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

Idea for a Premium T8 USN CL... Whatcha think?

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,099
[X-PN]
Members
1,757 posts
12,841 battles

T8  USN Juneau - Atlanta class CL

Would be similar to Atlanta except has 9km radar for 30 seconds (or maybe 9.5 for 20 seconds), access to 5th slot (like all T8s), 4.4 sec base reload,14km range with AFT, and 1/5 pen rule that other T8 CL's get.

 

Atlanta has always been a popular and fun ship...this would be more of that.

 

Whachall think?

Edited by YouSatInGum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,894
[FML]
Members
4,163 posts
16,112 battles
27 minutes ago, CAPTAIN_JACK_HOLDEN said:

Great idea with one fetal flaw.

It's not Russian.

Da Comrade!

You understand the importance of keeping the decadent western dogs in the dark that brilliant Soviet spies captured the designs of USS Atlanta in 1929! And that hard-working, gulag-fearing Soviet engineers made a series of innovations based on pinnacle of Soviet technology - such as tossing out rubbish American 5 inch guns and replacing with superior Soviet 130mm guns with much better ballistics and shells guided by the hand of Stalin himself! 

Continue to confuse the enemy, my friend, so they do not know about the latest terror of the seas - the Balanski! It shall bring great Soviet balans to all mid-tier battles, just as Smolensk has brought balans to high tier campfests!

Dasvidaniya!!

 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,630 posts
45,353 battles

If it shoots 127mm, then long range is a problem. The shells float that far.

ATL, when it came out was hella fun. It is to some extent today. But on PvP, it's fragile since it is technically a destroyer leader. It's speciality was AA. Anti-ship it's lacking.

If you want the cruiser you propose to be interesting, then have it with long range torpedoes. 10.5km, with 60 sec base reload. Longer range radar than Russian cruisers, but also have DFAA in separate slot, smoke in another slot. Hydro in another. And to put the cherry on top, give it a heal.

Basically, make it a research bureau OP ship. Even though its fragile, it would be excellent for antisubmarine warfare and area of denial skirmishes and no CV will touch it. Except Hakuryu. LOL

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,894
[FML]
Members
4,163 posts
16,112 battles
20 minutes ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

If it shoots 127mm, then long range is a problem. The shells float that far.

ATL, when it came out was hella fun. It is to some extent today. But on PvP, it's fragile since it is technically a destroyer leader. It's speciality was AA. Anti-ship it's lacking.

If you want the cruiser you propose to be interesting, then have it with long range torpedoes. 10.5km, with 60 sec base reload. Longer range radar than Russian cruisers, but also have DFAA in separate slot, smoke in another slot. Hydro in another. And to put the cherry on top, give it a heal.

Basically, make it a research bureau OP ship. Even though its fragile, it would be excellent for antisubmarine warfare and area of denial skirmishes and no CV will touch it. Except Hakuryu. LOL

Not sure if you've played Atlanta or Flint recently, but tbh its AA is now quite underwhelming.  It used to be a no fly zone, but now its more of an annoyance to enemy planes.  Imo, dedicated AA cruisers were nerfed too hard (primarily range) to no longer be able to provide a fleet AA bubble (unless facing much lower tier carriers).  Def AA consumable should also be strengthened somewhat, such as returning its 'panic' effect.  That would make it really hard to strike an AA cruiser, and allow them to still fill a gap in the fleet, without being stronger against ships.  

And should it get depth charges as well, so it can fight land, sea, air and subs?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[DHO-2]
Beta Testers
1,250 posts
11,232 battles

The Prems in WOWS are generally famous ships. E.g. 

HMS Hood

Torp-it

USS Mighty Mo (or Big Mo)

 

IMHO, if you're going to suggest a new prem, at least post some history (of that vessel).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,396
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
39,002 battles

 It will never work. Atlanta's AA is almost useless now. Tier 10 aircraft carriers will wreck it with rockets and then destroy it with bombs and torpedoes. It will be an easy target for them.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,630 posts
45,353 battles
1 hour ago, UltimateNewbie said:

Not sure if you've played Atlanta or Flint recently, but tbh its AA is now quite underwhelming.  It used to be a no fly zone, but now its more of an annoyance to enemy planes.  Imo, dedicated AA cruisers were nerfed too hard (primarily range) to no longer be able to provide a fleet AA bubble (unless facing much lower tier carriers).  Def AA consumable should also be strengthened somewhat, such as returning its 'panic' effect.  That would make it really hard to strike an AA cruiser, and allow them to still fill a gap in the fleet, without being stronger against ships.  

