Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Sabot_100

Dunkerque as a cruiser

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,123
[CVA16]
Members
5,391 posts
16,219 battles

WG obviously shifted policies over the years deciding to call the battlecruisers like Alaska, Kronstadt and Stalingrad high tier cruisers instead of lower tier BBs. Just wondering what tier Dunkerque would be IF it was recast as a cruiser? It  would have to get some changes of course, cruiser (or some hybrid version) accuracy for example. Also getting cruiser consumables (hey its French, does it get MBRB?). I'm thinking 8 or 9 depending on what changes are made.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
183
[VVV]
[VVV]
Members
808 posts
14,842 battles

I don't see why not hell at this point Renown or Repulse could be classified as cruisers since much like Seigfried they have six 15 inch guns 

Edited by yamato6945

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[CVA16]
Members
5,391 posts
16,219 battles
1 hour ago, yamato6945 said:

I don't see why not hell at this point Renown or Repulse could be classified as cruisers since mich like Seigfried they have six 15 inch guns 

WG has not been very consistent on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42
[-SOR-]
[-SOR-]
Members
110 posts
6,642 battles

if Dunkerque's 330mm guns got supercruiser dispersion it would bump up a few tiers. I think whether it would fit at T8 or T9 would come down to health pool and what consumables. Terrible AA would definitely be a crippling issue unless it got a imaginary 1943 US retrofit with a bunch of bofors nests or something, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
8 hours ago, Sabot_100 said:

WG obviously shifted policies over the years deciding to call the battlecruisers like Alaska, Kronstadt and Stalingrad high tier cruisers instead of lower tier BBs. Just wondering what tier Dunkerque would be IF it was recast as a cruiser? It  would have to get some changes of course, cruiser (or some hybrid version) accuracy for example. Also getting cruiser consumables (hey its French, does it get MBRB?). I'm thinking 8 or 9 depending on what changes are made.

 

The line between CAs and BBs could be blurred with Battlecruiser being the in between class. Some Battlecruisers like Kongo, Scharnhorst, Dunkerque, and Hood took more after BBs while ships like Alaska and those like it took more after cruisers. And then you add in Fast BBs and the Deutschland class into the mix and things get really confusing lol.

So I think Wargaming has all this ships classed as they should without adding in an additional designation fir Battlecruisers which honestly would complicate matters in game more than likely as some BCs were converted into Fast BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[PRMUS]
Members
943 posts
2,312 battles
On 7/2/2020 at 11:53 AM, Sabot_100 said:

WG obviously shifted policies over the years deciding to call the battlecruisers like Alaska, Kronstadt and Stalingrad high tier cruisers instead of lower tier BBs. Just wondering what tier Dunkerque would be IF it was recast as a cruiser? It  would have to get some changes of course, cruiser (or some hybrid version) accuracy for example. Also getting cruiser consumables (hey its French, does it get MBRB?). I'm thinking 8 or 9 depending on what changes are made.

 

Yup agree. Think eIther way though Dunkerque should be T7(which is a very broad tier), more historically appropriate than fighting ships from decades earlier. But these other ambgiious BB/BCs becoming higher ranked cruisers shows WG is rating them by how they compare to the rest of their type, not whether or not they belong at the tier as a whole. The cruisers are so much higher tier because of how they compare to real heavy cruisers, which they are not. IRL cruisers were not made for WOWS scenario where they'd be fighting BB's every mission, even the best of the them are at a disadvantage so they are likely being graded on a curve. DD's are different cause they are an actual threat to BB's by themselves. When you scroll over a cruiser label in the lobby it says something like "fight other cruisers and destroyers" but in game you're never going to be able to do that in isolation those ships would irl you'll be fighting BB's.  Think every ship you just named should be considered a battlecruiser and be classified as a battleship in line with how every battlecruiser prior to the ones above is a BB. Only ambigious type I agree with as a cruiser is Graf Spee because it's a cruiser in every way except the guns. 

Seems like WG's going to make anything that was officially a battlecruiser a battleship and anything battlecruiserlike with a different classification a cruiser. That's what I think from how they've treated ships so far. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[CVA16]
Members
5,391 posts
16,219 battles
1 hour ago, Aristotle83 said:

Think eIther way though Dunkerque should be T7(which is a very broad tier)

Seems low. Without huge nerfs, what other T7 cruiser could face it? It has no torps, a blind spot to the stern, and is on the slow side (for a cruiser) but it has substantial secondaries (broadside of 10) and primaries that will overmatch many of the real cruisers it faces and are a genuine AP threat to BBs. It still keeps its amazing bow-tanking ability. It might have to be a tier lower than Alaska so T8.

