Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
wjp120

Why isn't there anything like the Iowa at tier 10?

42 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles

By which I mean at least 33 knot base speed, and overmatch of at least 27mm. Preferably other important characteristics similar or better, too, but those are the big two for the purpose of my question.

For example, imagine another alternate Montana going in the opposite direction as Ohio. Imagine the Montana hull but with one of the rear turrets removed and replaced with more boiler volume, bigger turbines, heavier driveshafts and screws, etc. The citadel could be somewhat smaller, saving displacement there. Perhaps shave off a bit of armor somewhere, too. Make it displace a bit less than Montana, so the HP would be somewhere on the high side between Iowa and Montana.

I don't know if you'd have to reduce the reload speed for that to be balanced at tier 10 with 3x3 406mm/50s in this game. I think I'd be fine with 30s, but maybe it would need to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 28s or 26s base.

I don't think it would need any Georgia or Ohio style gimmicks to be viable. 

I know the 406s overmatch 28mm, but I mentioned 27mm at the top because that's the main threshold I care about for comfortable gunnery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,664
[HINON]
Members
13,392 posts

Maybe because there are already 2 T10 USN bbs at the moment and Ohio herself is relatively new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
1 minute ago, RipNuN2 said:

Maybe because there are already 2 T10 USN bbs at the moment and Ohio herself is relatively new.

Well, I don't necessarily mean USN. Just something with a 33 knot or better unbuffed max speed and at least 27mm of overmatch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[TNG-2]
Members
203 posts
14,166 battles

There will likely be an Iowa class (New Jersey or Wisconsin) added to the game at tier 10 in the not too distant future.  Probably will be similar to Bourgogne / Alsace.  Like I would expect the Tier 10 Iowa to have faster gun reload (and perhaps reload booster) with better sigma, a larger (Iowa sized) heal with Massachusetts heal cool down, Either Hydro OR defensive fire... and maybe speed boost.  Just plus up the HP pool a bit and there you are, tier 10 Iowa.

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,724 posts
11,349 battles

The closest thing speed wise with 27mm and even 30mm overmatch is repub.  Though from my experience, if you are getting hit in the repub, you are being penned unless it is at autobounce angles or lacks the HE pen.    Your best advantage is using your speed to throw off enemy shots and relocating. That is the downside of being coated in 32mm armor unlike say the Iowa or Monty that has 38mm deck plating that shatters more HE and in general better armor plating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
1 minute ago, Frederick_The_Great said:

The closest thing speed wise with 27mm and even 30mm overmatch is repub.  Though from my experience, if you are getting hit in the repub, you are being penned unless it is at autobounce angles or lacks the HE pen.    Your best advantage is using your speed to throw off enemy shots and relocating. That is the downside of being coated in 32mm armor unlike say the Iowa or Monty that has 38mm deck plating that shatters more HE and in general better armor plating. 

I was disappointed to learn that the Repub isn't even as fast as Iowa when its engine boost is active.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,311
[MUDDX]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
22,521 battles
34 minutes ago, wjp120 said:

imagine another alternate Montana going in the opposite direction as Ohio.

I had rather not particularly since it would be another complete fantasy ship. There are already more than enough of those.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
2 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

I had rather not particularly since it would be another complete fantasy ship. There are already more than enough of those.

Kind of hard to avoid when looking for options at tier 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,311
[MUDDX]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
22,521 battles
3 minutes ago, wjp120 said:

Kind of hard to avoid when looking for options at tier 10. 

Even more of a reason to not have one added then.

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[ANKER]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
574 posts
12,890 battles

Just give it 406 in 3 turrets with 4 barrels each. It has been suggested at a lower tier bit it would be a interesting tier 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
14 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

Even more of a reason to not have one added then.

I'm just saying the game you seem to want ends tiers below 10. Maybe you can't be happy in discussions about tier 10 if paper ships bother you.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
539
[POP]
Members
1,573 posts
22,744 battles
51 minutes ago, wjp120 said:

I was disappointed to learn that the Repub isn't even as fast as Iowa when its engine boost is active.