And should it get depth charges as well, so it can fight land, sea, air and subs?

I agree. The AA was brutally clubbed in an undisclosed location.

Original ATL class had both depth charge launchers and roll racks.

In addition to AA role, she did ASW.

The simplest answer to AA question is to revert CVs to RTS and restore the AA to original.

Seeing as that is like pulling the pin on a grenade in a factory full of TNT and plutonium, such a suggestion only gets me rotting vegetables thrown at me, or words uttered like, "CV lover, pervert, wierdo, bullcrap, and CVs should all burn down!"

The anger that CVs get is strong. I thought hiring Pusheen Imperial dressed pilots for my Hakuryu would look cute, but Wooster players will still hit the DFAA, priority, and whip out the 45 and try to shoot them all down.

I even have Baby Yoda running flight ops, yet use of the Force, whether Light or in my case Dark, only gets me no Love.

It's not easy playing CVs. I don't normally play them, I play all ships. Yet, I sail out and everyone groans. DDs hide, Wooster players go nuts, and even those Euro DDs hate being spotted. It's not my fault that they got no smoke.

Blame CVs or WG? Take your pick.

Either way, it's made me single. LOL 😏😎

Where is the Love?🤔😷🦇🐨🐻🌈🌌💮🦀🌹🐺🐉⚒️😎

 

 

 

Edited by SteelRain_Rifleman
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
766
[NUWES]
Members
3,426 posts
12,772 battles

The issue wouldn't be AA, the issue with the proposal is it is basically Atlanta again, but one tier higher in an even more brutal tier bracket without significant improvement to keep it alive.  It only gains a module slot (probably making it stealthier) little better radar, a bit more pen and a little more dps. That is not a T8-grade ship. You're better off with Cleveland or Montpelier if you want a premium USN CL. 

The Atlantas don't have the Soviet railgun ballistics to make this work or the total lack of armor-as-armor that the Soviet ships have. Floaty shells limit the ship a lot and it has a vulnerable citadel and enough armor to arm AP shells. The higher the tier, the more the range opens up and the more Atlanta suffers, even against higher-tier DDs. If Juneau got equipped with high velocity Soviet guns and could back up a bit I think it is doable but just kicking an Atlanta up to T8 with just those changes it not a good ship. Not when Cleveland and Montpelier exist. 

Real world-wise, the Clevelands were as good AA ships as the Atlantas were but were larger, tougher, more stable and added a main battery of 150mm guns to boot. 

Now that I think a bit more about it the concept might work if they added something like Gearing's torps which have longer range so she can attack from safety or at least keep larger ships from pushing into her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
119
[_I_]
Members
71 posts
9 hours ago, madgiecool said:

 

IMHO, if you're going to suggest a new prem, at least post some history (of that vessel).

USS Juneau...Ever hear of the Sullivan Brothers, as in USS The Sullivans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,099
[X-PN]
Members
1,757 posts
12,841 battles
11 hours ago, Tzarevitch said:

The issue wouldn't be AA, the issue with the proposal is it is basically Atlanta again, but one tier higher in an even more brutal tier bracket without significant improvement to keep it alive.  It only gains a module slot (probably making it stealthier) little better radar, a bit more pen and a little more dps. That is not a T8-grade ship. You're better off with Cleveland or Montpelier if you want a premium USN CL. 

The Atlantas don't have the Soviet railgun ballistics to make this work or the total lack of armor-as-armor that the Soviet ships have. Floaty shells limit the ship a lot and it has a vulnerable citadel and enough armor to arm AP shells. The higher the tier, the more the range opens up and the more Atlanta suffers, even against higher-tier DDs. If Juneau got equipped with high velocity Soviet guns and could back up a bit I think it is doable but just kicking an Atlanta up to T8 with just those changes it not a good ship. Not when Cleveland and Montpelier exist. 

Real world-wise, the Clevelands were as good AA ships as the Atlantas were but were larger, tougher, more stable and added a main battery of 150mm guns to boot. 

Now that I think a bit more about it the concept might work if they added something like Gearing's torps which have longer range so she can attack from safety or at least keep larger ships from pushing into her. 

Actually the AA issue was one area that I neglected.  Of course what should really happen is Atlanta and Flint need their AA buffed enough to make any CV in their MM spread reluctant to be around them.

While the ship would be fearsome with Soviet 130s, it would just be a Smolie light, and when we start just making fantasy combinations you might as well give it Friesland guns, call it a Super Atlanta because it can spit out 10 shells a second.

With the module it would have 8.7 concealment, maybe a heal would be warranted...testing would reveal that.

