Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Ace_04

Future Tech Tree Split-Branches

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,790
[-K-]
Members
7,328 posts
12,025 battles

Good day all,

I was recently reading some history about the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal and found myself rather inquisitive over several of the Japanese light cruisers present in the action.  It got me thinking about future potential tech-tree line splits, and I got to thinking about the following possiblities:

  • Japanese light cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • British heavy cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • USN destroyers (guns vs. torpedo boats?)
  • USN battleships (main guns vs. secondary builds?)

What other nations/tech-tree lines do you think could be split into a sub-branch, and if so, what would be it's focus?

Edited by Ace_04

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[-TDF-]
Beta Testers
1,151 posts
4,464 battles

RN Battlecruiser line with Retrofitted HMS Hood at tier 8. They should all be built similar to how Vanguard is with Strong Heal, Solid AP/HE, Good Accuracy, Cruiser-esque rudders and great speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,140
[WOLFG]
Members
7,004 posts
5,011 battles

I would think a RN DD line would be doable. 

As to what their playstyle would be, I don't know.

We already have DDs without smoke and DDs without torpedoes.

Running out of things to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Privateers, Members
8,913 posts
7,837 battles

I did work out a full German DD split.

The idea behind it being fairly simple. One line gets the 150s, the other uses the 128s. Makes the grind and captain builds a lot smoother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,208
[-RNG-]
Supertester
2,824 posts
3,793 battles

Seeing how many high tier USN battleships we have, I think the fact that there isn't a line split is just awful. I don't blame WG, as a whole line split is a lotta work and major change as opposed to premium content, but it would have been nice to use ships like Georgia, Massachusetts, and the upcoming Ohio. I would have liked to see heavier boats (currently in game) and lighter/faster ships with good secondaries and AA, as well as DFAA standard. 

 

Also Japanese could go too. I always thought a torp BB line would be fun. Just single launchers, maybe 8km range or so. Make it an actual feature, not a lucky gimmick like Kii. Again, split the line into big/bulky no-torps (Nagato), and lighter faster guys with torps (Kongo). I doubt Ise and the likes will ever make it to game not that planes are directly controlled, but that would be a fun split too. 

 

British could probably go BBs and Battlecruisers as well, but they aren't in dire need imo. Would be nice to fill the gap between their CLs and the BBs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,387
[ARGSY]
Members
15,169 posts
9,943 battles
9 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

I would think a RN DD line would be doable. 

As to what their playstyle would be, I don't know.

ASW (and likewise for the Americans).

33 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

a sub-branch

I came here expecting to read about submarines. You might want to change your post title to talk about "tech-tree line splits".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,790
[-K-]
Members
7,328 posts
12,025 battles
1 minute ago, User_the_n00b said:

I'd like a wth branch. Say a BB with 40 5" guns. 

:cap_rambo:

 

Sure, but you only get to fire them once every 5 minutes.  Better make it count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
381
[IND8]
Members
530 posts
8,343 battles

I had been working on a series of future lines and what ships and skills I would like to see, but Wargaming scooped me twice on French DDs and Italian cruisers, so I pretty much gave up on posting anymore, but for lines not yet revealed, here is a quick rundown on what I came up with:

RN CA
    VI York
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_York_(90)
    VII Kent
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Kent_(54)
    VIII Norfolk
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Norfolk_(78)
    IX Surrey (1939 Design)
    3 guns x 3 turrets 250 mm guns
    X Northumberland (1941 Design)
    4 guns x 3 turrets 250 mm guns

US Submarines 
    III L-1
    IV O-1
    V S-1
    VI Barracuda
    VII Cachalot
    VIII Gato
    IX Balao
    X Tench

KM Submarines
    III U-9
    IV U-19
    V U-66
    VI U-139
    VII U-27
    VIII U-69
    IX U-167
    X U-2511

RM Battleships
    III Margherita
    IV Dante Alleghieri
    V Cavour
    VI Andrea Doria
    VII Caracciolo
    VIII Italia
    IX ?
    X UP-41

US Battleships 2 (Secondaries)
    V Nevada
    VI Pennsylvania
    VII Tennessee (1944 Version)
    VIII Constellation (Lexington Class)
    IX Kentucky (Unused post-war redesign)
    X Ohio (Tillman design)

UK Battlecruisers
    IV Indomitable
    V Tiger
    VI Renown
    VII Anson (Hood class)
    VIII Jellicoe (J3)
    IX Great Britain (G3)
    X Empire (Modified G3 with quad turrets)

IJN Light Cruisers
    V Nagara
    VI Agano
    VII Oyodo
    VIII Suzuya (Mogami 155mm version)
    IX ?
    X ?

Suggestions for a tier 9 Italian Battleships or for tier 9 and 10 Japanese light cruisers are most welcome. The theme for Japanese lights seems to be insane torpedoes.