Not really a serious proposal for WG to change things. Just a what-if exercise.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[PRMUS]
Members
943 posts
2,312 battles
40 minutes ago, Sabot_100 said:

Seems low. Without huge nerfs, what other T7 cruiser could face it? It has no torps, a blind spot to the stern, and is on the slow side (for a cruiser) but it has substantial secondaries (broadside of 10) and primaries that will overmatch many of the real cruisers it faces and are a genuine AP threat to BBs. It still keeps its amazing bow-tanking ability. It might have to be a tier lower than Alaska so T8.

Not really a serious proposal for WG to change things. Just a what-if exercise.

Oh I know i don't WG think has ever reteired something if something's OP or UP they'll nerf it or buff it..

But yeah that's the thing it's only OP at T7 if you consider it a cruiser. Like Alaska as a cruiser it's good for T9(right now cause T9 and T10 going to get all those battlecruisers not called battlecruisers) as a Iowa with much weaker guns it probably belongs at T8. If you consider it a BB or BC, it's fine though. It's like the Scharnhorst. At T6 it's OP either way though, BB's dont really have that manueverability at T6 makes a mockery out of "fast battleship" QE for example. And when you get down tiered Dunkerque wil be fighting early sluggish dreadnoughts. Heck heavy cruisers aren't even a thing until T5 and the Dunkerque would be existing at T4 where it is faster than some of the cruisers and stronger than the BB's. The German BB's that have that reload time in those tiers are slow and sluggish. Izmail might be a T6 battlecruiser and might be almost as fast but Dunkerque's reload time and movement is OP by comparison. It's also got a great range for a T6 especially considering it's speed advantage. And Russian BB's aren't exactly something everyone considers balanced. 

At T8 I'd think the Dunkerque would just be throughly outclassed by other BB's which at that point all got at least 15 inch guns. At T7 you got the Lyon with the 16 smaller, guns, Scharnhorst is more maneuverable but has weaker guns, KGV's aren't much more powerful either though I think they are better. Colorado and Nagato got the bigger 16 inch guns but are considerably slower especially Colorado. It's pretty balanced. At T8 every BB's a fast battleship, every BB's got considerably stronger guns, Dunkerque would just be bad. But again if you're comparing it to cruisers that changes. All BB's are going to overmatch cruisers at T7, what T7 heavy cruiser could face any T7 BB alone? What heavy cruiser(the 7-8 inch gun kind) at any tier can overmatch a BB? They have a different job they aren't expected to. 

Guess seeing a misleading cruiser icon on  BB would just be misleading af like it is to BB players who see a cruiser icon and end up fighting a much weaker fast battleship. It'd be the same except the cruiser would face more consequences for being misled. With these ambigious ships it's best to give them the label that's closer to being accurate. Whatever misleads least. It's closer to a BB, a lot closer so think they made the right call there like I think they made the wrong call with the Alaska etc. Dunkerque's main peer is Scharnhorst and it's at T7 think that's where it belongs.  Instead they put it with the ships it was designed to destroy Graf Spee and her sisters. 

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[GNOME]
Members
51 posts
5,064 battles
On 7/3/2020 at 5:44 PM, Sabot_100 said:

Seems low. Without huge nerfs, what other T7 cruiser could face it? It has no torps, a blind spot to the stern, and is on the slow side (for a cruiser) but it has substantial secondaries (broadside of 10) and primaries that will overmatch many of the real cruisers it faces and are a genuine AP threat to BBs. It still keeps its amazing bow-tanking ability. It might have to be a tier lower than Alaska so T8.

Not really a serious proposal for WG to change things. Just a what-if exercise.

What nerfs?  It's not considered a terribly strong Tier 6 Battleship right now.  It has over matching, but the lack of torps and the low speed area already significant weaknesses.  Not to mention the bad AA power, and the fact it gets overmatched through the bow.  Now I guess if it became faster or got a smaller surface detection range when it became a cruiser, I'd be worried about it being OP.  As it stands right now, you could probably give it a little more speed and copy+paste it to tier 7 and it would be fine.  It's a fat target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
[PHD]
Members
1,516 posts
6,479 battles

I hope at some point WG will create a "battlecruiser" line and move some of the super cruisers and light battleships, along with new battlecruisers like the Repulse,  into it.

And while they are at it "declare " them vulnerable to Asashio type DW torps.

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.

×