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

American Battlecruiser Split

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
117 posts
2,120 battles

American Battlecruiser line split suggestion

Now that the American battleship split has finally happened, as well as with Wargaming showing off the Italian battleships I thought why not finish a line split that I'd been thinking of since I finished my last American line split. (that was deleted along with the second one that I made, when WG merged the two suggestion pages and all of the stuff for the third and largest one I made wasn't backup anywhere because I'm an idiot). For any that did vote in the last poll that I made the German and British battlecruiser splits are next, then it's going to be the Japanese battleship and battlecruiser splits. Anyhow the most important rule I made when making this line was to not include the finalized Lexington class design to show that the US has significantly more varied designs than that one. 


American Battlecruisers
Pros:
•Early tiers are extremely fast for their tier.
•The some ships have significantly more HP than their equal tier BB counterparts.
•Tier 5 and 6 are some of the fastest ships in their tier
Cons:
•Tier 3 is still a cruiser while other lines get proper Battleships.
•Tiers 5-6 have the weakest armor schemes for any battleship in the game where even DDs can reliably crit them.
•They don’t have the greatest versatility in the world.
•No real consistent progression. 

 

US battlecruisers:

Tier 2 USS Brooklyn (ACR-3)

Tier 3 USS Seattle (ACR-11)

Tier 4 USS Lake Erie (preliminary Wyoming BC counterpart design 1912)

Tier 5 USS Mobile Bay (preliminary battlecruiser 10-1915 design)

Tier 6 USS Constellation (CC-2)

Tier 7 USS Samoa (CA2-D)

Tier 8 USS Columbia (preliminary battlecruiser design No.140 design 6-1915)

Tier 9 USS Illinois (Fast battleship design 8in)

Tier 10 USS Louisiana (BB-65 AA BB conversion scheme H with a name change)


Tier 2 USS Brooklyn (ACR-3)
Description:
The Brooklyn class of armored cruisers were the only class of armored cruiser used by the US with more than four main battery guns. She was additionally unique  in that she featured the tumblehome design commonly seen in French and Russian ships.
XP 560
Cost 157,000

USS_Brooklyn_h91960.jpg.9bcf77bb190fbe9c1c06d8c4fcb0cbd6.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 10,230tons
Stock HP 22,920
Upgraded HP 27,500

Armor:
13mm bow/stern
64mm bow/stern deck
76mm center deck
152mm citadel deck
102mm citadel sides/faces
76mm belt
140mm turret face
76mm turret sides/rear/roof
203mm barbettes

Main battery:
8 4x2 203mm/35cal Mk3 guns
AP Shell 203mm AP 260lbs
AP Shell weight 118kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 4,200
AP Shell Initial velocity 640m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2782
AP Shell Broadside DPM 50,400‬
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 34mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 203mm Common 260lbs
HE Shell weight 118kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 2,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 640m/s
HE Shell fire chance 14%
Reload 21sec
Turret Traverse 50sec
Stock Range 10.52km
Upgraded Range 14.63km
Sigma 1.7
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 165.2
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 206.3

Secondary battery:
A Hull secondary's:
12 12x1 127mm/40cal mk2
HE Shell 127 HE common round
HE Shell weight 22.7
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,800
HE Shell Velocity 701m/s
HE Fire chance 3%
Reload 5sec
Range 3km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

B Hull secondary's:
8 8x1 127mm/40cal
12 12x1 127mm/40cal mk2
HE Shell 127 HE common round
HE Shell weight 22.7
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,800
HE Shell Velocity 701m/s
HE Fire chance 3%
Reload 5sec
Range 3km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
B Hull AA:
Amount 2x1 76mm/50cal
Range 3.5km
DPS 5.6

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 20knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 25.21knots
Turning circle Radius 480m
Stock Rudder shift time 10.6sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 6.78sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 11.23km
Air Detection Range 5.45km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 7.68km

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

Summary:
The Brooklyn has the second largest broadside of the tier with only Mikasa's having a heavier broadside, despite being an armored cruiser the Brooklyn is equipped with 8 203mm guns. Despite having eight guns it can only fire 6 of them per side even with this caveat it still is the only ship at the tier that has 203mm guns. Combining this with the fast top speed of 25.21knots the Brooklyn can and will out run most ship within her tier. Additionally she also has the most HP out of all cruisers at her tier.

 

Tier 3 USS Seattle (ACR-11) 
Description:
The USS Seattle was the second ship of the Tennessee class of armored cruisers, she sported mostly the same armament as the rest of her class with the only exception being her catapult mounted on the rear ten inch turret. 
Ships in class: 4
Ships completed: 4
Ships lost to Tsunami: 1
Ships scrapped: 4
XP 5,000
Cost 285,000

800px-USSMontanaACR13.jpg.f08584eabd68f1c1e7e037b5b4ceb0aa.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 15,964tons
Stock HP 29,690
Upgraded HP 32,300
Tennessee_class_cruiser_schematic.thumb.gif.8405fc94e7e11059033bac0115878ce2.gif
Armor:
13mm bow/stern
76mm bow/stern deck
38mm center deck
102mm citadel deck
100mm citadel sides/faces
Stock Turret:
230mm turret face
130mm turret sides
76mm turret rear
Upgraded Turret:
152mm turret face
38mm turret side
38mm turret rear
57mm turret roof

Main battery:
4 2x2 254mm/40cal Mk6 guns
AP Shell 254mm AP 510lbs
AP Shell weight 231.3kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 7,200
AP Shell Initial velocity 823m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2782
AP Shell Broadside DPM 172,800
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 41mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 254mm Common 510lbs
HE Shell weight 231.3kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 3,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 823m/s
HE Shell fire chance 25%
Reload 20sec
Turret Traverse 60sec
Stock Range 10.52km
Upgraded Range 14.49km
Sigma 2.0
Stock Dispersion R x 8.4 + 48 = 136.368
Upgraded Dispersion R x 8.4 + 48 = 169.716

