Jump to content
jo_jo_nerd

British BB Split - Battlecruisers

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles

I was bored so heres a British Battlecruiser line.

Strengths

- short fused AP will make over pens rare

- enhanced damage con consumable

- accurate guns

- fast and maneuverable (most ships)

Weaknesses

- fires only AP

- Citadels from long range will be very tough to achieve

- weak armor

- large citadels

 

Tier III

Indefatigable - Improved Invincible Class Battlecruiser

 

Blueprints > Ships > Ships (UK) > HMS Indefatigable (Battlecruiser ...

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 12-inch Mk X naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

13.7 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(16x1) BL 4-inch Mk VII naval guns

7.5 sec reload/8 rpm

3 km firing range

Maneuverability

25 kts

15.2 sec rudder shift

Detectability

13.5 km surface

6.6 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party

Ship Repair

Indefatigable will feature a gun layout similar to the T4 Kaiser, she has very good firing angles, for 6 guns but limited angles for all 8.

 

Tier IV

Queen Mary - Improved Lion Class Battlecruiser

 

HMS Queen Mary - Wikiwand

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 13.5-inch Mk V naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

14.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(16x1) BL 4-inch Mk VII naval guns

7.5 sec reload/8 rpm

3.5 km firing range

Maneuverability

28 kts

15.9 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.2 km surface

8 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party

Ship Repair

Queen Mary would make a nice addition to T4, with her impressive fire power and good maneuverability. Although she has a belt the height of a skyscraper and she's incredibly massive for T4 at 700 ft long.

 

Tier V

Tiger - Barely made T5

WI battlecruiser HMS Tiger gets a refit and battles through WW 2 ...

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 13.5-inch Mk V naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

16.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(6x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

4 km range

Maneuverability

30 kts

16.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.2 km surface

8.5 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party 

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Putting Tiger at T5 would be tough especially because there are so many other good T5 ships like Kongo, Pyotr Velikiy, and Giulio Ceasar. Although a refitted version of Tiger might serve better, she is still outclassed by many other T5 battleships.

 

Tier VI

Renown - Fast and Well-armed

File:HMS Renown (1939) profile drawing.png - Wikimedia Commons

Main Guns

(3x2) BL 15-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

18.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(10x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

4 km range

Maneuverability

31 kts

13.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.9 km surface

10.5 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E - Enhanced, 30s action time)

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Renown in many ways is very similar to her counterpart Queen Elizabeth. She was very successful during WW2 and she would be a strong ship at T6.

 

Tier VII

Anson - HMS Hood Modernization

HMS Hood Refit between August 1940 - April 1941 | alternatehistory.com

Sorry for the stupid photo bucket logo all over the image, but you get the representation.

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 15-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

18.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) QF 5.25-inch naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

29 kts

13.9 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

12.1 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Anson was the second Admiral Class battlecruiser. Although she was never completed, she could be brought to life in WoWs as the planned modernization of HMS Hood. She would play very much like HMS Hood in WoWs, but she is more sluggish and has a significantly larger super structure.

 

Tier VIII

Vengeance - Design H3a of G3 Battlecruiser Preliminaries

ImageG3 \

Again, apologies for the photo bucket logo up front, couldn't find another image.

Main Guns

(2x3) BL 18-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 1.8 rpm

56 sec 180° turret traverse

22.1 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) BL 6-inch Mk XXII naval guns

10 sec reload / 6 rpm

5 km range

(5x1) QF 4.7-inch Mk VIII naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

33.5 kts

16.3 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

11.4 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

For T8 this ship might look like a monster, but there are some significant flaws in this ship, for example, it has the same armor scheme as Nelson, making penetrations by enemy battleships very very easy, her belt sits high out of the water, AA would be garbage, and she looks incredibly dumb.

 

Tier IX

Agamemnon - The G3 Battlecruiser

After my last post about battlecruisers, I remembered the G3 class ...

 

Main Guns

(3x3) BL 16-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 1.8 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

20.5 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) BL 6-inch Mk XXII naval guns

10 sec reload / 6 rpm

5 km range

(6x1) QF 4.7-inch Mk VIII naval guns

4 sec reload / 15 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

32 kts

13.3 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.8 km surface

11.9 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Agamemnon (or G3) should fit into T9 pretty well, given her powerful armament, thick belt and high speed. Although her bizarre gun placement will be an issue.