It's like half a knot slower if you do a ton of straight line driving and less HE resistant for that trade off but you get 13k more HP higher DPM and the ability to overmatch all the 30mm deck and upper belt that used to make cruisers 'tanky' in those tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
984
[KAPPA]
Members
3,115 posts
8,344 battles

Honestly, I'd rather have a T10 Georgia. Adore that ship and her 4.5 minutes of 38 knots. Perfect ship to dominate co-op in.

And before anyone tries to say it, no, Ohio is nothing like her. She's sluggish and doesn't have improved accuracy. She's a T10 Massachusetts if anything.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,505
[RKLES]
Members
12,554 posts
14,283 battles
5 hours ago, wjp120 said:

By which I mean at least 33 knot base speed, and overmatch of at least 27mm. Preferably other important characteristics similar or better, too, but those are the big two for the purpose of my question.

For example, imagine another alternate Montana going in the opposite direction as Ohio. Imagine the Montana hull but with one of the rear turrets removed and replaced with more boiler volume, bigger turbines, heavier driveshafts and screws, etc. The citadel could be somewhat smaller, saving displacement there. Perhaps shave off a bit of armor somewhere, too. Make it displace a bit less than Montana, so the HP would be somewhere on the high side between Iowa and Montana.

I don't know if you'd have to reduce the reload speed for that to be balanced at tier 10 with 3x3 406mm/50s in this game. I think I'd be fine with 30s, but maybe it would need to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 28s or 26s base.

I don't think it would need any Georgia or Ohio style gimmicks to be viable. 

I know the 406s overmatch 28mm, but I mentioned 27mm at the top because that's the main threshold I care about for comfortable gunnery.

Sounds like your wanting either Stalingrad, Moskva, or Yoshino if you want something like Iowa at tier X. You get the high speeds, similar gun layout, strong bow armor, but turn side on to the enemy and you get your citadel hit in those CAs about the same as Iowa as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,413
[SALVO]
Members
25,046 posts
26,407 battles
6 hours ago, wjp120 said:

By which I mean at least 33 knot base speed, and overmatch of at least 27mm. Preferably other important characteristics similar or better, too, but those are the big two for the purpose of my question.

For example, imagine another alternate Montana going in the opposite direction as Ohio. Imagine the Montana hull but with one of the rear turrets removed and replaced with more boiler volume, bigger turbines, heavier driveshafts and screws, etc. The citadel could be somewhat smaller, saving displacement there. Perhaps shave off a bit of armor somewhere, too. Make it displace a bit less than Montana, so the HP would be somewhere on the high side between Iowa and Montana.

I don't know if you'd have to reduce the reload speed for that to be balanced at tier 10 with 3x3 406mm/50s in this game. I think I'd be fine with 30s, but maybe it would need to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 28s or 26s base.

I don't think it would need any Georgia or Ohio style gimmicks to be viable. 

I know the 406s overmatch 28mm, but I mentioned 27mm at the top because that's the main threshold I care about for comfortable gunnery.

:Smile_facepalm:

You just described the Iowa, though historically, the timing was reversed, i.e. the Iowa class came before the Montana class.  And frankly, what you're describing wouldn't really be tier 10 material, IMO.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,413
[SALVO]
Members
25,046 posts
26,407 battles
1 hour ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Sounds like your wanting either Stalingrad, Moskva, or Yoshino if you want something like Iowa at tier X. You get the high speeds, similar gun layout, strong bow armor, but turn side on to the enemy and you get your citadel hit in those CAs about the same as Iowa as well.

He is pretty much  describing the difference between a battleship and a battlecruiser, i.e. trading tonnage in guns and armor for more speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,505
[RKLES]
Members
12,554 posts
14,283 battles
8 minutes ago, Crucis said:

He is pretty much  describing the difference between a battleship and a battlecruiser, i.e. trading tonnage in guns and armor for more speed.