Optional Gun upgrade (locked behind C Hull)
6 2x3 203mm/55cal Mk14 mod.2 guns
AP Shell 254mm AP 510lbs
AP Shell weight 118kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 4,600
AP Shell Initial velocity 853m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2846
AP Shell Broadside DPM 
AP Shell auto bounce angle 67.5
AP Shell armed threshold 34mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 203mm HE/HC Mk25
HE Shell weight 118kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 2,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 823m/s
HE Shell fire chance 14%
Reload 15sec
Turret Traverse 45sec
Range 15.67km
Sigma 1.8
Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 216.7

Secondary battery:
A/B/C Hull secondary's:
16 16x1 152mm/50cal
HE Shell 152 mm HE/HC Mk20 mod. 4
HE Shell weight 
HE Shell Maximum damage 2,200
HE Shell Velocity 152mm 853m/s
HE Fire chance 6%
Reload 10sec
Range 3km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
C Hull AA:
Amount 12x1 76.2mm
Range 3.5km
DPS 33.6

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 18.56knots
Upgraded Maximum speed 22.27knots
C Hull Upgraded Maximum Speed 27knots
Turning circle Radius 530m
Stock Rudder shift time 16.6sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 7.9sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 10.51km
Air Detection Range 6.73km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 254mm 10.45km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 203mm 9.45km

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

A/B hull unique consumables
Slot 3 Spotter plane/Catapult fighter 4/3

Summary:
The Seattle is an evolution of the Brooklyn in more ways than one, firstly it's firepower in either configuration is much greater than that of Brooklyn, especially with the 6 203/55's from the Pensacola class. Secondly the Seattle is better protected and has higher HP than it's smaller brother at tier 2. And lastly just like the Brooklyn the Seattle can comfortably out run all of the tier three cruisers that it'd be likely to face and pose enough of a threat to the tier four cruisers to be able to bully them.

 

Tier 4 USS Providence (preliminary Wyoming BC counterpart design 1912)
Description:
The USS Providence is a preliminary design to what would become the Lexington class of Battlecruisers. The design hoped to take the guns of the Wyoming class and but them on a faster hull, ultimately the design never materialized.
XP 5,900
Cost 685,000

pic1.png.e2c42d0c79d8d1d8146e773daff31319.png

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 27,000tons
Stock HP 39,180
Upgraded HP 42,720

Armor:
19mm bow/stern
19mm bow/stern deck
51mm center deck
76mm citadel deck
51mm citadel face
203mm belt = citadel sides
203mm turret face
114mm turret sides
114mm turret rear
127mm turret roof
13mm superstructure

Main battery:
10 5x2 305mm/50cal Mk6 guns
AP Shell 305mm AP 870lb
AP Shell weight 394.6kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 8,300
AP Shell Initial velocity 884m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2226
AP Shell Broadside DPM 172,800
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 51mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.01sec
HE Shell 254mm Common 510lbs
HE Shell weight 231.3kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 3,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 823m/s
HE Shell fire chance 25%
Reload 30sec
Turret Traverse 51.43sec
Stock Range 14.38km
Upgraded Range 15.82km
Sigma 1.9
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 203.8
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 218.2

Secondary battery:
A Hull secondary's:
12 12x1 152mm/53cal 
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 7.5sec
Range 4km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

B Hull secondary's:
8 8x1 152mm/53cal 
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 7.5sec
Range 4km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
A Hull AA:
Amount 4x1 76.2mm
Range 3.5km
DPS 11.2

B Hull AA:
Amount 4x1 76.2mm, 32 8x4 28mm/75 mk2 mod. 2, 10 10x1 12.7mm Browning m2 mod. 1
Range 3.5km/ 2.4km/ 1.2km
DPS 11.2/ 18.4/ 36

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 21.3knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 26knots
Turning circle Radius 620m
Stock Rudder shift time 17.45sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 12.45sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 14.78km
Air Detection Range 7.87km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 10.99km

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

Summary:
The Providence is to basically a faster Wyoming that has one less turret and lighter armor. The Providence's guns are a lot more accurate than Wyoming since it has 1.9 sigma opposed to the Wyoming's 1.5. Additionally it has a far higher top speed than it's Battleship cousin, but this comes at the cost of armor. While the Wyoming has a 283mm belt the Providence only has a 203mm belt, adding on to this is its weaker turret armor.

 

Tier 5 USS Mobile Bay (preliminary battlecruiser 10-1915 design)
Description:
USS Mobile Bay is one of the preliminary designs for a large scouting force battlecruiser, eventually this became the Lexington class. The design called for eight 356mm guns in two quad turrets on fore and one aft. Additionally the design had a listed top speed of 35knots.
XP 15,000
Cost 1,750,000

s584090.thumb.jpg.ae1ba94fe615fab1d974512388a6efcd.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 32,000tons
Stock HP 50,400
Upgraded HP 54,350

Armor:
19mm bow/stern
19mm deck
127mm belt
127mm barbettes
32mm armored slope
51mm citadel deck
127mm citadel face/sides
152mm turret face
114mm turret side
102mm turret rear
127mm turret roof

Main battery:
8 2x4 356mm/50cal mk7 guns
AP Shell 356mm AP Mk16
AP Shell weight 680.4kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 10,500
AP Shell Initial velocity 823m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2545
AP Shell Broadside DPM 84,000
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 59
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 861m/s
HE Shell fire chance 30%
Reload 31sec
Turret Traverse 45sec
Stock Range 16.08km
Upgraded Range 19.1km
Sigma 1.85
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 220.8
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 251

Secondary battery:
12 12x1 152mm/53cal mk12 guns
HE Shell HC mk34 mod. 1
HE Shell weight 47.6kg
HE Shell Initial velocity 792m/s
HE Shell Maximum Damage 1,800
HE Shell fire chance 5%
Reload 8.57sec
Range 5km
Dispersion 16.333*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
A Hull AA:
Amount 8 8x1 76.2mm, 32 8x4 28mm/75 mk2 mod. 2, 20 20x1 12.7mm Browning m2 mod. 1
Range 3.5km/ 2.4km/ 1.2km
DPS 22.4/ 18.4/ 72