 

Tier X

Incomparable - The Peak of Royal Navy Battlecruiser design

 

2106109946_ScreenShot2020-08-18at7_20_15PM.thumb.png.8b9305ed7e019cc87cc1f05dbf9255e6.png

Main Guns

(3x2) BL 20-inch (508 mm) guns

26 sec reload / 2.3 rpm

36 sec 180° turret traverse

24.5 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(10x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

4 sec reload / 15 rpm

6.5 km range

Maneuverability

33.6 kts

12.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

11.9 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Fighter/Spotter

At first glance this thing may look a little OP. But once you learn that it was designed with an 11 inch main belt and sits at 1000 feet long, your thoughts will change. Yes, it is a massive target and very lightly armored, but realistically in this hypothetical 1939 refit, she could have been armored up similarly to ships like HMS Hood or HMS Renown. So its safe to say this modern take on the Incomparable should get roughly 14 inches of main belt armor.

 

Let me know what you all think of this. Thanks! 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,008 posts
6,589 battles

I like short AP fuses. I want long-range (7~7.7 km base) secondaries for the high-tier ones also. Battleships without long-range secondaries are toothless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169
[LOIN]
Supertester
854 posts

It looks great but not sure. About H3 at tier 8 it's guns are little too big for the tier. Maybe switch them out for 16.5 inch. Then again 6x16 inch is small number of guns perhaps faster reload will work. You still have alot of tier 8s still using 15 inch guns. 

Also I'm not sure about Incomparable. I think it would make something like Thunderor pointless in getting.

Edited by Starfleet1701

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
27 minutes ago, Starfleet1701 said:

It looks great but not sure. About H3 at tier 8 it's guns are little too big for the tier. Maybe switch them out for 16.5 inch. Then again 6x16 inch is small number of guns perhaps faster reload will work. You still have alot of tier 8s still using 15 inch guns. 

Also I'm not sure about Incomparable. I think it would make something like Thunderor pointless in getting.

I personally dont think it would, one of Thunderer's greatest features is her thick belt. Incomparable would have a much thinner belt making pens on her far easier than on thunderer, it would be a different play style. Incomparable wouldn't even get HE, one of thunderers primary features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169
[LOIN]
Supertester
854 posts
32 minutes ago, jo_jo_nerd said:

I personally dont think it would, one of Thunderer's greatest features is her thick belt. Incomparable would have a much thinner belt making pens on her far easier than on thunderer, it would be a different play style. Incomparable wouldn't even get HE, one of thunderers primary features.

I take advantage of Thunderor's big guns and use AP more often. It is true the belt would be thinner than Thunderor. But other than that, I don't see a big difference in terms of armor. The bigger guns Incomparable has would allow it pen 32mm of armor. Which is a game changer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
2 hours ago, Starfleet1701 said:

I take advantage of Thunderor's big guns and use AP more often. It is true the belt would be thinner than Thunderor. But other than that, I don't see a big difference in terms of armor. The bigger guns Incomparable has would allow it pen 32mm of armor. Which is a game changer.

Yeah, but the armor significantly weaker than Thunderers. For example, when I fire at a broadside Thunderer from 15 km away and I hit the the spot of the citadel, it will be a non-pen, or if I fire at a bow on Thunderer, cannot pen the bow. With Incomparable, if I fire at her broadside, she's getting punished, or say I fire at her bow from anything under 12 km, its going to be a penetration. I figure it will be somewhat like Slava VS Kremlin, plus, Incomparable weighed in at somewhere over 55,000 tons making her health pool roughly the same as Tirpitz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
19 hours ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

I think you should switch the tier 8 and 9 ships. Otherwise, I think it could work.

Thats fair, or maybe the T8 could be swapped out with this,

 

Washington Cherry Trees II./ Part 3 – Warship Projects 1900-1950

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,236
[IND8]
[IND8]
Members
1,254 posts
11,723 battles
6 hours ago, jo_jo_nerd said:

Thats fair, or maybe the T8 could be swapped out with this,

 

Washington Cherry Trees II./ Part 3 – Warship Projects 1900-1950

Once again, I think this design looks more like a tier 9, while your tier 9 looks like a tier 8. Maybe this alt design could become a coal ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
16 hours ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

Once again, I think this design looks more like a tier 9, while your tier 9 looks like a tier 8. Maybe this alt design could become a coal ship.

Really? You think T9? I think this would qualify for T8 because its got a horrendous gun layout and Nelson style armor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[C_NT]
Members
960 posts
2,477 battles

Good work. 

IMO one that's a bit too paper for my taste is the alternative G3 design(and i agree with the point others are making it should be swapped with normal G3 if it weren't). Think battlecruisers generally should only go up to T8(as T9 is where Alaska and it's paper WW2 contemparies seem to start popping up in cruiser land). Don't think you need to stretch to fill a tree up to T10 if you don't need to stretch to fill one up to T1. 