Yeah, and that’s a different play style than a traditional BB, and a fun one that not everyone can manage to play. And it can be tricky to find which ships in the game are the BCs as they are either labeled as BBs or CAs in game. One of these days WG really needs to have some proper Battlecruiser tech tree lines, but until then those that enjoy the BC play style just have to pick up the various BCs scattered around in game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,197
[INTEL]
Members
1,778 posts
15,773 battles
19 minutes ago, Crucis said:

:Smile_facepalm:

You just described the Iowa, though historically, the timing was reversed, i.e. the Iowa class came before the Montana class.  And frankly, what you're describing wouldn't really be tier 10 material, IMO.  

I was thinking that too. So he wants Iowa at T10 when you can play iowa already at T9 and clean up on XP in T10 matches. Cause... reasons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
7 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Sounds like your wanting either Stalingrad, Moskva, or Yoshino if you want something like Iowa at tier X. You get the high speeds, similar gun layout, strong bow armor, but turn side on to the enemy and you get your citadel hit in those CAs about the same as Iowa as well.

If it doesn't overmatch 27mm plating, it doesn't fit the description, which was laid out in the first sentence of the OP.

6 hours ago, Ares1967 said:

I was thinking that too. So he wants Iowa at T10 when you can play iowa already at T9 and clean up on XP in T10 matches. Cause... reasons...

Did I say it was because I wanted to "clean up" in what I assume you mean to be random random matches? Random matches aren't the only tier 10 matches.

 

Also, in the OP I mentioned possible differences from the Iowa to fit such a concept into tier 10. But then again, both of you seem to be responding to nothing more than the title of my post, so I have no expectation that either of you will read this far into this reply.

 

I've been thinking about this question for weeks, and I finally posted because ranked is tier 10 now. I imagine I might like to do clan battles at some point in the future, too. There is no option to bring a tier 9 ship into a mode that requires tier 10.

 

But, this isn't just about me. This is about what people think about the question. I am genuinely curious as to why every tier 10 battleship in the game has a base top speed of less than 33 knots. And why the only battleship at that tier which can exceed that speed on average cannot overmatch 27mm. It seems like an odd  combination to not exist, when both numbers trend upwards all the way from tier 3 to tier 9.

 

Note that I'm not against Bourgogne being the way that it is. It's obviously well balanced as a whole. I just find it curious that there's only one BB on that side of this seemingly forbidden pairing of statistics at tier 10.

 

I might make a thread about cruisers with torpedoes and radar at tier 10 someday. Maybe use Chapayev as the example in the title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,195
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers
3,194 posts
9,525 battles

It appears the 27mm overmatch is going to be moot eventually since the IFHE change would buff tier 10 cruiser plating to 30mm and you need Republique's guns or above to overmatch that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
83
[TF16A]
[TF16A]
Members
506 posts
8,091 battles
22 minutes ago, Vader_Sama said:

It appears the 27mm overmatch is going to be moot eventually since the IFHE change would buff tier 10 cruiser plating to 30mm and you need Republique's guns or above to overmatch that.

The change is only for the central portion of the armor. The bows and stern will stay the same as they are now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[WOLFX]
Members
268 posts
12,925 battles
15 hours ago, Crucis said:

He is pretty much  describing the difference between a battleship and a battlecruiser, i.e. trading tonnage in guns and armor for more speed.

 

15 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Yeah, and that’s a different play style than a traditional BB, and a fun one that not everyone can manage to play. And it can be tricky to find which ships in the game are the BCs as they are either labeled as BBs or CAs in game. One of these days WG really needs to have some proper Battlecruiser tech tree lines, but until then those that enjoy the BC play style just have to pick up the various BCs scattered around in game.

 

Well, what I'm envisioning would still have better armoir protection than the Iowa. Just because I used the "battlecruiser process" to frame my example doesn't make it a battlecruiser any more than Iowa is a battlecruiser, since it would be more tanky than the Iowa. And might have better AA, since the extra deck space could possibly be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×