Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
steamrollerHD

second US BB line "IDEAS"

110 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
131 posts
2,277 battles

hello every one i am making this post to convey an idea i had about how WG could add a second USN BB line  to the game. despite the recent addition of the USN CLs i had idea ever since the RN BBs were added. the idea behind this line came from the recent lowering of the citadels on recent lines the HE spam from the British and the border camping of BBs. this line will have strong torpedo  resistance from tier 3-10, increasing in 5% each tier starting from 35%, tier 9-10 very high penetration enough to penetrate the turtle back armor of german BBs and high alpha damage with the USN cruiser normalization. the tiers 3-8 will based off of historical design but the tier 9-10 will based on a what if scenario where the USN did know  about yamato's 460mm guns and redesign the last two iowa class BBs ( Illinois and Kentucky) and the Montana class.    

from tiers 3-6,8 will be similar to the standard line but the tier 7,9,10 will be different but familiar to the standard line and with that being said lets start off with the three ships that will the point of controversy on this topic .

the first ship will be the tier 7 the original 1920's south Dakota class:

Armament: 4x3 16in/50 cal guns  potential AP damage 13,000 

HE damage 4800  fire chance 34%

2 rounds per min

secondaries: 16x 6in/53 cal guns 

4x 3in dual purpose guns 

4x 6 pounder guns 

AP shell velocity 768m

HE shell velocity 803m

Armor: main belt 340mm 

barrettes  343mm

turrets: face 457 mm, top 127mm, sides 229-254mm, rear 229mm

bow and stern 32mm ? maybe or stick with the standard 21 mm

maneuverability:

speed: 21 knots  

turning radius: 684 ft 

rudder shift 13.3 secs

displacement 43,200 long tons compared to Colorado's 32,600 long tons 

HP pool 58,000 to 59 000 compared to colorado's 49,100 to 50,100

 in short play style very similar to Colorado and same range more than likely but higher pen, more alpha and higher volume of fire with a 1.8 sigma with 240m of dispersion

tier 9 Illinois or Kentucky ( this where i went something fictional for the design specifically gun caliber armor and secondaires)

Armament: 3x3 440mm /50 cal guns alpha damage 14600 damage 

HE damage 5,800  fire chance 36%

HE shell  velocity 780m

AP shell velocity 850m 

2 round per min

secondaries: either 6in or 7in 3x2 guns

4x2 127 mm

range 24.5m 

dispersion 258m

sigma 2.0 or 2.2

armor: 380mm main belt 

deck armor 42 mm 

upper armor belt 48 mm

bow and stern 32mm getting stronger as its gets closer to the citadel

turrents: face 526mm armor  top 254 mm sides 350 mm rear 326mm

turrent rotation 50 secs for 180 degrees

barrettes 510 mm 

manuverbility 

max speed 31knots 

turning radius 950 ft 

rudder shift    (stock) 21 secs  top 17 secs

displacement 55,000 long tons 

HP pool 83,300

detection range  15.8 by sea 17.4 by air 

summary very strong surface combat capabilities with 17 in guns and larger secondaries but AA suffers and can only fend off one to two strikes from a tier 9 or 10 carrier and key note the tier 8-10 has an above the water line citadel ( think pre buffed Iowa and Montana) and the  tier 9-10 has a air drag value that slows down shell speed to 650m at 18km which reduces penetration and hopefully reduces sniping and camping BBs

tier 10 Louisiana (are you ready for a crazy idea)

armament 4x4 458 or 456mm guns max AP damage 15400  

HE damage 6000 fire chance 38%

AP velocity 850m

HE velocity 790m

2 rounds per min

range 24.5m

secondaries  6x2 7 in guns

6 x 2 127 mm guns 

10 20 mm bofors 

armor:

550mm main belt 

upper belt 44mm

deck armor 46mm

bow and stern 32 mm just like at tier 9 it gets more effective the closer towards the citadel 

turrets: face 590mm sides 406mm top 320 mm rear 310 

turret rotation  55 secs for 180 degrees

barrettes 560mm

maneuverability

max speed 28.5 knots

turning radius 1050m

rudder shift 18.3 secs 

concealment 

16.2 by sea 

18.7 by air

displacement 89,000 long tons

HP pool 112,000

summary  a battleship with fire power shell weight and surface combat capabilities than Montana but with inferior AA suit when to her. she is slower but with more armor and just like monty before she had her citadel lowered Louisiana  has high citadel but can penetrate and citadel german BBs through their turtle back armor   at a range between 11- 15km 

 