Edited by Shannon_Lindsey
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[NUWES]
Members
2,618 posts
8,430 battles

In  you could do a French DD split between the contre-torpilleurs like Aigle and Le Terrible and most of the other incoming French DDs, and the torpilleurs which are basically standard DDs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,983
[SALVO]
Members
22,937 posts
23,528 battles
1 hour ago, Stand_Alone97 said:

RN Battlecruiser line with Retrofitted HMS Hood at tier 8. They should all be built similar to how Vanguard is with Strong Heal, Solid AP/HE, Good Accuracy, Cruiser-esque rudders and great speed.

Also a German Battlecruiser line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[NUWES]
Members
2,618 posts
8,430 battles
18 minutes ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

I had been working on a series of future lines and what ships and skills I would like to see, but Wargaming scooped me twice on French DDs and Italian cruisers, so I pretty much gave up on posting anymore, but for lines not yet revealed, here is a quick rundown on what I came up with:

RN CA
    VI York
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_York_(90)
    VII Kent
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Kent_(54)
    VIII Norfolk
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Norfolk_(78)
    IX Surrey (1939 Design)
    3 guns x 3 turrets 250 mm guns
    X Northumberland (1941 Design)
    4 guns x 3 turrets 250 mm guns

US Submarines 
    III L-1
    IV O-1
    V S-1
    VI Barracuda
    VII Cachalot
    VIII Gato
    IX Balao
    X Tench

KM Submarines
    III U-9
    IV U-19
    V U-66
    VI U-139
    VII U-27
    VIII U-69
    IX U-167
    X U-2511

RM Battleships
    III Margherita
    IV Dante Alleghieri
    V Cavour
    VI Andrea Doria
    VII Caracciolo
    VIII Italia
    IX ?
    X UP-41

US Battleships 2 (Secondaries)
    V Nevada
    VI Pennsylvania
    VII Tennessee (1944 Version)
    VIII Constellation (Lexington Class)
    IX Kentucky (Unused post-war redesign)
    X Ohio (Tillman design)

UK Battlecruisers
    IV Indomitable
    V Tiger
    VI Revenge
    VII Anson (Hood class)
    VIII Jellicoe (J3)
    IX Great Britain (G3)
    X Empire (Modified G3 with quad turrets)

IJN Light Cruisers
    V Nagara
    VI Agano
    VII Oyodo
    VIII Suzuya (Mogami 155mm version)
    IX ?
    X ?

Suggestions for a tier 9 Italian Battleships or for tier 9 and 10 Japanese light cruisers are most welcome. The theme for Japanese lights seems to be insane torpedoes.

I only have a couple of issues:

1. Revenge on your UK BC list is a BB not a BC. I think you might mean Renown. 

2. Constellation (Lexington BC design) doesn't fit on your US Battleships 2 list. It is a Battlecruiser with incredibly thin armor. I would get vaporized in a close-in secondaries duel. I'd suggest the old South Dakota (1920) design and call her USS Indiana since that is the only one of the proposed names in that class that hasn't been used in the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
381
[IND8]
Members
530 posts
8,343 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Also a German Battlecruiser line.

I don't think a full line split is possible for the German Battlecruisers due to the complete lack of designs post WWI. Likely these will all be premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,225 posts
6,255 battles
1 hour ago, Ace_04 said:

Good day all,

I was recently reading some history about the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal and found myself rather inquisitive over several of the Japanese light cruisers present in the action.  It got me thinking about future potential tech-tree line splits, and I got to thinking about the following possiblities:

  • Japanese light cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • British heavy cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • USN destroyers (guns vs. torpedo boats?)
  • USN battleships (main guns vs. secondary builds?)

What other nations/tech-tree lines do you think could be split into a sub-branch, and if so, what would be it's focus?

There are certainly a number of ships that probably deserve to be in game and there are very probably enough to construct several stub tech trees.  

What I do get tired of is the idea that ever new branch needs some sort of gimmick artificially slapped on them to make them "interesting".  If there is a basis for a ship to have some sort of different capability that the other ships around her don't, then give her that capability.  If there is no basis at all for the gimmick in question, then don't add the gimmick.   Let the ships and their qualities speak for themselves.  

That being said, there are a lot of ships out there which could and should make their way into the game. 

1) Japanese light cruisers

2) US Battleships 

3) US Destroyers

4) German Battlecrusiers

5) British Heavy Cruisers

6) British Destroyers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
381
[IND8]
Members
530 posts
8,343 battles
5 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

I only have a couple of issues:

1. Revenge on your UK BC list is a BB not a BC. I think you might mean Renown. 

2. Constellation (Lexington BC design) doesn't fit on your US Battleships 2 list. It is a Battlecruiser with incredibly thin armor. I would get vaporized in a close-in secondaries duel. I'd suggest the old South Dakota (1920) design and call her USS Indiana since that is the only one of the proposed names in that class that hasn't been used in the game. 