WG knows it is worthwhile to cater to USN fans as well....that's why there is a glut of premium BBs and DDs.  The cruiser offerings are less compelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[DHO-2]
Beta Testers
1,250 posts
11,232 battles
15 hours ago, DesRon_29 said:

USS Juneau...Ever hear of the Sullivan Brothers, as in USS The Sullivans?

 

No, but I have now, as I just googled it.

 

IMHO would have been a million times easier if the OP (or you) had included it.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_brothers#:~:text=The%20five%20brothers%2C%20the%20sons,as%20Gunner's%20Mate%20Third%20Class.)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
609
[BOTO]
Members
1,460 posts
18,147 battles
5 hours ago, madgiecool said:

 

No, but I have now, as I just googled it.

 

IMHO would have been a million times easier if the OP (or you) had included it.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_brothers#:~:text=The%20five%20brothers%2C%20the%20sons,as%20Gunner's%20Mate%20Third%20Class.)

They both probably assumed you had a rudimentary knowledge of WWII era naval combat history.  I frequently make the mistake of assuming that players have at least a basic knowledge of early/mid 20th century naval combat when that's simply not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
766
[NUWES]
Members
3,426 posts
12,772 battles
13 hours ago, YouSatInGum said:

Actually the AA issue was one area that I neglected.  Of course what should really happen is Atlanta and Flint need their AA buffed enough to make any CV in their MM spread reluctant to be around them.

While the ship would be fearsome with Soviet 130s, it would just be a Smolie light, and when we start just making fantasy combinations you might as well give it Friesland guns, call it a Super Atlanta because it can spit out 10 shells a second.

With the module it would have 8.7 concealment, maybe a heal would be warranted...testing would reveal that.

WG knows it is worthwhile to cater to USN fans as well....that's why there is a glut of premium BBs and DDs.  The cruiser offerings are less compelling.

I agree we could use a few more USN cruisers. I would love to see Salt Lake City, Houston or Chicago on T6 for starters. I just don't think uptiering an Atlanta to T8 will work. Truthfully I haven't had problems with Atlanta's AA she swats down aircraft fine for me. Scaled up on T8 I think her AA would still be fine. She can't provide a full immunity shield but that is not the new AA model.  Her poor shell ballistics are what really kill putting her on T8. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,630 posts
45,353 battles
On 6/1/2020 at 3:01 AM, Taichunger said:

 It will never work. Atlanta's AA is almost useless now. Tier 10 aircraft carriers will wreck it with rockets and then destroy it with bombs and torpedoes. It will be an easy target for them.

I remember when it was a no fly zone. BBs like Yamato would snuggle with it like it's got an irresistible coconut smell just so CVs couldn't sink the Yamato.

Back in those days, you sank the ATL to get Yamato by getting a teammate to get it for you or hope the player runs out of DFAA.

I really hope AA cruisers get fixed to be honest, but that can only work if CVs were reverted to RTS.

Since that is less likely to happen, that may never happen to AA cruisers.

Adjustment to a ship type at an extreme level usually does things like this. WG adjusted CVs too much, then were forced to adjust AA cruisers as well. The corrections have gone out of control at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[DHO-2]
Beta Testers
1,250 posts
11,232 battles
16 hours ago, Aaron_S_Merrill said:

They both probably assumed you had a rudimentary knowledge of WWII era naval combat history.  I frequently make the mistake of assuming that players have at least a basic knowledge of early/mid 20th century naval combat when that's simply not the case.

 

Thank you for the two insults.  Clearly I failed to meet both your rudimentary and basic knowledge standards because I failed to know about 1 boat.   

What i believe you mean to say is 'I have no interest in USN ships' (Unless Steven Seagal happens to be the cook on board).  This is probably true for most non-Americans.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
871 posts
220 battles
16 hours ago, Aaron_S_Merrill said:

They both probably assumed you had a rudimentary knowledge of WWII era naval combat history.  I frequently make the mistake of assuming that players have at least a basic knowledge of early/mid 20th century naval combat when that's simply not the case.

TBH  - I was confused as well.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Juneau_(CL-52)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Juneau_(CL-119)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
609
[BOTO]
Members
1,460 posts
18,147 battles
48 minutes ago, madgiecool said:

 

Thank you for the two insults.  Clearly I failed to meet both your rudimentary and basic knowledge standards because I failed to know about 1 boat.   

What i believe you mean to say is 'I have no interest in USN ships' (Unless Steven Seagal happens to be the cook on board).  This is probably true for most non-Americans.

Sorry if you took it as an insult, because I didn't offer it as one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×