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

Possible future Premium DDs (or CLs)

4 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

772
[REVY]
Members
2,287 posts
12,277 battles

Was going through a book on US DD classes and came across these 'Destroyer Leaders'.

Norfolk-class
 

Spoiler

1280px-USS_Norfolk_(DL-1)_underway_c1964

roughly 6,000 tons, basically the same size as an Atlanta-class.
She carries 8 - DP 3in/50s and 8 - 21in torpedo tubes.
She also carried ASW weaponry. She served from 1951 - 1973


Mitscher-Class

 

Spoiler

1920px-USS_Wilkinson_(DL-5)_underway_in_

Larger then a Gearing, but smaller then an Atlanta (about 5,000 tons, 490ft long)
As built 2 - 5in/54 Mark 42s, 4 - 3in, 2 - ASW rockets and Depth charge rack. Later refitted as Guided Missile DD.

Served from 1953 to 1978

 

Both ships are early 50s ships and while large for DDs, can fit into the game in their early forms as they had DP main guns, as well as additional AA guns and in some ways are similar to the Friesland, but bigger.
They would definitely be high tier ships, at 9 or 10, more likely 10.

Thoughts?

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,892
[SYN]
Members
15,861 posts
12,803 battles

USS Norfolk DL-1 would be very slow. Slower than any of the existing T9/10 DDs.
I don't know WG would even go for 76mm guns being a main weapon at that tier. Even with a 1/4 HE divider, it would still only do 19mm of penetration.
If they do go with it, it would be kind of hilarious to see 50rpm x 8 guns = 400 shells fly in 1min, and with an absolute max range of 13,350m.
So, like nearly double the rof of Smolensk.

Mitscher is extremely slow for a "DD" or even a cruiser.
If placed in T9 or 10, it will be the slowest DD at those tiers and would be a functionally worse Friesland or Norfolk.
If it had either 4x 127mm/54 or 8x 76mm/70, then it could be formidable, but because they are split in 2x 127mm and 4x 76mm, the main armament is lacking.

And for either of them, I don't see how WG will fit in guided missiles. They tried that before, it sucked and from its ashes arose the current CV control scheme (presumably).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
195
[RANGR]
Members
311 posts
3,990 battles

More post war ships, not to mention that are American? Can we get some ideas for some actually built ships like the British BC, Italian lines, Spanish and Brazilian lines, more commonwealth things, etc.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
772
[REVY]
Members
2,287 posts
12,277 battles
On 7/17/2020 at 7:06 PM, MrDeaf said:

And for either of them, I don't see how WG will fit in guided missiles. They tried that before, it sucked and from its ashes arose the current CV control scheme (presumably).

I'm aware of the issue in regards to Guided missiles, hence why I mentioned them in their as built condition vs their later life refits.

 

 

On 7/17/2020 at 9:44 PM, Raven2303 said:

More post war ships, not to mention that are American? Can we get some ideas for some actually built ships like the British BC, Italian lines, Spanish and Brazilian lines, more commonwealth things, etc.

These ships were built which is why I brought them up.

I'd love to see BCs, but if you only want the ones that were built, you'd only see them up to T7 with the Admiral-class, likely a post imaginary refit version.
Spanish would likely fall under the Pan-Euro lines, Brazil Pan-American, the Commonwealth would be basically copies of the British lines with some kind of gimmick. Italian BBs and DDs would be the only lines truly available. Speaking of which, weren't Italian DDs in testing at one point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×