B Hull AA:
Amount 16 8x2 8x2 40mm/56cal Bofors Mk1, 8 8x1 76.2mm, 40 10x4 28mm/75 mk2 mod. 2, 30 30x1 12.7mm Browning m2 mod. 1
Range 3.51km, 3.5km/ 2.4km /1.2km
DPS 90.4, 22.4/ 23 /108

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 25.65knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 35knots
Turning circle radius 870m
Stock Rudder shift time 24sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 18.5sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 14.78km
Air Detection Range 8.56km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 12.23km

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

Summary:
The USS Mobile Bay is the first (of three ships) in this line that represent the Lexington class of battlecruisers. The Mobile Bay is very similar top the French tier eight battleships Gasgone and Champane with it's turrets only being in two quad turrets on the bow and stern of the ships. As should be expected of American Battlecruisers she has an even lighter belt than the previous ship but unlike the Providence the belt on the Mobile Bay covers the entirety of the ships hull from bow to stern. Plus the Mobile Bay has a top speed of 35knots making it by far the fastest battleship of it's tier. Though even with it's upsides it'll probably have problems facing tier 7 battleships if played like a battleship at higher tiers

 

Tier 6 USS Constellation (preliminary battlecruiser design No.169 design 6-16-1916)
Description:
The USS Constellation is the original design selected for the Lexington class's construction. The design would ultimately adapt to counter the British Hood and German Earst Yorck class of battlecruisers that had a heavier broadside with fewer guns. 
XP 38,500
Cost 3,895,000

s584102.thumb.jpg.5a5dec3c334a0a4d2acd8e45f091471f.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 33,500tons
Stock HP 50,400
Upgraded HP 56,800

Armor:
26mm bow/stern
26mm deck
50mm citadel face/roof
127mm belt = citadel sides
152mm turret face
114mm turret sides
102mm turret rear
76mm turret roof
127mm barbettes

Main battery:
10 2x2, 2x3 superimposed 356mm/50cal mk7 guns
AP Shell 356mm AP Mk16
AP Shell weight 680.4kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 10,500
AP Shell Initial velocity 823m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2545
AP Shell Broadside DPM 210,000
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 59
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 861m/s
HE Shell fire chance 30%
Reload 30sec
Turret Traverse 40sec
Stock Range 16.08km
Upgraded Range 19.1km
Sigma 1.8
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 220.8
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 251

Secondary battery:
A hull Secondary's:
18 18x1 127mm/51cal Mk7
HE Shell 127mm HE/HC Mk39
HE Shell weight 22.7kg
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 960m/s
HE Shell Fire chance 6%
Reload 7sec
8 8x1 76mm/105cal Mk16
HE Shell 76mm HE/HC round
HE Shell weight 5kg
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,250
HE Shell Initial Velocity 1386m/s
HE Shell Fire chance 4%
Reload 3.5sec

Range 4km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

B hull Secondary's
10 10x1 127mm/51cal Mk7
HE Shell 127mm HE/HC Mk39
HE Shell weight 22.7kg
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 960m/s
HE Shell Fire chance 6%
Reload 7sec
8 8x1 127mm/25cal Mk19 mod.6
HE Shell 127mm HE/HC Mk36
HE Shell weight 24.43kg
HE Shell Maximum damage 1,800
HE Shell Initial Velocity 657m/s
HE Shell Fire chance 6%
Reload 4sec

Range 4km
Dispersion 19*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
A Hull AA:
Amount 8 8x1 76mm/105cal, 80 20x4 28mm/75 Mk2 mod.2
Range 3.51, 2.4km
DPS 44.8, 46

B Hull AA:
Amount 8 8x1 127mm/25cal, 24 6x4 40mm/56cal Bofors Mk2 16 8x2 40mm/56cal Bofors Mk1, 22 22x1 20mm Oerlikon
Range 4.2km, 3.51km, 2.01km
DPS 58.4/ 95.4‬, 90.4/ 79.2

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 30knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 35knots
Turning circle radius 970m
Stock Rudder shift time 26sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 15.4sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection Range 15.35km
Air Detection Range 10.56km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 12.56km

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

Summary:
The Constellation is the second most likely paper ship in the tree that could've been built, plus she technically is the original finalized design for the Lady Lex. Besides that the Constellation is generally on the weaker side of the ships at tier six since she only has ten 356mm/50cal guns which are the same ones as the New Mexico. She does also have a weaker protection scheme than the Mobile Bay since her belt is the same thickness, despite covering a significantly smaller area. Even with these disadvantages she still has the insane speed of the Mobile Bay, as well as a stronger AA battery.

 

Tier 7 USS Samoa (CA2-D)
Description:
The CA2-D (or Samoa) is one of the preliminary designs made for the Alaska class of Large Cruisers. The design was made to counter a hypothetical Japanese Cruiser killer with 356mm guns. Eventually the Alaska's design was decided over this one due to cost since the Alaska's only had 33% less firepower than the CA2-D.
XP 95,500
Cost 7,425,000

s511-06.thumb.jpg.1a14cc32e36e6f4594cff9bd323a6297.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 38,700tons
Stock HP 56,500
Upgraded HP 61,300

Armor:
26mm bow/stern
26mm bow/stern deck
38mm center deck
64mm citadel deck
305mm citadel face
57mm citadel sides
330mm belt
325mm turret face
152mm turret sides
133mm turret rear
127mm turret rear
330mm barbettes
16mm superstructure

Main battery:
12 4x3 305mm/50cal mk8 guns
AP Shell 305mm AP Mk18 mod.1
AP Shell weight 517kg
AP Shell Maximum Damage 8,900
AP Shell Initial velocity 762m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2470
AP Shell Broadside DPM 213,600
AP Shell auto bounce angle 67.5
AP Shell armed threshold 51mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 305mm AP Mk17 mod.1
HE Shell weight 462.3kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 4,300
HE Shell Initial Velocity 808m/s
HE Shell fire chance 27%
Reload 26.5sec
Turret Traverse 30sec
Stock Range 17.56km
Upgraded Range 18.81km
Sigma 1.9
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 235.6‬
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 248.1‬

