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

Two tier 7 US BC suggestions.

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
115 posts
2,102 battles

Tier 7 U.S.S. Constitution (CC-6) Premium gold

71F99787-461A-46D2-802C-22E03C282B27.jpeg.ba5f6a37a2c50e20722016a528d8f80f.jpg.4df1745b99f5a483f26d9659d47ccebc.jpg
Description:

The USS Constitution was the part of the first (and only) class of battlecruisers the US actually attempted to build. She was designed with the idea of being the flagship of the US's new scouting force, the Lexington's were designed in tandem with the Omaha class light cruiser.
Ships in class: 6
Ships cancelled: 4
Ships completed: 2
Gold cost 9,000 $37.20

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 45,354tons
HP 64,400

Armor:

Ship_Lexington_02.thumb.jpg.2a20a208ee135d24519f64f36d6a8a87.jpg
26mm bow/stern 
26mm bow/stern deck
57mm center deck
32mm outer central deck
57mm citadel roof
57mm auxiliary belt
176mm main belt
16mm superstructure
279mm turret face 
152mm turret side 
127mm turret rear

Main battery:
8 4x2 16in/50cal mk2 guns
AP Shell 406mm Mk5
AP Shell weight 1016kg 
AP Shell Maximum Damage 12,700
AP Shell Initial velocity 808m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2676
AP Shell Broadside DPM 203,200‬
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 68mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 16in Mk13 1,900lbs
HE Shell weight 861.8kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 5,700
HE Shell Initial Velocity 820m/s
HE Shell fire chance 36%
Reload 33sec
Turret Traverse 45sec
Range 18.29km
Sigma 1.9
Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 242.9

Secondary battery 
14x1 6in/53cal guns 
HE Shell 152 mm HE/HC Mk34 mod. 1
HE Shell Maximum damage 2,200
HE Shell Velocity 152mm 914m/s
HE Fire chance 152mm 6%
Reload 4sec
Range 5.5km 
Accuracy (11xR/333.3333 + 30)

Anti Air:
Range 3.51km/ 3.5km/ 2.4km/ 1.38km
DPS 90.4/ 22.4/ 46/ 101.9
Amount 16 8x2 40mm/56cal Bofors Mk1/ 8x1 76.2mm/ 80 20x4 28mm/75 Mk2 mod.2/ 38x1 20mm Oerlikons 

Maneuverability:
Maximum Speed 33knots 
Turning circle radius 950m
Rudder shift time 15.9sec

Concealment:
Surface Detectability range 16.65km
Air Detectability range 11.71km
Smoke firing Detectability range 17.99km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage Control Party
Slot 2 Repair party 4 
Slot 3 Spotter plane 4

Summary: 
The Constitution is in the Lexington classes original configuration for the most part. The only difference between Constitution and the original design are the plethora of AA guns strapped onto her, though most of them aren't particularly useful. Thanks to her rather fast top speed and hard hitting guns Constitution should be more than capable of dealing with most of the potential cruisers and battleships she would be forced to contend with. Her main battery has a longer reload than the Colorado due to the Constitution having a better armored deck, a higher top speed, and having more pen on the shells.

 

Tier 7 USS Congress (Preliminary design 79,000ton variant 7-1912)

pic2.thumb.jpg.01f868ac0d28cfd7c5e317b0d2f8f491.jpg
Description:
USS Congress is the second largest battleship design made by the US navy. She features the same guns as the "tiny" New York class battleships. The Congress was one of many designs made to counter the new Kongo class battlecruisers from Japan.
Designed July 1912
Gold cost 9,700 $40

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 79,000tons
HP 104,200

Armor:

s584024.thumb.jpg.c96aaed09f14c06b821da9b9c61370a7.jpg

(Note the image above is not the same ship as what I'm dubbing the Congress. They are two different ships that come form the same design study, I'm merely using it as a basis for the Congress since there aren't any documents of its blueprints that I could find. The only stated armor value for the Congress is that it had a 356mm belt.)
26mm bow/stern
26mm deck
356mm belt 
229mm barbettes
50mm citadel deck/face/sides
283mm turret face
152mm turret side
152mm turret rear
89mm turret roof

Main battery:
8 4x2 356mm/45cal Mk8 guns
AP Shell 356mm AP Mk16
AP Shell weight 680.4kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 10,300
AP Shell Initial velocity 792m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2604
AP Shell Broadside DPM 164,800
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 59mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 356mm HE/HC Mk22
HE Shell weight 578.34kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 5,000
HE Shell Initial Velocity 834m/s
HE Shell fire chance 30%
Reload 24
Turret Traverse 30sec
Range 18.04km
Sigma 2.0
Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 240.4

