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

Could we get a mid-tier premium IJN battleship/battlecruiser that isn't a downtiered/retread version of something else?

81 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

6,090
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles

Thread title pretty much says it all.

Musashi, Kii, Ashitaka and Mutsu are all same-tier copies (or close to it) or downtiered nerf boats with very little interesting about them (for the record, I like Kii and Mutsu, but I do not feel like either ship has a particularly unique play experience relative to their clone/near-clones). It would be nice to see Japan receive at least one battleship or battlecruiser - aside from Ishizuchi - which is unique or a different model.

I honestly don't care if it's near-to or even completely made up - WG is on the verge of adding the second nearly-fictitious BB tree to the game; getting upset about that at this point is a little like going to a baseball game and getting pissed about instant replay. Yeah, it may not have added much, but it's kind of ingrained now.

So... paper me up a boat. Please.

Edited by Battlecruiser_Kongo
  • Cool 9
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,090
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles

This *IS* kind of a retread, but it would still be really neat. The proposed 16" Fuso refit:

60c6768966a30cdc18e5e14cad28e457.jpg

I just think it would have looked really cool. It could be tier 7 if you did a, say, 1943 version or something with some enhanced AA. Small health pool relative to the tier, but very nice guns to compensate.

Edited by Battlecruiser_Kongo
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
602
[90TH]
Members
1,147 posts
10,774 battles

Sorry to hijack your thread, but...

Could we get a Free XP DD? Or a Tier 10 premium DD?

Free XP or T10 premiums include Missouri, Musashi, Salem, Stalingrad, Jean Bart...

The last thing we need is people complaining about not enough premium battleships. There’s probably 4 premium BBs for every DD. 

Edited by n00bot
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 6
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,648
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,827 posts
4,361 battles

The quickest (cheapest) option for WG would just be to rename Mutsu "Mutsu '34" (or whatever interwar date they based her off of) and then market a Mutsu '43 at T7, with a 25~28s main gun reload (as the IJN was able to do), and optionally buff the secondary range. Assuming all else is about the same stat-wise with Nagato, faster RoF and optionally longer secondary ranges would compensate for the lack of AA, which will be far more risky after the CV overhaul given the indefinite loitering time permitting multiple drops. She'd be pretty vanilla as far as Premiums go, but the main gun RoF would be sufficiently potent enough to warrant selling as the gimmick itself.

Another straightforward option is Yamashiro ('44) at T6; better short-range AA than Fuso, but slightly worse offensive capability due to a 2/4 fore/rear-facing turret setup rather than a 3/3. Assuming everything else was more or less identical stat-wise, it'd strictly be a Texas/NY difference; Texas having slightly different gun arcs and more short-range AA than NY and very minor stat differences (about a half-kt slower and a bit more HP or so due to increased displacement), but gameplay-wise handles identically.

A more radical option is BBCV Hyuuga, now that WG is experimenting with them in one of the spin-off WoWs games, which also happens to handle pretty similarly to Steel Ocean's take on BBCV Ise (a mix of old CV RPG mechanics with direct-fire control of the ship itself). Ise would be left to become a second T6 in a future IJN BB line.

The Kongou sisters naturally, also make for ideal candidates:

  • Kongou ('44) at T6 with her late-war AA; tighten up the accuracy a bit and upgrade the main battery RoF to 28s, and add any missing HP and armor from the increased displacement/tier. Would pretty much compete with PeF; better in some respects, worse in some others.
  • Haruna ('45) at T6, with her late-war AA/secondary setup; similar to Kongou, give her a 28s reload and missing HP and armor based on displacement/tier, but instead of improving the accuracy, buff the secondary ranges to rival or exceed PeF. Again, better than PeF in some respects, worse in some others.
  • Kirishima ('42) at T5 with her full AA. No changes to stats from the T5 Kongou representative aside from more HP from increased displacement and any missing armor (if any, aside from bow/stern), and again functionally being another Texas/NY situation. The AA alone giving her a Premium status over Hiei (who serves as the Kongou representative).
  • Hiei ('42) at T5, just with 28s reload OR better accuracy instead. This one is optional; could even be a Bundle-only ship (buy the Kongou Sisters Bundle for the price of 3 Premiums) as it's literally a clone of the tech tree ship, just with better main gun reload (or accuracy) and Premium status making it suitable as a trainer.
  • Then let WG go the extra mile and grandfather the ARP Kongou Sisters to match, to vary it up between 2 T5s and 2 T6s, instead of all T5s.
Edited by YamatoA150
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,113
Alpha Tester
2,552 posts

The 1944 Kongo is all I want.