Secondary battery:
A hull secondary's:
16 8x2 127mm/38cal mk12 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk32
HE Shell weight 25kg
HE Shell Initial velocity 792m/s
HE Shell Maximum Damage 1,800
HE Shell fire chance 5%
Reload 3.5sec
Range 5km
Dispersion 16.333*R/333.333+30

B hull secondary's:
16 8x2 127mm/54cal mk41 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk41
HE Shell weight 31.45kg
HE Shell Initial velocity 808m/s
HE Shell Maximum Damage 1,800
HE Shell fire chance 9%
Reload 4sec
Range 6.5km
Dispersion 11*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
A Hull AA
Amount 16 8x2 127mm/38cal mk12, 56 14x4 40mm/56cal Bofors mk1, 26 26x1 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk10 mount
Range 5.01km/ 3.51km/ 2.01km
DPS 90.6/ 222.6/ 111.8   

B hull AA:
Amount 16 8x2 127mm/54cal, 64 16x4 40mm/56cal Bofors mk1, 44 44x1 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk10 mount
Range 5.19km/ 3.51km/ 2.01km
DPS 125.6/ 254.4/ 189.2  

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 28.5knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 33.5knots
Turning circle Radius 910m
Stock Rudder shift time 24.7sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 15.9sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection range 16.56km
Air Detection Range 11.16km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 13.68km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage control party
Slot 2 Repair Party 4
Slot 3 DFAA 2
Slot 4 Catapult Fighter/Spotter plane 4

Summary:
The Samoa is the second ship of the CA2-D class in the game, with the other being the Puerto Rico. The differences between the PR and Samoa are that Samoa has better AA, is at a lower tier, lacks PR's Hydro and Radar, and has a longer reload. Compared to it's contemporaries Samoa has better guns than Scharnhorst but her guns take much longer to reload than it. Against Florida, California, and Pultava her guns have slightly less pen and deal less damage. Against the Gneisenau, King George V, and Duke of York she lacks overmatch (or in the later's case really good HE). Against the 16inch armed ships she completely lacks in terms of damage and overmatch. Also Lyon just out guns her.

 

Tier 8 USS Columbia (preliminary battlecruiser design No.133 design 5-1915)
Description:
The Columbia is one of the larger designs developed at the same time as the Constellation before the final refined design which had the same armament as the Columbia.
XP 125,000
Cost 10,750,000

s584072.thumb.jpg.0d4824ea215a7eb3ce401b58b31e2beb.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BB
Displacement 56,500tons
Stock HP 74,200
Upgraded HP 80,200

Armor:
32mm bow/stern
32mm bow/stern deck
38mm center deck
89mm armored deck
38mm citadel deck
51mmmm citadel turtleback
229mm citadel face
330mm water line belt
254mm upper citadel belt
203mm lower citadel belt
457mm turret face
254mm turret front side plate
229mm turret rear side plate
229mm turret rear
127mm turret roof
330mm barbettes

Main battery:
8 4x2 406mm/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 1016
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 28sec
Turret Traverse 40sec
Stock Range 18.29km
Upgraded Range 23.77km
Sigma 1.9
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 242.9
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 297.7

Secondary battery:
A/B hull secondary's:
16 8x2 127mm/38cal mk12 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk32
HE Shell weight 25kg
HE Shell Initial velocity 792m/s
HE Shell Maximum Damage 1,800
HE Shell fire chance 5%
Reload 3.5sec
Range 6km
Dispersion 16.333*R/333.333+30

Anti Air:
A Hull AA
Amount 16 8x2 127mm/38cal mk12 guns, 40 10x4 40mm/56cal Bofors mk1, 32 32x1 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk3
Range 5.01km/ 3.51km/ 2.01km
DPS 90.6/ 159/ 115.2

B hull AA:
Amount 16 8x2 127mm/38cal mk12 guns, 16 16x1 76.2mm/50cal mk34 guns, 60 30x2 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk3
Range 5.01km/ 3.99km/ 2.01km
DPS 90.6/ 315.2/ 216

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 27.34knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 29knots
Turning circle Radius 935m
Stock Rudder shift time 20.56sec
Upgraded Rudder shift time 15.78sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection range 15.89km
Air Detection Range 9.76km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 15.23km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage control party
Slot 2 Repair Party 4
Slot 3 Spotter Plane/ Fighter plane 4

Summary:
Columbia is the latest in the long line of tier 8 American battleships armed with 406mm guns, the main thing that sets Columbia apart is that she has guns with shells with 800m/s + shell speed as well as having larger 50 caliber guns. Between North Carolina, Kansas, and Columbia, Kansas has the thickest belt with North Carolina having the weakest belt armor. While North Carolina has the best possible DPS out of the three. Speed wise Columbia is the fastest with Kansas being the slowest. Finally in terms of HP Columbia has the largest HP pool out of all of the tier 8 battleships in game.

 

Tier 9 USS Illinois (Fast battleship design 8in)
Description:
The Illinois is one of the many preliminary designs of the Iowa class, the design featured a weaker belt, a higher top speed of 35knots, and 12 406mm guns.
XP 185,000
Cost 16,350,000

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BC
Stock Displacement 50,950
Upgraded Displacement 62,700
Stock HP 71,000
Upgraded HP 84,900

Armor:
32mm bow/stern
32mm bow/stern deck
44mm center deck
206mm belt
58mm citadel roof
267mm citadel side
127mm citadel face
229mm turret face
152mm turret side
127mm turret rear
127mm turret roof