 

list of ships in this line

tier 3 Delaware class

tier 4 Florida class

tier 5 new York class            (i couldn't find any thing else for this tier feel free to give ideas )

tier 6 Tennessee class

tier 7 south Dakota 1920

tier 8 south Dakota 1939

tier 9 Illinois

tier 10 Louisiana

consumables: standard USN BB consumables  

 

  premium camo instead of a historical camouflage the premium camo can based on the state flags and some historic detail such as the delaware would a reference to general Washington crossing the Delaware river and adding details such as a patriot uniform  and more refences to that time 

another detail with the premium camo is from tier 3-5 the turrets will be bronze plated with bronze highlights around the superstructure deck and armor. tier 6-7 silver plating tier 8-9 gold plating and the tier 10 platinum, gold and silver plating  

however iknow this idea can be consider OP especially against a cruiser and destroyer. with the increase torp resistance  that get up to 70% at tier 10 but that can only be achieved by angling the ship towards the torpedoes but that leaves you exposed to enemy fire. the increase deck armor will make difficult for certain cruisers but i hate british BBs you will get fires but not as often.

now made this post as theory or idea to implement a second BB line so please don't jump to conclusions i would to hear from crusier mains Destroyer mains and other BB mains for refinement and balancing ideas about this topic thank you for reading and have a nice day

 

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
937 posts
7,720 battles

Increase HP of Colorado and put it in the South Dakota line of "heavy Battleships" which lead to Montana.  Probably paper design for Tier X in Iowa line of "fast battleships," or even introduced modernized Iowa class as the Tier X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
655
[REVY]
Members
1,962 posts
11,142 battles

Only thing Illinois and Kentucky had over the first four Iowas was improved Torpedo protection. Given 'when' they might have entered service, you could swap out the 40mm AA guns with the more 'modern' 3in that replaced them in the 50s.

 

Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Tenneesee should make an appearance, either their Pearl Harbor or post pearl harbor refits.

 

The 1920s South Dakota is a must, Perhaps even the Lexington-class BCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

I had an idea of a 'fast' and 'slow' USN BB line setup:

T3: South Carolina

T4: Wyoming

T5 Slow: New York

T5 Fast: Nevada

T6 Slow: Pennsylvanian

T6 Fast: New Mexico

T7 Slow: Colorado

T7 Fast: Lexington

T8 Slow: North Carolina

T8 Fast: South Dakota

T9 Slow: South Dakota (1920's)

T9 Fast: Iowa

T10 Slow: Tillman IV-2

T10 Fast: Montana

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
1 minute ago, Lord_Slayer said:

The 1920s South Dakota is a must, Perhaps even the Lexington-class BCs.

Come-the [edited] on; at least get it right when you refer to the DAMN Lexingtons themselves:

Battlecruisers are abbreviated *CC*, hell the Lexington herself was originall CC-1.

BC does not exist (only started being used in the MID*2000's* as an abbreviation for Battlecruiser)

CB is Cruiser, Large, and 'fake' in the sense that it is purely administrative to hide the fact the Alaska's were CC's

CC is Cruiser, Capital, which is the most succinct description of what a Battlecruiser is.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
131 posts
2,277 battles
2 minutes ago, Lord_Slayer said:

Only thing Illinois and Kentucky had over the first four Iowas was improved Torpedo protection. Given 'when' they might have entered service, you could swap out the 40mm AA guns with the more 'modern' 3in that replaced them in the 50s.

 

Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Tenneesee should make an appearance, either their Pearl Harbor or post pearl harbor refits.

 

The 1920s South Dakota is a must, Perhaps even the Lexington-class BCs.

yeah i know but i wanted something different at tier 9-10 than the 3x3 and 4x3 406mm guns and some thing a little more sturdier but the my idea of a high citadel will not change though  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[ASRN]
Beta Testers
583 posts
5,844 battles
4 minutes ago, Lord_Slayer said:

Only thing Illinois and Kentucky had over the first four Iowas was improved Torpedo protection. Given 'when' they might have entered service, you could swap out the 40mm AA guns with the more 'modern' 3in that replaced them in the 50s.

 

Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Tenneesee should make an appearance, either their Pearl Harbor or post pearl harbor refits.

 

The 1920s South Dakota is a must, Perhaps even the Lexington-class BCs.

Now there's a thought:  Saratoga appearing in-game as a battlecruiser as opposed to a CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
91
[BEARS]
Members
256 posts
11,537 battles

Game needs the USS New Jersey.