1280px-Kongo1944.png

In case anyone doesn't know, the tech tree Kongo is actually Hiei.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,952
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,853 posts
11,315 battles
12 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Kongo said:

second nearly-fictitious BB tree to the game

Much as this as usual comes down to who's defining fictitious - what's the first tree of Nearly Fictitious BB's? Cause from my recollection -

- USN existed

- IJN save for Izumo at least started construction, if not out right built

- Germany they all existed I'm pretty sure except tier 9, which is based on the H-class ship designs, and tier 10 which from what I've found in digging appears to be full created as "what if they built the H class, then made a successor" as it things back when I did this digging did not line up for it to be H-44 with different guns as people said it was.

- UK the only ships of question are Monarch and Conquerer because for some reason they did not include Vanguard at 8 in the tech tree for whatever reason. 

- France "Turenne" is actually a Danton class with a unified armament, Normadie's were laid down, Lyon's and Alsace were designed and planned with start dates  but canceled by the outbreak of WW1 and the fall of France respectively so the only real fake here is Republique. 

 

Also, they still have the Ise (pre hybrid) and Tosa (pre-Kaga's conversion) classes to pull from without out right inventing a ship. 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,770
[SALVO]
Members
24,198 posts
24,546 battles

For mid tiers, it seems like the only options are perhaps a Kongo clone, either at tier 5 or, as suggested above, a late war refit, uptiered to tier 6 version.  Or perhaps just add in the Ise or Hyuga in its pre-WW2 refitted state, probably at tier 6.  Of course, an Ise would probably little different from a Fuso.

For a high tier BB, the Tosa is the obvious choice.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,770
[SALVO]
Members
24,198 posts
24,546 battles
4 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Much as this as usual comes down to who's defining fictitious - what's the first tree of Nearly Fictitious BB's? Cause from my recollection -

- USN existed

- IJN save for Izumo at least started construction, if not out right built

- Germany they all existed I'm pretty sure except tier 9, which is based on the H-class ship designs, and tier 10 which from what I've found in digging appears to be full created as "what if they built the H class, then made a successor" as it things back when I did this digging did not line up for it to be H-44 with different guns as people said it was.

- UK the only ships of question are Monarch and Conquerer because for some reason they did not include Vanguard at 8 in the tech tree for whatever reason. 

- France "Turenne" is actually a Danton class with a unified armament, Normadie's were laid down, Lyon's and Alsace were designed and planned with start dates  but canceled by the outbreak of WW1 and the fall of France respectively so the only real fake here is Republique. 

 

Also, they still have the Ise (pre hybrid) and Tosa (pre-Kaga's conversion) classes to pull from without out right inventing a ship. 

For what it's worth, Ghost, I don't think that the Monarch is all that questionable, given that during the KGV's design process, 14", 15", and 16" versions were considered.  I think that the Monarch could just be considered a "what if the KGV's were built with 15" guns" class (and the Monarch name being mostly just a "gotta name it something" name). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,404 posts
1,584 battles
57 minutes ago, Wolcott said:

The 1944 Kongo is all I want.

1280px-Kongo1944.png

In case anyone doesn't know, the tech tree Kongo is actually Hiei.

I'd kill for a late-war Kongo sister. Haruna was great at the end, too - massed AA, and that funky raised rear funnel.

1322228_123629_large.jpg

Either would be lovely. An AA-heavy uptiered Kongo would be amazing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,404 posts
1,584 battles
40 minutes ago, Crucis said:

For mid tiers, it seems like the only options are perhaps a Kongo clone, either at tier 5 or, as suggested above, a late war refit, uptiered to tier 6 version.  Or perhaps just add in the Ise or Hyuga in its pre-WW2 refitted state, probably at tier 6.  Of course, an Ise would probably little different from a Fuso.

For a high tier BB, the Tosa is the obvious choice.

But do we really need a fourth Amagi/similar. Yes, okay, Tosa was a battleship - but it's the same guns, layout, silhouette, AA, etc. The Tosas weren't even all that more well-armored than Amagi, which was pretty much an all-around better ship.

Edited by Battleship_DukeofYork
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,648
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,827 posts
4,361 battles
1 minute ago, WanderingGhost said:

Also, they still have the Ise (pre hybrid) and Tosa (pre-Kaga's conversion) classes to pull from without out right inventing a ship. 

Ise and Tosa both can work in a second line proper.

A theoretical tree-ship Ise would need a fictional "C" Hull refit that adds most of the AA that BBCV Ise got, but onto a fictional refit BB hull instead. That includes the AA rockets just to prop up the short-med range AA a bit more, if not long-range, to a lesser degree than Hood's rocket AA. Hyuuga can easily represent the BBCV side, so both sisters would get represented at T6 easily.