Main Battery:
12 4x3 406mm/45cal mk6 guns
AP Shell 406mm mk8
AP Shell weight 1,225kg 
AP Shell Maximum Damage 13,100
AP Shell Initial velocity 701m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2598
AP Shell Broadside DPM 157,200
AP Shell auto bounce angle 60
AP Shell armed threshold 68mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell 406mm HE/HC mk13
HE Shell weight 862kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 5,700
HE Shell Initial Velocity 820m/s
HE Shell fire chance 39%
Reload 34.2sec
Turret Traverse 45sec
Stock Range 19.97km
Upgraded Range 23.26
Sigma 1.8
Stock Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 259.7
Upgraded Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 292.6

Secondary Battery:
20 10x2 127mm/38cal mk32 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk32
HE Shell weight 25kg
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:
A Hull:
Amount 20 10x2 127mm/38cal mk32 guns, 56 14x4 40mm/56cal Bofors mk1, 34 34x1 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk3
Range 5.01km/ 3.51km/ 2.01km
DPS 151/ 222.6/ 122.4

B Hull:
Amount 20 10x2 127mm/38cal mk32 guns, 20 20x1 76.2mm/50cal mk34 guns, 49 49x1 20mm/70cal Oerlikon mk3
Range 5.01km/ 3.99km/ 2.01km
DPS 151/ 394/ 187.43

Maneuverability:
Stock Maximum Speed 32.5knots
Upgraded Maximum Speed 35knots
Turning circle Radius 1060m
Stock Rudder shift time 24.3
Upgraded Rudder shift time 18.5sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection range 16.68km
Air Detection Range 11.79km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 14.66km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage control party
Slot 2 Repair Party 5
Slot 3 DFAA 2
Slot 4 Spotter Plane/ Fighter plane 6

Summary:
The Illinois has the same 406mm guns as the Alabama and North Carolina, since it was done as a weight saving measure (plus the book does not explicitly say whether their 45cal or 50cal). She has a slightly longer reload than the Iowa to compensate for having 12 guns opposed to the Iowa's 9. She additionally has a higher top speed than Iowa of being 2knots faster. Compared to Georgia she has a higher base top speed but is slower when Georgia activates her speed boost. She also has more shells flying in the air than Georgia and suffers less if she loses one of her turrets.

 

Tier 10 USS Louisiana (BB-65 AA BB conversion scheme H with a name change)
Description:
The Louisiana is one of the proposed conversion schemes for the USS Kentucky into an AA battleship. The design featured 16 203mm guns in four quad turrets, these guns were the same ones used on the Des Moines class of heavy cruisers.
Ships in class: 6
Ships cancelled: 2
Ships completed: 4
Ships retired: 4
XP 235,700
Cost 19,780,000

gaptwqj.thumb.jpg.e24cbb5422731cc27ea014b345c095ff.jpg

Spoiler

Survivability:
HP formula BC
Displacement 52,000
HP 86,200

Armor:
32mm bow/stern
32mm bow/stern deck
38mm center deck
307mm belt
130mm citadel roof
307mm armored side
297mm upper citadel side
168mm lower citadel side
287mm armored face
216mm citadel face
439mm barbettes
203mm turret face
95mm turret sides
51mm turret rear
102mm turret roof

Main Battery:
16 4x4 203mm/55cal mk16
AP Shell AP mk21 mod 2
AP Shell weight 152kg 
AP Shell Maximum Damage 2,800
AP Shell Initial velocity 762m/s
AP Shell Krupp 2919
AP Shell Broadside DPM 448,000
AP Shell auto bounce angle 67.5
AP Shell armed threshold 34mm
AP Shell detonation delay 0.033sec
HE Shell HE Mark25
HE Shell weight 118kg
HE Shell Maximum Damage 5,000
HE Shell Initial Velocity 823m/s
HE Shell fire chance 14%
Reload 6sec
Turret Traverse 30sec
Range 17.89km
Sigma 1.9
Dispersion R x 10.0 + 60 = 259.7

Secondary Battery:
28 14x2 127mm/54cal mk41 guns
HE Shell 127mm HE Mk41
HE Shell weight 31.45kg
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:
Amount 16 4x4 203mm/55cal mk16, 28 14x2 127mm/54cal mk41 guns, 12 6x2 76.2mm/50cal mk34 guns
Range 7.25km/ 5.19km/ 3.99km
DPS 266.64/ 219.8/ 162

Maneuverability:
Maximum Speed 33knots
Turning circle Radius 920m
Rudder shift time 17.2sec

Concealment:
Surface Detection range 16.2km
Air Detection Range 11.4km
Smoke Firing Detection Range 10.67km

Consumables:
Slot 1 Damage control party
Slot 2 Repair Party 5
Slot 3 Spotter Plane/ Fighter plane 6
Slot 4 DFAA 2

Legendary Module:
Dual Purpose Autoloader
Module slot 5
Buffs:
Decrease reload to 5.5sec
Increase long range AA to 8.01km
Increase medium range AA to 6.01km
Increase short range AA to 2.89km

Debuffs:
Increase turret travers to 60sec
Decrease range to 15.83km
Remove Spotter/ Fighter plane consumable 
Decrease sigma to 1.7

Summary:
The Louisiana is equipped with the third ship in the line to be equipped with 203mm guns however despite their low caliber they still pack on hell of a punch. Compared to Des Moines, Louisiana has a larger amount of dakka that can be thrown at opponents, however she is has a worse camo rating than the heavy cruiser, as well as not having as accurate guns as Des Moines (of coarse having 16 guns firing at a target is their own form of accuracy but still). She is also able to use her guns as their intended design them working as AA guns unlike Des Moines guns. Compared to the other tier 10 BB's she has the third worse HP behind Conqueror and Bourgogne. She also lacks the firepower and overmatch ability that they have. But again she does have 16 203mm guns making her very capable of burning down most other tier 10 BB's, or she could still load nothing but AP and still kill everything.