Torn on how I feel about Incomparable 6 20 inch guns that could almost grab the Blue Riband will be very difficult to deal with(points for being pretty well named). Guess replacing Shikashima's good armor with like 7 knots is a pretty good trade off(both have about same reload time).And it seems to be a soft paper design, the guns aren't on naval weapons.com and they've got all them paper ship guns. How powerful are those guns compared to a A-150/Shikashima are they a lower calibar and fire lighter shells given the 2+decades difference? 

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
2 hours ago, Aristotle83 said:

Good work. 

IMO one that's a bit too paper for my taste is the alternative G3 design(and i agree with the point others are making it should be swapped with normal G3 if it weren't). Think battlecruisers generally should only go up to T8(as T9 is where Alaska and it's paper WW2 contemparies seem to start popping up in cruiser land). Don't think you need to stretch to fill a tree up to T10 if you don't need to stretch to fill one up to T1. 

Torn on how I feel about Incomparable 6 20 inch guns that could almost grab the Blue Riband will be very difficult to deal with(points for being pretty well named). Guess replacing Shikashima's good armor with like 7 knots is a pretty good trade off(both have about same reload time).And it seems to be a soft paper design, the guns aren't on naval weapons.com and they've got all them paper ship guns. How powerful are those guns compared to a A-150/Shikashima are they a lower calibar and fire lighter shells given the 2+decades difference? 

I would assume based on other British designs, the 508 mm of Incomparable would have significantly less penetration and velocity than Shikishima or A-150. They would be highly inferior guns. And I think it would be fair to stop at T8, but Wargaming would never do that, all of their lines go up to T10 including the split lines.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[C_NT]
Members
960 posts
2,477 battles
24 minutes ago, jo_jo_nerd said:

I would assume based on other British designs, the 508 mm of Incomparable would have significantly less penetration and velocity than Shikishima or A-150. They would be highly inferior guns. And I think it would be fair to stop at T8, but Wargaming would never do that, all of their lines go up to T10 including the split lines.

Yeah that'd be one way to clearly make it work gameplay wise. Still wondering if anyone knows the actual gun if it exists? Really wish WG wouldn't make up guns. 

Tbh I don't think battlecruiser lines are ever coming and they'll just be slowly released as premiums as time passes. If they do yeah you're right they going to go to 10.  But why would WG release a bunch of the most anticipated ships at once for free when they could just release them one by one as premiums over the course of several years? 

I honestly think Italian BB line might be the last non DD(I don't know anything about DD' tbh have no idea what hasn't been done yet) CV, or submarine tech tree they ever do, just cause they've done it for every nation but what reason is there for them to continue with free ships once they have a line of every type of every major naval power?

Even with the US BB line split, the Tillman's wouldn't have exactly been the most anticipated premiums they clearly holding your Lexingtons, South Dakotas, Iowas(meaning rest of the class not Iowa) and friends for premiums. I imagine it's somewhat hard to sell paper premiums so why use the real ships as anything other than that?

Edited by Aristotle83

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25
[N9PTS]
Members
222 posts
605 battles
On 8/18/2020 at 10:39 PM, jo_jo_nerd said:

I was bored so heres a British Battlecruiser line.

Strengths

- short fused AP will make over pens rare

- enhanced damage con consumable

- accurate guns

- fast and maneuverable (most ships)

Weaknesses

- fires only AP

- Citadels from long range will be very tough to achieve

- weak armor

- large citadels

 

Tier III

Indefatigable - Improved Invincible Class Battlecruiser

 

Blueprints > Ships > Ships (UK) > HMS Indefatigable (Battlecruiser ...

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 12-inch Mk X naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

13.7 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(16x1) BL 4-inch Mk VII naval guns

7.5 sec reload/8 rpm

3 km firing range

Maneuverability

25 kts

15.2 sec rudder shift

Detectability

13.5 km surface

6.6 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party

Ship Repair

Indefatigable will feature a gun layout similar to the T4 Kaiser, she has very good firing angles, for 6 guns but limited angles for all 8.

 

Tier IV

Queen Mary - Improved Lion Class Battlecruiser

 

HMS Queen Mary - Wikiwand

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 13.5-inch Mk V naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

14.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(16x1) BL 4-inch Mk VII naval guns

7.5 sec reload/8 rpm

3.5 km firing range

Maneuverability

28 kts

15.9 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.2 km surface

8 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party

Ship Repair

Queen Mary would make a nice addition to T4, with her impressive fire power and good maneuverability. Although she has a belt the height of a skyscraper and she's incredibly massive for T4 at 700 ft long.

 

Tier V

Tiger - Barely made T5

WI battlecruiser HMS Tiger gets a refit and battles through WW 2 ...