Tosa is an easy T8 to swap with Amagi; assuming one line is a "fast" line and the other a "slow" line. Tosa would take up T8 in the slow line shared with Izumo and Yamato, and Amagi would take up T8 in the new "fast" line, alongside some Kii-variant at T9 and Number 13 at T10, or if WG wants to go wild, Number 13 at T9 and maybe a "fast battleship" version of Yamato at T10; either works since Number 13 also used 460mm cannons, so isn't bound to balance issues found with 8x 457 Conqueror. Tosa could pretty much 1:1 Amagi's base stats (armor scheme, TDS, main gun accuracy/RoF), and just add a bit more armor and HP in exchange for losing speed and a bit of maneuverability.


Off the top of my head, much of the possible IJN Premiums would mostly be T7+ territory, what with the numerous Hiraga and Fujimoto design concepts for a "Kongou Successor".

I recall one of them being basically, a 16" fast battleship; a hull form similar to Kongou, but carrying either 8x 16" (4x2) or 10x 16" (2x2 and 3x2). The 8x form could work as a T7; say 1.8 or 1.9 sigma, 30kt top speed, and armor similar or slightly superior to Nagato would work. The 10x form is an easy T8; just shrinking the number of turrets from Amagi's 5 to 4, but having two triples and two twins, and slightly improving speed over Nagato by 1-2 kt.

A few 9x 16" designs also existed from the two as other possible "Kongou successors", IIRC (besides the ones that were mentioned as part of the A-140 J series). One being pretty much an IJN Iowa. Another being closer to an IJN SoDak or NC (I forget which). Both of which are pretty much solid T8 and T9 options, though they all look very similar to Yamato given the changing design philosophies from a classic tripod-style mast to a more solid pagoda mast like the prototype Hiei was rebuilt with.

There also exists a few Hiraga BB designs with quad 16" that could work too, though all of them were based on the 410mm, meaning they're mostly stuck at T7+. a 2x4 design that's pretty much an IJN Gascogne w/ 16" (and roughly 26kt) and a 3x4 design that's pretty much IJN Alsace w/ 16" (and roughly only 23 kt). Hiraga notably did the math that made them work out, but assuming those were included into the game, I'd expect IJN quad turrets to have a sluggish traverse; probably 50s to pull a 180 considering they would have weighed a fair bit. It probably wouldn't stop an IJN Alsace from needing to be T10 with modernizations though, partially to raise the speed to say, 27kt, and also to give her a necessary AA suite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,770
[SALVO]
Members
24,198 posts
24,546 battles
5 minutes ago, Battleship_DukeofYork said:

But do we really need a fourth Amagi/similar. Yes, okay, Tosa was a battleship - but it's the same guns, layout, silhouette, AA, etc. The Tosas weren't even all that more well-armored than Amagi, which was pretty much an all-around better ship.

The reality is that the Tosa, Amagi, and Kii classes were designed along very similar lines.  But I'd rather have a real design, i.e. the Tosa, than something that completely fictional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,952
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,853 posts
11,315 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

For what it's worth, Ghost, I don't think that the Monarch is all that questionable, given that during the KGV's design process, 14", 15", and 16" versions were considered.  I think that the Monarch could just be considered a "what if the KGV's were built with 15" guns" class (and the Monarch name being mostly just a "gotta name it something" name). 

Understand that BB's are not exactly my Forte - which is why I said "of question" as I have no clue if it's based on something I'm not aware of and obviously, have to give it a name. USN, IJN, UK and German CV's - that I know. Anything else is random knowledge and stuff I've learned the last 3 years of google searches or books. 

29 minutes ago, YamatoA150 said:

A theoretical tree-ship Ise would need a fictional "C" Hull refit that adds most of the AA that BBCV Ise got