 

Sources

Spoiler

Tier 2

Main Guns: USA 8"/35 (20.3 cm) Marks 3 and 4 and 8"/40 (20.3 cm) Mark 5 - NavWeaps

5inch Secondary Guns: USA 5"/40 (12.7 cm) Marks 2, 3 and 4 - NavWeaps

Ship Specs: USS Brooklyn (ACR-3) - Wikipedia

Tier 3

Main Guns: USA 10"/40 (25.4 cm) Mark 3 - NavWeaps

(Optional Guns): USA 8"/55 (20.3 cm) Marks 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14 - NavWeaps

Secondary Guns: USA 6"/50 (15.2 cm) Mark 6 and Mark 8 - NavWeaps

Ship Specs: Tennessee-class cruiser - Wikipedia 

Tier 4

Weapon specs: Wyoming - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ships Specs/ Picture: Washington Cherry Trees I./ Part 1 – Warship Projects 1900-1950

Tier 5

Main Guns: New Mexico - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Secondary Guns: Omaha - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: Photo # S-584-090 picture data (shipscribe.com)

Tier 6

Main Guns: New Mexico - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

127/51 Secondary Guns: Colorado - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

76/105cal Secondary Guns: USA Experimental and Miscellaneous 3" (7.62 cm) Guns - NavWeaps

127/25 Secondary Guns: Colorado - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: Photo # S-584-102 picture data (shipscribe.com)

Tier 7

Main Guns/ Stock Secondary Guns: Puerto Rico - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

(Upgraded Secondary Guns): Montana - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: Warship Projects Profile No.US301D – Warship Projects 1900-1950 , Photo # S-511-6 picture data (shipscribe.com)

Tier 8

Main Guns: USA 16"/50 (40.6 cm) Mark 2 and Mark 3 - NavWeaps

Secondary Guns: Puerto Rico - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: Photo # S-584-072 picture data (shipscribe.com)

Tier 9 

Main Guns: North Carolina - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Secondary Guns: Iowa - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: U.S. Battleships: An Illustrated Design History: Friedman, Norman, Raven, Alan, Baker III, A. D.: 9781591142478: Amazon.com: Books (Page 310 Scheme 8in)

Tier 10

Main Guns: Des Moines - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Secondary Guns: Montana - Global wiki. Wargaming.net

Ship Specs: Warship Projects Profile No.US003G – Warship Projects 1900-1950

 

Edited by skytank_invader
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
721
[MR-1]
Members
1,713 posts
21,983 battles

well if theres a UK battlecruiser split then hood should be in that because it was classed as a battlecruiser but WOW made it as a battleship 

its even called a battlecruiser on the official hood website 

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/index.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
3 minutes ago, Gaelic_knight said:

well if theres a UK battlecruiser split then hood should be in that because it was classed as a battlecruiser but WOW made it as a battleship 

its even called a battlecruiser on the official hood website 

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/index.php

Of course there should be an Admiral Class, especially since there’s not many ships you could replace it with.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,134
[PISD]
Members
1,819 posts
6,028 battles
28 minutes ago, Gaelic_knight said:

well if theres a UK battlecruiser split then hood should be in that because it was classed as a battlecruiser but WOW made it as a battleship 

its even called a battlecruiser on the official hood website 

http://www.hmshood.org.uk/index.php

Because Battlecruiser were more close to Battleship per design. They were more or less Battleship with less armor, more length and more speed, but their base design was still Battleship. The Repulse for instance were derivative of the R class.

 

only the late 30’s design were “Cruiser derived”, that is Cruiser that went to McDonald too often and got fat.

 

 

to be honest, British or German Battlecruiser should come in first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,001 posts
43,695 battles

The US had them on the drawing board but never built them. That's one line. RN is two. German is 3. IJN obviously 4th. That leaves probables in France and Italy.

Battlecruisers were largely ignored not because of the name, it's because of MM. To introduce this ship type will make wait times be longer unless WG cuts match criteria a bit.

We are already seeing CLs get the bite in MM.

Right now MM has to match up BBs heavy cruisers, light cruisers, cruisers, battlecruisers, CVs, DDs, and finally subs seperately in order to be close to fair. 

Ideally, it should work like that.

But instead it is working different from that.

Maybe WG should fix MM equity issues first, then introduce these lines.

Otherwise, if you do bring them in, we are in for more drama.

We want the variety and the history. That's what makes it fun. An equitable MM ship to ship could do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
6 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

to be honest, British or German Battlecruiser should come in first.

Yeh, if anything they should come simultaneously since the British and Germans were in a navel arms race against each other. With ships like Hood being designed to specifically counter the 15in Mackensen, design the British obtained. Which lead the Germans actually laying down the Earst Yorck class to counter the Admirals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,139 posts
1,603 battles
2 hours ago, skytank_invader said:

Tier 2 USS Brooklyn (ACR-3)

Tier 3 USS Seattle (ACR-11)

Nobody in their right mind would ever call these 2 battlecruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
24 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

Nobody in their right mind would ever call these 2 battlecruisers.

Yes, which is why I pointed out that their ACR’s and that with the planed modernizations they are the closest thing to an early tier BC that doesn’t go 35knots, only have 4 guns of 356mm or larger, and not have a belt made of paper. I could have had the line split from either the South Carolina or Omaha but I felt that having dedicated ships that get you more used to the lines somewhat consistent gameplay instead of just chucking you in with later tiers would be better. Admittedly those are the most out lying ships in the line, but their also the only ship in the line that were completed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,202 posts
12,101 battles
1 hour ago, skytank_invader said:

Now that the American battleship split has finally happened

I mean, their missing 4 tiers, used the wrong tier 8, and hilariously mucked it up but uh.. yeah, lets say it's happened.

 

To the actual suggestion - the main issue here is this line, as proposed, is absolute chaos randomly going from 12, to 14, to 12, to 16, to 8 inch guns. There's also the question that like other existing Battlecruisers - are they being added as Cruisers or Battleships because currently - they are added as one or the other, and I don't see that changing as then they have to change a lot of other ships like Hood. 

The 'stretched Wyoming' I'm finding seems like it had 8x 12" guns, not 10, but regardless, 12" guns, higher speed, while maintaining basically BB armour, I'd move it to tier 5 in place of the oddball Mobile Bay that could easily be a premium, and given how Wargaming is at the moment with tiers added, drop the 2-4 ships. 