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 13.5-inch Mk V naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

16.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(6x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

4 km range

Maneuverability

30 kts

16.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.2 km surface

8.5 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party 

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Putting Tiger at T5 would be tough especially because there are so many other good T5 ships like Kongo, Pyotr Velikiy, and Giulio Ceasar. Although a refitted version of Tiger might serve better, she is still outclassed by many other T5 battleships.

 

Tier VI

Renown - Fast and Well-armed

File:HMS Renown (1939) profile drawing.png - Wikimedia Commons

Main Guns

(3x2) BL 15-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

18.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(10x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

4 km range

Maneuverability

31 kts

13.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

15.9 km surface

10.5 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E - Enhanced, 30s action time)

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Renown in many ways is very similar to her counterpart Queen Elizabeth. She was very successful during WW2 and she would be a strong ship at T6.

 

Tier VII

Anson - HMS Hood Modernization

HMS Hood Refit between August 1940 - April 1941 | alternatehistory.com

Sorry for the stupid photo bucket logo all over the image, but you get the representation.

Main Guns

(4x2) BL 15-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 2 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

18.4 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) QF 5.25-inch naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

29 kts

13.9 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

12.1 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Spotter/Fighter

Anson was the second Admiral Class battlecruiser. Although she was never completed, she could be brought to life in WoWs as the planned modernization of HMS Hood. She would play very much like HMS Hood in WoWs, but she is more sluggish and has a significantly larger super structure.

 

Tier VIII

Vengeance - Design H3a of G3 Battlecruiser Preliminaries

ImageG3 \

Again, apologies for the photo bucket logo up front, couldn't find another image.

Main Guns

(2x3) BL 18-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 1.8 rpm

56 sec 180° turret traverse

22.1 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) BL 6-inch Mk XXII naval guns

10 sec reload / 6 rpm

5 km range

(5x1) QF 4.7-inch Mk VIII naval guns

5 sec reload / 12 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

33.5 kts

16.3 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

11.4 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

For T8 this ship might look like a monster, but there are some significant flaws in this ship, for example, it has the same armor scheme as Nelson, making penetrations by enemy battleships very very easy, her belt sits high out of the water, AA would be garbage, and she looks incredibly dumb.

 

Tier IX

Agamemnon - The G3 Battlecruiser

After my last post about battlecruisers, I remembered the G3 class ...

 

Main Guns

(3x3) BL 16-inch Mk I naval guns

30 sec reload / 1.8 rpm

45 sec 180° turret traverse

20.5 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(8x2) BL 6-inch Mk XXII naval guns

10 sec reload / 6 rpm

5 km range

(6x1) QF 4.7-inch Mk VIII naval guns

4 sec reload / 15 rpm

5 km range

Maneuverability

32 kts

13.3 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.8 km surface

11.9 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Agamemnon (or G3) should fit into T9 pretty well, given her powerful armament, thick belt and high speed. Although her bizarre gun placement will be an issue.

 

Tier X

Incomparable - The Peak of Royal Navy Battlecruiser design

 

2106109946_ScreenShot2020-08-18at7_20_15PM.thumb.png.8b9305ed7e019cc87cc1f05dbf9255e6.png

Main Guns

(3x2) BL 20-inch (508 mm) guns

26 sec reload / 2.3 rpm

36 sec 180° turret traverse

24.5 km firing range

Secondary Guns

(10x2) QF 4.5-inch Mk I – V naval guns

4 sec reload / 15 rpm

6.5 km range

Maneuverability

33.6 kts

12.5 sec rudder shift

Detectability

16.5 km surface

11.9 km air

Consumables

Damage Control Party (E)

Ship Repair

Fighter/Spotter

At first glance this thing may look a little OP. But once you learn that it was designed with an 11 inch main belt and sits at 1000 feet long, your thoughts will change. Yes, it is a massive target and very lightly armored, but realistically in this hypothetical 1939 refit, she could have been armored up similarly to ships like HMS Hood or HMS Renown. So its safe to say this modern take on the Incomparable should get roughly 14 inches of main belt armor.

 

Let me know what you all think of this. Thanks! 

 

 

 

 You did the research and put in the work very very good job  Nice work in good job

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
42 minutes ago, Aristotle83 said:

Yeah that'd be one way to clearly make it work gameplay wise. Still wondering if anyone knows the actual gun if it exists? Really wish WG wouldn't make up guns. 

Tbh I don't think battlecruiser lines are ever coming and they'll just be slowly released as premiums as time passes. If they do yeah you're right they going to go to 10.  But why would WG release a bunch of the most anticipated ships at once for free when they could just release them one by one as premiums over the course of several years? 