 

Make her a t10 or a premium. she saw more combat than the other Iowas classes combined.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
131 posts
2,277 battles
8 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

T9 Slow: South Dakota (1920's)

a 1920's BB against a montana grosser kurfurst and even a yamato a BB that can go only 21 knots a tier 10 the south dakota was design against the nagato classes and the nelson classes so no way in hell that going to work 

Edited by steamrollerHD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
2 minutes ago, steamrollerHD said:

a 1920's BB against a montana grosser kurfurst and even a yamato a BB that only 21 knots a tier 10 the south dakota was design against the nagato classes and the nelson classes so no way in hell that going to work 

It has 12 16" Guns, firing the same shell that would be used on the Iowa and Montana, and has *13.5* inches of belt armor compared to the Iowa's 12.

Also, the SD's were famously going to go 23.5 knots, as the first departure from the Standard Type's 21 knots.

At least do the *basic* research first.

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
3 minutes ago, steamrollerHD said:

and speaking of the south dakota 1920's and colorado uses the same shell 

On so many levels, you are wrong:

The SD 1920's used the *Mk2* and were going to be upgraded to the Mk3 Gun, which used the same shells that would be later used on the NC to Iowa Classes. Specifically, it could fire the Mk5 shell. Meaning an SD at T9 could have the same super heavies as the Iowa/Monty

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
131 posts
2,277 battles
Just now, _RC1138 said:

It has 12 16" Guns, firing the same shell that would be used on the Iowa and Montana, and has *13.5* inches of belt armor compared to the Iowa's 12.

Also, the SD's were famously going to go 23 knots, as the first departure from the Standard Type's 21 knots.

At least do the *basic* research first.

the south Dakota's were never built and if they were they would the same speed and previous designs and how can a ship from the 1920's fire the same shell that a ship was built after the super heavy shell design was started in the late 1930's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
6 minutes ago, steamrollerHD said:

the south Dakota's were never built and if they were they would the same speed and previous designs and how can a ship from the 1920's fire the same shell that a ship was built after the super heavy shell design was started in the late 1930's 

But they weren't DESIGNED the same as the Previous classes. That was why they were such a big deal. How the [edited] do you not know this if you are commenting on it? They were EXPRESSLY noted as being the first ships to represent a departure from the "Standard Type" design.

And their guns, the Mk 2 (and proposed Mk 3's) which were build (and then sent to the U.S. Army) were capable of firing the Mk 5 shell, which is the 'base line' AP shell that the Mk 7 gun of the Iowa's used; and the Mk 7 gun could fire the mK 8 Super Heavy shell, ergo, the Mk 3 gun would have been able to fire the Mk 8 shell.

See the key thing to understand is the REASON the *Mk* 1 equiped Colorado's couldn't fire the Mk 8 shell was that their *handling* equipment couldn't physically lift the shell. But the Mk 2 and Mk3 that the Lexingtons/South Dakota's were going to get, COULD handle that mass projectile.

It wasn't a caliber problem, it was an ELEVATOR problem.

Edited by _RC1138
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[WOLF2]
Members
252 posts
6,155 battles

The main problem with adding additional US BBs is that each subsequent class is just strictly better than the previous ship.  That is:

Nevada is better than NY with a significantly better gun layout.
Pennsylvania is better than Nevada and worse than NM having better armor (than Nevada) but worse guns (than NM, amongst others).
Tennessee has better range (and slightly better sea-keeping) than NM but is other wise equivalent.
1920 SD has better firepower and speed than Colorado.

The only really interesting question is 1920 SD vs North Carolina, where one has superior firepower and the other speed. (although, as pointed out, SD uses the mk 2 and NC uses mk 6).  However, balancing the rest against the current line would be difficult.

Now, you could create a fantastical second line, where you sacrifice some firepower or armor for speed but I'm sure USN enthusiasts would be upset by this.  Thus, I do not expect a second BB line except premiums.

Edited by real_icebeast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
655
[REVY]
Members
1,962 posts
11,142 battles
15 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

Come-the [edited] on; at least get it right when you refer to the DAMN Lexingtons themselves:

Battlecruisers are abbreviated *CC*, hell the Lexington herself was originall CC-1.

BC does not exist (only started being used in the MID*2000's* as an abbreviation for Battlecruiser)

CB is Cruiser, Large, and 'fake' in the sense that it is purely administrative to hide the fact the Alaska's were CC's

CC is Cruiser, Capital, which is the most succinct description of what a Battlecruiser is.

I know they were CC-1 through CC-6

But other then hardcore fans, most people referred to them as BCs, so I stuck with the 'common' misconception to avoid confusion.