6-8 you have 2 unused versions of the Lexington class battlecruiser sandwiching the CA2-D design - which currently sits at tier 10 in the form of Puerto Rico albeit that's as a cruiser. Which even if were making this line as battleships instead of cruisers, CA2-D likely ends up at tier 8, which leaves the middle ground, ideally filled with other 12" gun ships as opposed to a jump from 12-14--12 though an argument can be made based on possible nature of more modern 12 inch guns being better, and more numerous, than the preceding ships 14" guns. 

And then you have 9 - a battleship with 12x 16 inch guns really a Montana with less armour and more speed, going to an Iowa with heavy cruiser guns.

 

Lets assume for a moment we go down the 'balanced as BB's' line of thinking, to avoid what should be a near default of the CA2-D to tier 10 or removal from the line to avoid rioting

Tier 5: "Stretched Wyoming", be it 4 or 5 twin turrets.

Tier 6: 12 or 14 inch gun design.

Tier 7: 14 inch gun design (if Samoa is tier 8) or Samoa (if 16 inch gun design is used at tier 8)

Tier 8: Samoa or another 16 inch gun design

Tier 9: Updated Lexington Class - Basically updated armament, modern main battery of 16 inch guns and DP 6 inch turrets instead of the old style singles. 

Tier 10: would be the 'stripped down Montana' with the 16 inch guns you basically have as the 9, with the originally intended DP 6 inch AA guns. 

Your still going to have a weird jump with that line back to 12 inch guns - but they are more numerous and better than the 14 inch guns of the previous ship. And for the most part, the line keeps going forward in time - other than redoing the old Lexington design to 20 years further in the future of it's design. The 14" 'original Lexington' could be the tier 6 or 7 option, better fitting it's original time frame.

But that's my 2 cents with the information I can pull up off hand and quickly not doing a massive research dive on the subject spanning hours if not days. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

I mean, their missing 4 tiers, used the wrong tier 8, and hilariously mucked it up but uh.. yeah, lets say it's happened

(i’m not defending what they did to the 1920’s SD i’m just saying it happened, albeit now we kinda need a line split for faster low tier BB’s but whatever)

37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

There's also the question that like other existing Battlecruisers - are they being added as Cruisers or Battleships because currently - they are added as one or the other, and I don't see that changing as then they have to change a lot of other ships like Hood. 

Only the tier 2 and 3 are Cruisers, everything past that is a BB as far as the game goes.

37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

The 'stretched Wyoming' I'm finding seems like it had 8x 12" guns, not 10, but regardless, 12" guns, higher speed, while maintaining basically BB armour, I'd move it to tier 5 in place of the oddball Mobile Bay that could easily be a premium, and given how Wargaming is at the moment with tiers added, drop the 2-4 ships. 

There are many different designs of making a BC version of the Wyoming I went with the one with a 10 gun broadside that came at the cost of armor. As for Mobile Bay well there are three separate choices of a Lexington class prelim with 8 356mm turrets, the one mentioned above, a conventional layout with 4x2 turrets similar to Hood and Bismark, then finally a design with a triple and twin forward and a triple as a rear turret. If I wanted to be boring I’d pick the boring conventional one, but I thought it wouldn’t stand out much among the Kongo and the Russian tier 5 in turret layout. Plus they all have a 5in belt but Mobile Bay is the only one that covers the entire ship.

37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

6-8 you have 2 unused versions of the Lexington class battlecruiser sandwiching the CA2-D design - which currently sits at tier 10 in the form of Puerto Rico albeit that's as a cruiser. Which even if were making this line as battleships instead of cruisers, CA2-D likely ends up at tier 8, which leaves the middle ground, ideally filled with other 12" gun ships as opposed to a jump from 12-14--12 though an argument can be made based on possible nature of more modern 12 inch guns being better, and more numerous, than the preceding ships 14" guns. 

Fair enough if anything Guam would’ve been a better choice, but I went with the CA2-D because I know a lot of people didn’t get PR, plus between the two design this one is slightly closer to a BB than Alaska which is an overweight cruiser. There also is a battlecruiser design the USN made that had 9 New Mexico guns in an Iowa turret set up but I forgot about it after I finished making tiers 2-8 so I thought screw it. I believe it could go at 30knots.

37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

And then you have 9 - a battleship with 12x 16 inch guns really a Montana with less armour and more speed, going to an Iowa with heavy cruiser guns.

I would have used Iowa in this line but that’d mean I’d have to find a suitable replacement (which isn’t hard since in the spring style archives alongside the tier 8 ship is what the USN called at the time a fast battleship that had 12 406mm/50cal guns that is basically a proto Montana in 1919 or 1915 and it’s both lighter yet faster than the tier 8 ship at the same time despite having equivalent armor).

37 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Tier 10: would be the 'stripped down Montana' with the 16 inch guns you basically have as the 9, with the originally intended DP 6 inch AA guns. 

Louisiana doesn’t have the 6inch DP guns because there isn’t a design with both a 35knot top speed, 12 6in DP guns, and 12 406mm guns in Norman Friedman’s book that I could find

Edited by skytank_invader
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
721
[MR-1]
Members
1,713 posts
21,983 battles
3 hours ago, Y_Nagato said:

Because Battlecruiser were more close to Battleship per design. They were more or less Battleship with less armor, more length and more speed, but their base design was still Battleship. The Repulse for instance were derivative of the R class.

 

only the late 30’s design were “Cruiser derived”, that is Cruiser that went to McDonald too often and got fat.

 

 

to be honest, British or German Battlecruiser should come in first.

but it was  stated it was as as a battlecruiser . and even  the founding members were not only those who lost loved ones on the ship but the 3 remaining survivors  were members of the website 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
2 minutes ago, Gaelic_knight said:

but it was  stated it was as as a battlecruiser . and even  the founding members were not only those who lost loved ones on the ship but the 3 remaining survivors  were members of the website 

I think what they were going for was that the definition of what is a BC, fast BB, and a Cruiser Killer (Deutschland’s, Azuma, and Alaska’s) is a very hard to define subject.