I honestly think Italian BB line might be the last non DD(I don't know anything about DD' tbh have no idea what hasn't been done yet) CV, or submarine tech tree they ever do, just cause they've done it for every nation but what reason is there for them to continue with free ships once they have a line of every type of every major naval power?

Even with the US BB line split, the Tillman's wouldn't have exactly been the most anticipated premiums they clearly holding your Lexingtons, South Dakotas, Iowas(meaning rest of the class not Iowa) and friends for premiums. I imagine it's somewhat hard to sell paper premiums so why use the real ships as anything other than that?

Thats a great point, they would definitely make a profit off of releasing the BCs as premiums. As for non DD lines, there are a number I could see, EU Cruisers, EU Battleships, Pan American Cruisers, Pan American Battleships, but I dont think wargaming wants to waste their time on countries they see as "irrelevant." Its just too bad but you do make a great point.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
33 minutes ago, Number9Pounder said:

 

 

 

 You did the research and put in the work very very good job  Nice work in good job

 

Thanks, much appreciated. If you stay in touch with my account I will be posting a Pan American BB line if you are interested. But anyway Thanks for the support! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[-HMCS]
Members
1 post
672 battles

Man I would love to use these girls on the high seas! But we all now WG will never go for it...... I mean they can still release more South Dakota class BBs, we only have 2 afteralll.... Oh and high tier torp BBs cant't forget those either lmbo. I think a entire line of ships that can give the frenchies a challenge on the flanks and have good AP would be a good addition, and who cares that they're paper ships I mean look the enitre USSR Fleet... it's basically just a myth lmbo like 3 of the ships actually exsisted. If you look at WOT then its easy to see what'll happen most likely with WOWS there is only so many legit Tanks you can release and eventually just start making things up after a while, and there was historically more Tanks produced then Ships if you get what I mean. I would love every one of these ships because thats a fun concept of playstyle, but everyone gets triggered when "Battlecrusiers" are mentioned for some reason haha. Either way great work bruv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
478
[CAZA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
531 posts
6,950 battles

WG absolutely butchered the BBs, I hope they don't do the same with a potential BC line.

 

I'd give them HE however, but below average HE like German HE or Roma's HE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
830 posts
1,927 battles

The Tiger was "strongly influenced" by the IJN Kongo class, (which was basicly an upgraded Lion class) thus it could fit comfortably in Tier 5 if they did a "theoretical refit" option. 

 

that aside I'd rather they avoid giving British battlecruisers a weird gimmick. IMHO they should just make them fast, lightly armored, with limited numbers of long ranged accurate guns. 

Edited by BrianDavion
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[NFA]
Members
47 posts
4,595 battles
On 8/28/2020 at 7:23 AM, TokenCanuck said:

Man I would love to use these girls on the high seas! But we all now WG will never go for it...... I mean they can still release more South Dakota class BBs, we only have 2 afteralll.... Oh and high tier torp BBs cant't forget those either lmbo. I think a entire line of ships that can give the frenchies a challenge on the flanks and have good AP would be a good addition, and who cares that they're paper ships I mean look the enitre USSR Fleet... it's basically just a myth lmbo like 3 of the ships actually exsisted. If you look at WOT then its easy to see what'll happen most likely with WOWS there is only so many legit Tanks you can release and eventually just start making things up after a while, and there was historically more Tanks produced then Ships if you get what I mean. I would love every one of these ships because thats a fun concept of playstyle, but everyone gets triggered when "Battlecrusiers" are mentioned for some reason haha. Either way great work bruv.

Thanks man. I would hate to see Wargaming skip this but it may happen... Anyway I forgot to give the BCs engine boost in my proposal :Smile_facepalm: I should have done that.

On 8/30/2020 at 10:05 PM, Torenico said:

WG absolutely butchered the BBs, I hope they don't do the same with a potential BC line.

 

I'd give them HE however, but below average HE like German HE or Roma's HE.

I just saw a lot a similarities between UK heavy cruisers and battleships, and I thought that Light cruisers and BC could be very similar, things like AP only but idk man, works either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[FUR-A]
[FUR-A]
Beta Testers
25 posts
10,235 battles

If the Indefatigable was put in it would also allow war gaming to put out a pair of premium ships, specifically 'Australia' and 'New Zealand'. I like the list and think it would be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[MEME]
Beta Testers
195 posts
3,970 battles

Maybe they could sell the HMS Repulse as premium ship.

Maybe give her a special ability similar to 'Defensive AA Fire' or 'Steering Gears Modification 2'

She did handle air attacks for a good while with Prince of Wales.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×