Secondary battery:
Amount 20 10x2 127mm/54cal mk41 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk41
HE Shell weight
HE Shell Initial velocity 808m/s
HE Shell Maximum Damage 1,800
HE Shell fire chance 9%
Reload 4sec
Range 6km
Dispersion 11*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
Range 5.19km/ 3.51km/ 1.38km
DPS 122/ 180.8/ 53.63, 64.36
Amount 20 10x2 127mm/54cal mk41 guns/ 32 8x4 40mm/56cal Bofors Mk2/ 20 10x2 20mm Oerlikons, 24 24x1 20mm Oerlikons

Maneuverability:
Maximum Speed 32knots
Turning circle radius 1350m
Rudder shift time 20.5sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 16.45km
Air Detection Range 10.55km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 16.95km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage control party
Slot 2 Repair party 3

Summary:

The USS Congress is by far and away the largest ship in its tier, and one of the actual largest in the game dwarfing both the Montana and Yamato. Despite her immense size her firepower is pitiful in comparison being about the same broadside weight as the Kongo class that she was meant to counter. In spite of this the Congress still is a massive ship with an not so insignificant AA battery, and she uses the same secondary guns as the "smaller" Montana class. 

 

Sources:

Spoiler

https://warshipprojects.com/2017/03/17/teszt-2-cikk/ The Congress's picture and were it has its specifications mentioned.

http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-584/images/s-file/s584024c.htm The other ship used in the Congress.

https://wiki.wargaming.net/ru/Navy:Линейные_крейсера_типа_Lexington Where I found the picture showing the Lexington's armor profile.


 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[KNCOL]
Members
812 posts
1,885 battles

I'm not sure about the second one but having battlecruiser Lexington class added in would be cool 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
115 posts
2,102 battles
5 minutes ago, Koogus said:

I'm not sure about the second one but having battlecruiser Lexington class added in would be cool 

In all honesty I didn’t try to make the second one as “realistic” as possible (hence why it has Montana secondaries instead of the 5inch 38’s). I’d rather see the lady Lex as a BC before I ever see the 79,000ton design, but I also just wanted to share the other US super ship design that wasn’t one of the Tillman’s.

Plus it would be absolutely ridiculous to see it sitting next to the Hood and Nagato, dwarfing both of them while also being severely out gunned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[TWE]
Beta Testers
198 posts
1,469 battles
3 minutes ago, skytank_invader said:

Because I'm already making an American BC line split from tiers 2-8.

Starting at II? Interesting! Are you using armored cruisers as the starter ships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
115 posts
2,102 battles
13 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Starting at II? Interesting! Are you using armored cruisers as the starter ships?

Yup, more specifically the Brooklyn class and the USS Seattle, with them both receiving the engine upgrades that the navy thought of doing post Washington navel treaty. (which would’ve boosted their top speed to 26knots, instead of 21knots).

Edited by skytank_invader
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,735
[SALVO]
Members
25,457 posts
27,411 battles
1 minute ago, skytank_invader said:

Yup, more specifically the Brooklyn class and the USS Seattle, with them both receiving the engine upgrades that the navy thought of doing post Washington navel treaty. (which would’ve boosted their top speed to 26knots, instead of 21knots).

The problem with Armored Cruisers is that they share the same problem as Pre-Deadnoughts, i.e. a strong "secondary" battle that was really more like a part of the ship's main battery.  I'd love to see WG fix this, but let's be realistic.  We're talking about tier 2-4 ships, and WG barely cares about anything lower than tier 6 at this point.  I think that they only way that we could ever get WG to care about WW1 and pre-WW1 era warships is if they split WoWS into two different games.  One that ran from about 1900 to 1920, and the other which ran from 1920 to post-WW2.    But does anyone think that they'd ever do that?  I don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[TWE]
Beta Testers
198 posts
1,469 battles
4 minutes ago, skytank_invader said:

Yup, more specifically the Brooklyn class and the USS Seattle, with them both receiving the engine upgrades that the navy thought of doing post Washington navel treaty. (which would’ve boosted their top speed to 26knots, instead of 21knots).