I disagree it would need a C hull and should likely just be the B hull unless Wargaming really wants 3 hulls. While I'm 150% against the rework at this point, were we to keep what we have I'm of the opinion all ships from at least tier 5-7, possibly 4-7 other than ones like AZ, Ark Beta, etc, need to have upgrades more on par with the plans they are facing, meaning at the very least pre-war or in general around 1941 for tier 4 or 5, and then 6 and 7 or 5-7 have mid-late war outfits. So CO outfitted more like Maryland or at least given what AA guns it's missing, Kongo close to, if not in, it's 1944 trimmings, etc. Seeing as especially if we standarized weapon damage per barrel - as most used either their own weapons or the same but had it that when you have say the 40 mm pom pom vs the bofors you just have the range difference, and then just sheer numbers creating some difference as usually as we go up tiers the ships have more and more AA guns and all, actually creates a narrower gap in AA damage between tiers, meaning reworking plane HP numbers that can be smoothed out as well, reducing the issue of +2 CV's just waltzing through AA of -2 ships and maybe knock out some of the issues of -2 CV's wrecked by +2 ships. In which case Ise hull B, if they keep the simpler progression, would be the "Refit BB with all the BBCV guns". Which, is also technically a change they could do in 2 stages or more, with the inittial stage being to simply change the AA DPS to what the hulls would have (so despite the hull being the same, Kongo having AA DPS on par with the 44 version) and the plane HP, and then either later on or over time updating the visual models to match it and then just redistributing that same DPS to the other guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
633 posts
4,652 battles
1 hour ago, Battleship_DukeofYork said:

I'd kill for a late-war Kongo sister. Haruna was great at the end, too - massed AA, and that funky raised rear funnel.

1322228_123629_large.jpg

Either would be lovely. An AA-heavy uptiered Kongo would be amazing.

DID SOMEONE SAY HARUNA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[CVLOV]
Beta Testers
3,640 posts
2,633 battles

Hell yes.  We Japan BB players have been whining and complaining to WarGaming for a very long time now.
I got the Kii and Mutsu, but they're port queens. I only took them out recently because of the snowflakes event.

I love playing the ARP Kongos but sadly, they aren't full premiums (missing credit multiplier). Ishizuchi is ok with the buffs it has received, Mikasa is still waiting for a secondary buff to base 5km, then nothing really worthwhile (imho) until T9 with the Musashi.
There's a lot of tiers to cover properly with nice a nice BB or 3. Something non-gimmicky (no reload boost, speed boost, AA boost, torpedoes, etc).  Just use those "balance points" to make a good BB.

Tier 5 thru 7 would be my choice.  Played Nagato for the first time since about 4 months with snowflakes event, ended up with a 100k game.  I had forgotten how much of a basic, good BB it was.
I'm not opposed to anything outside said tiers.  Say the Satsuma with 6x twin 10 inches and  2x twin 12 inches.  And before someone says "blah blah different shell characteristics"  just make like a DD torp spread mechanics, press "3" and you control the 10", press 3 again, and back to 12" or something.
It also had 20 secondary batteries.... But the meat of the subject stands, a good BB of tier 5-to-7 would be preferable.
 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,338
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,333 posts

Anybody here have experience with Ashitaka post buff for the type 91 shells?  she looks good to me after that.

 

On topic though... Yeah WG is mega lazy and idk why they can't be asked to put real effort into a new model for a JP BB premium.  Its asked about all the time since the game's launch and from what I understand they do have options.  I personally would love to see something more interesting here myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,579
[INTEL]
Members
12,355 posts
34,342 battles
1 hour ago, CaliburxZero said:

Anybody here have experience with Ashitaka post buff for the type 91 shells?  she looks good to me after that.

Yes. Shes completely different. You have to zealously guard your side and she eats damage, but dose gunz make it all worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[GRETA]
[GRETA]
Members
580 posts
16,768 battles

Instead of new ships, I rather they make some QoL buffs to certain ships to bring them in line with their peers.

Mutsu - give her access to Type 91 APC shells. Reduce her reload if we have to, but give her real BB penetration.

Nagato - Reduce her reload from 32 to 30 seconds. No reason to keep her dpm hampered when CO has an increased health pool and Ashitaka with even better dpm at 20 rpm.

Amagi, Kii - buff their secondary range to 6.5km base. This puts them ahead of Americans and behind the Germans. Overall a small improvement to their close range capabilities.

Alternatively, give Kii 10km torps found on the Kagero. Her poor secondaries and relative lack of armor really holds her back as a brawler. 10km torps would open ways to drop torps on any pursuers as Kii plays the kitting role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[SDIWO]
Members
1,218 posts
6,637 battles
5 hours ago, Hydrawlix said:

Skip to 1:30 Yuro explains perfectly lol

You should really never skip ahead in a Yuro video, especially with that excellent torpedo job to start that one lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
523 posts
5 hours ago, Battleship_DukeofYork said:

But do we really need a fourth Amagi/similar. Yes, okay, Tosa was a battleship - but it's the same guns, layout, silhouette, AA, etc. The Tosas weren't even all that more well-armored than Amagi, which was pretty much an all-around better ship.

Amagi, Ashitaka, and Kii are enough I can't agree more with this statement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×