Oops on Renown. I spaced on that. I know better. 

As for Constellation, if armor is a problem, put it in the original line and move North Carolina and modify it accordingly.

Edited by Shannon_Lindsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,983
[SALVO]
Members
22,937 posts
23,528 battles
1 minute ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

I don't think a full line split is possible for the German Battlecruisers due to the complete lack of designs post WWI. Likely these will all be premium.

Disagree.  The Siegfried could have been a high tier BC.  Also, there are supposedly no legit designs for Italian cruisers after the tier 7 Zara, but that's not going to stop WG from adding in some fictional high tier designs.  Furthermore, there's a tier 7 German BB design that hasn't been added to the game, the L20 alpha that could be added into the BB line and the tier 7 Gneisenau could be move up to tier 8 as a battlecruiser.

L20 alpha BB design

The German BC line could start with legit ships and one unbuilt design.

T3: Von Der Tann

T4: Moltke or Seydlitz

T5: Derfflinger

T6: Mackensen 

T7: Ersatz Yorck:  Ersatz means "replacement" (as in "replacement Yorck"), so this class would need a new name, since the 3 ship names intended for this class were Yorck, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau.

 

And then with the previously mentioned suggestion...

 

T8: Gneisenau class "battlecruiser".  Would probably need improved accuracy on the main guns to make it viable.

T9: O class battlecruisers: (i.e. the Siegfried).

T10: Probably a fictional successor to the O class battlecruiser

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,184
[SYN]
Members
8,132 posts
12,771 battles

German and British battlecruisers are a no brainier.

British heavy cruisers and Japanese light ones are a common choice, and we do now have forerunners for them in the shape of Exeter and Yahagi though Yahagi... Has gotten nowhere fast.

Destroyers are relatively easy to split in my opinion, generally lots of ships. The US could have had a destroyer leader branch with Somers, Benham and others though I'm not sure if 2 premiums makes that less likely. 

The British could add a destroyer split focussed on heavier ships with the 4.7in/50 or one equipped with the 4in gun - British Akizuki's. At the lighter end a small branch of destroyer caliber armed cruisers like a C-class with lots of 4in guns, Delhi, Scylla, Dido and some heavier designs with the 5.25in would be possible. The French split mentioned is sensible too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
125
Beta Testers
634 posts
1,698 battles
4 hours ago, Tzarevitch said:

I only have a couple of issues:

1. Revenge on your UK BC list is a BB not a BC. I think you might mean Renown. 

2. Constellation (Lexington BC design) doesn't fit on your US Battleships 2 list. It is a Battlecruiser with incredibly thin armor. I would get vaporized in a close-in secondaries duel. I'd suggest the old South Dakota (1920) design and call her USS Indiana since that is the only one of the proposed names in that class that hasn't been used in the game. 

Wait, but South Dakota hasn't been used in game yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
740
[EQRN]
Members
1,613 posts
13,546 battles
4 hours ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

I had been working on a series of future lines and what ships and skills I would like to see, but Wargaming scooped me twice on French DDs and Italian cruisers, so I pretty much gave up on posting anymore, but for lines not yet revealed, here is a quick rundown on what I came up with:

Very nice branches!  Could you tell us your Italian cruiser line up and how it differs from WG’s?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,774
[PVE]
Members
10,001 posts
18,222 battles
6 hours ago, Ace_04 said:

Good day all,

I was recently reading some history about the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal and found myself rather inquisitive over several of the Japanese light cruisers present in the action.  It got me thinking about future potential tech-tree line splits, and I got to thinking about the following possiblities:

  • Japanese light cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • British heavy cruisers (partial sub-branch/split)
  • USN destroyers (guns vs. torpedo boats?)
  • USN battleships (main guns vs. secondary builds?)

What other nations/tech-tree lines do you think could be split into a sub-branch, and if so, what would be it's focus?

Pretty much what you listed and then BRN and KM Battlecruisers. Maybe a US and IJN CV split?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,111
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
4,799 posts
13,828 battles

I wish for more [good] german ships... but i wish even more they fix what we alread have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
381
[IND8]
Members
530 posts
8,343 battles
50 minutes ago, FrodoFraggin said:

Very nice branches!  Could you tell us your Italian cruiser line up and how it differs from WG’s?  

I'm not at my computer right now, but a brief summary is a different ship at tier 1, but the same concept, tiers 2-4 were the same, can't remember what my 5 was, my 6-8 became the actual 5-7, my 9 I once again can't remember, and my 10 was a 203 mm version of the never completed Etna.

Style wise, I was thinking excellent detection range with long range torpedoes and heal, but no smoke, and no hydro until tier 7. I actually like the rolling smoke and no hydro concept WG is going with for them.

Edited by Shannon_Lindsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×