 

2 minutes ago, Ganbaruzoi_ said:

Wasn't the Montana designed as a counter to the Yamato class to begin with?

 

Yes and no. The Iowas were designed for speed and sacrificed armor to achieve that. They also still fit the Panama Canal. They technically could not be protected against their own heavy AP shells and were considered 'unbalanced'.

The Montanas as designed had armor that could defeat the heavy AP shell. These were also the first ship-s designed not to fit in the Panama Canal.

Limited information was known in regards to the Yamatos before and during the war. Navy Intel had them with 16in guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
131 posts
2,277 battles
2 minutes ago, _RC1138 said:

But they weren't DESIGNED the same as the Previous classes. That was why they were such a big deal. How the [edited] do you not know this if you are commenting on it? They were EXPRESSLY noted as being the first ships to represent a departure from the "Standard Type" design.

And their guns, the Mk 2 (and proposed Mk 3's) which were build (and then sent to the U.S. Army) were capable of firing the Mk 5 shell, which is the 'base line' AP shell that the Mk 7 gun of the Iowa's used; and the Mk 7 gun could fire the mK 8 Super Heavy shell, ergo, the Mk 3 gun would have been able to fire the Mk 8 shell.

yeah an attempt break from the design regardless they could stand up against tier 9 and tier 10 ships so no the south is 1920's design ship and she should be at tier 7 yes her armor is thicker iowa's but iowa has the speed and maneuverability to make it work you don't put something from 1920's that moves that slow and that CANNOT fire those shells nor have the range to compete with tier 9 and 10 BBs so this idea heavily flawed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
2 minutes ago, Lord_Slayer said:

I know they were CC-1 through CC-6

But other then hardcore fans, most people referred to them as BCs, so I stuck with the 'common' misconception to avoid confusion.

"Misconception" is a nice way of saying, too lazy or too stupid to just use the right word/abbreviation. Catering to stupid people is pretty bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,420 posts
6,278 battles
24 minutes ago, MokrieDela said:

Game needs the USS New Jersey.

 

Make her a t10 or a premium. she saw more combat than the other Iowas classes combined.

That means ZIPPY, the Missouri and Wisconson were both better protected than the New Jersey or Iowa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
86 posts
7,717 battles

i dont think anyone has a problem if they add a second BB line up totier 7 or 8 and add the higher tiers after like they are doing with the IJN dd line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,171
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
Just now, steamrollerHD said:

yeah an attempt break from the design regardless they could stand up against tier 9 and tier 10 ships so no the south is 1920's design ship and she should be at tier 7 yes her armor is thicker iowa's but iowa has the speed and maneuverability to make it work you don't put something from 1920's that moves that slow and that CANNOT fire those shells nor have the range to compete with tier 9 and 10 BBs so this idea heavily flawed 

Again, the Mk3 gun *could* fire the same mK 8 shell from the Iowas. I mean, technically speaking, the Mk *1* gun from the Colorado could fire the the mK 8 shell if you could find a way to hoist it into the loading tray (and had the extra length of the room). The guns/breaches were inherently compatible with all the 16" shells used by the USN, it was just the loading system that wasn't. That loading system was totally redesigned for both the Lexingtons and the SD's and could handle up to and including the 1200 kg mK's the Iowas later received; in the same way that the North Carolina's who were originally designed around the Mk5 shell, which is basically identical to the Colorado's shells, could later load the Mk8's, because the handling equipment was build robust enough to lift/handle it.

So, what you have in the 1920 SD, is a ship with 16"/50 Cal guns (not either of the two types of 16"/45 Cal guns of the Colorado OR the North Carolina), capable of firing the *same* Mk8 shell the Iowa does, but instead of 9 guns, it has *12* AND it has the 2nd most armor of a T9 BB, and, what you are not considering, a Standard Type's armor placement, meaning it's citadel is WELL buried inside the hull, unlike the Iowa/Monty, making it all the more tanky.

Realistically, for all intents and purposes, the only appreciable difference is that the SD is a smaller, slower, more heavily armed and armored ship compared to the Iowa's larger, faster, less heavily armed and armored ship. They represent two sides of the coin and make a good compliment. But at least lets be honest here: you know nothing, clearly, about the South Dakotas, other than they were from the 20's and there's no way, in your head, that a ship in the 20's can compete with ships from the 40's... except that's not even REMOTELY how the real world works nor how things work in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
107 posts
5,585 battles

Can't say I care about more paper ships especially if they remain as slow as mid tier USN BBs, WG pls gib t9 Alaska for 750 fxp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×