Very interesting! I also had placed a rebuilt Tennessee-class at tier III but I went for the Pennsylvania-class at tier II, as Brooklyn seemed to be sort of a weird intermediate design between it's direct predecessor the New York and the Penns which were more refined.

 

1 minute ago, Crucis said:

The problem with Armored Cruisers is that they share the same problem as Pre-Deadnoughts, i.e. a strong "secondary" battle that was really more like a part of the ship's main battery.  I'd love to see WG fix this, but let's be realistic.  We're talking about tier 2-4 ships, and WG barely cares about anything lower than tier 6 at this point.  I think that they only way that we could ever get WG to care about WW1 and pre-WW1 era warships is if they split WoWS into two different games.  One that ran from about 1900 to 1920, and the other which ran from 1920 to post-WW2.    But does anyone think that they'd ever do that?  I don't.

Hold that thought! I'm working on something that could make low tier gameplay more viable (well, subjectively at least). Watch this forum. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
828
[KIA-T]
Members
2,237 posts
9,838 battles

Is the second ship the ludicrous 400m long battlecruiser design?

Because I've wanted it for so long since I heard it was a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
115 posts
2,102 battles
22 minutes ago, Akeno017 said:

Is the second ship the ludicrous 400m long battlecruiser design?

Because I've wanted it for so long since I heard it was a thing.

No sadly it’s “only” 381meters according to the site that I found it at, could you send me a link to where you found the 400meter one.

 

31 minutes ago, Crucis said:

The problem with Armored Cruisers is that they share the same problem as Pre-Deadnoughts, i.e. a strong "secondary" battle that was really more like a part of the ship's main battery.  I'd love to see WG fix this, but let's be realistic.  We're talking about tier 2-4 ships, and WG barely cares about anything lower than tier 6 at this point.  I think that they only way that we could ever get WG to care about WW1 and pre-WW1 era warships is if they split WoWS into two different games.  One that ran from about 1900 to 1920, and the other which ran from 1920 to post-WW2.    But does anyone think that they'd ever do that?  I don't.

I’d like to add that part of the proposal for the Tennessee class cruisers refit would’ve replace the 4 10inch guns with two New Orleans turrets so I’d basically be a low tier Deutschland class.

Also onto things that we know WG won’t do, what about a version of WoWs that can be played offline and is basically half strategy game with telling your fleet what to do, and being able to turn ships that you’ve used a lot into Museum ships that you can view in your port that’ll earn you money. But anyway I like your idea of splitting the game in half, though there could be several problems when it comes to the 1920’s version’s top tiers specifically for Battleships since where do you go after the current games tier tens which would be a tier 8 since you’d be getting rid of all tier 1-4’s effectively (besides carriers). And then you have the problem of ships like Yammy going against jets which would make the power imbalance between BB’s and CV’s even greater. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
828
[KIA-T]
Members
2,237 posts
9,838 battles
1 minute ago, skytank_invader said:

No sadly it’s “only” 381meters

Approximation roundabouts within margin of error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
362
[CRF]
Members
867 posts
8,499 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

The problem with Armored Cruisers is that they share the same problem as Pre-Deadnoughts, i.e. a strong "secondary" battle that was really more like a part of the ship's main battery.  I'd love to see WG fix this, but let's be realistic.  We're talking about tier 2-4 ships, and WG barely cares about anything lower than tier 6 at this point.  I think that they only way that we could ever get WG to care about WW1 and pre-WW1 era warships is if they split WoWS into two different games.  One that ran from about 1900 to 1920, and the other which ran from 1920 to post-WW2.    But does anyone think that they'd ever do that?  I don't.

An interesting game that is coming out at some point that looks somewhat interesting and covers a broad range of naval development is Ultmate Admiral: Dreadnoughts.  It will come out on Steam at some point in the near future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[TFFOX]
Members
800 posts
1,633 battles

they would probably have to call the 1st battlecruiser "Saratoga", since there is already a lexington in the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
115 posts
2,102 battles
18 minutes ago, AdmiralFox08 said:

they would probably have to call the 1st battlecruiser "Saratoga", since there is already a lexington in the game

In all fairness I think WG would rather use Constellation first so they can turn Sara into a premium with the 8inch secondaries. Plus Constellation was the second in the class while Sara was the third.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[TFFOX]
Members
800 posts
1,633 battles
1 hour ago, skytank_invader said:

In all fairness I think WG would rather use Constellation first so they can turn Sara into a premium with the 8inch secondaries. Plus Constellation was the second in the class while Sara was the third.

good point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×