For instance in the original configuration of the Admiral class they were called battlecruisers, yet after the intensive redesign the Hood was classified as both a battlecruiser and as one of the worlds first fast battleships. Alternatively I could call Nagato a BC because it has really light armor for a battleship and it’s much faster than any of its contemporaries beside the Queen Elizabeth class.

Meanwhile you have something like say the Littorio’s, the Iowa’s, and the Scharnhorst’s all of which are fast battleships. Yet depending on who you ask the later two are either a BB and a BC, a BC and a BB, or both of them are BC’s. 

The last one’s are somewhat harder to classify since most are called battlecruisers or in the Deutschland’s case “pocket battleships” (seriously that term needs to go die already they don’t have armor capable of resisting any meaningful BB’s secondary battery let alone their main battery) anyways as Y_Nagato stated above most of them are up scaled cruisers and less de armored battleships. If anyone wants a post 1920’s BC look at the Kronstadt and Siegfried. Both of which are equipped with 6 38cm guns that are relatively equal or better to what the navy that would’ve fielded them used, plus they had sufficient armor to withstand slightly larger guns than the Alaska’s and Azuma’s could handle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,202 posts
12,101 battles
8 hours ago, skytank_invader said:

There are many different designs of making a BC version of the Wyoming I went with the one with a 10 gun broadside that came at the cost of armor. As for Mobile Bay well there are three separate choices of a Lexington class prelim with 8 356mm turrets, the one mentioned above, a conventional layout with 4x2 turrets similar to Hood and Bismark, then finally a design with a triple and twin forward and a triple as a rear turret. If I wanted to be boring I’d pick the boring conventional one, but I thought it wouldn’t stand out much among the Kongo and the Russian tier 5 in turret layout. Plus they all have a 5in belt but Mobile Bay is the only one that covers the entire ship.

Fair enough if anything Guam would’ve been a better choice, but I went with the CA2-D because I know a lot of people didn’t get PR, plus between the two design this one is slightly closer to a BB than Alaska which is an overweight cruiser. There also is a battlecruiser design the USN made that had 9 New Mexico guns in an Iowa turret set up but I forgot about it after I finished making tiers 2-8 so I thought screw it. I believe it could go at 30knots.

I would have used Iowa in this line but that’d mean I’d have to find a suitable replacement (which isn’t hard since in the spring style archives alongside the tier 8 ship is what the USN called at the time a fast battleship that had 12 406mm/50cal guns that is basically a proto Montana in 1919 or 1915 and it’s both lighter yet faster than the tier 8 ship at the same time despite having equivalent armor).

Louisiana doesn’t have the 6inch DP guns because there isn’t a design with both a 35knot top speed, 12 6in DP guns, and 12 406mm guns in Norman Friedman’s book that I could find

Like I said, the one I found was 4x2 - I didn't find the 5x2 version. The Wyoming design, least the 4x2 gun I found, as it does compete directly with Kongo at tier 5 would have a similar lay out however that design had another 3 inches of armour over Kongo, being a bit slower but able to better take a hit, and that doesn't get in to the differences in gun calibers, secondary/AA guns especially with any kind of refits, etc. Turret layout and all doesn't add much to a ship it's really more about how it works overall - Izumo for example is unique in layout, more so in the early days, but it's performance made it far from exciting. Especially at low tiers - you kinda want to have players playing ships that give them a good idea how the line will be at higher tiers, so throwing in an oddball like Mobile doesn't really help as really it'd be the only one with that type of layout and the issues that come with it. 

I'm all for adding CA2-D - I'll be first to admit my salt levels over everything with PR are still pretty damn high, the problem is it has to be done right because some people tossed out a ton of money for it as a tier 10 cruiser. If were rating it a BB, and to tier 8, stripping it of slot 6, DEF AA, and Radar would hopefully be enough to avoid rioting, maybe one or two other tweaks I can't yet think of. Given some of the armour protection I've seen suggested in designs maybe making these have decent secondary guns wouldn't be the worst idea. 

To combine the last 2 points a bit - I think there is a bit of confusion. I believe your tier 9, 12 gun Iowa is the same ship I'm talking about at tier 10, were just defining it differently as it was part of the Iowa design process - but the overall look and all of the ship in the configuration ends up resembling more the Montana than Iowa. As to the 6 inch guns - it's one of those cases of 'intended but development issues' deals from what I can find. They originally wanted to use a so far unclear number of 6 inch DP twin mounts, if not triples, that were originally going to be part of Cleveland's Main Battery as well - however there were development issues that delayed it till you get to ships like Worcester. Seeing as it's a game - and they rectified things like Hood's damaged water main that hurt her speed - along with the fact his was a never built, we can rectify the switch to 5/38's due to delays and all to either the originally intended Cleveland armament, or the same DP guns on Wor. Which can kinda keep things more toward helping differentiate these a bit from the other USN ships by having 6 inch guns as more of a mainstay through the line, and maybe tweak how it's AA works using a different DP gun that can have longer range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
2 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Like I said, the one I found was 4x2 - I didn't find the 5x2 version. The Wyoming design, least the 4x2 gun I found, as it does compete directly with Kongo at tier 5 would have a similar lay out however that design had another 3 inches of armour over Kongo, being a bit slower but able to better take a hit, and that doesn't get in to the differences in gun calibers, secondary/AA guns especially with any kind of refits, etc. Turret layout and all doesn't add much to a ship it's really more about how it works overall - Izumo for example is unique in layout, more so in the early days, but it's performance made it far from exciting. Especially at low tiers - you kinda want to have players playing ships that give them a good idea how the line will be at higher tiers, so throwing in an oddball like Mobile doesn't really help as really it'd be the only one with that type of layout and the issues that come with it. 

When it comes to turret layout Mobile isn’t that different from any other ship in the line besides the tier 4, which is the only ship where it’s main battery isn’t perfectly split in half. The Mobile could work since with there only being two turrets it means you have to get used to the idea of halving half your potential firepower only accessible in most circumstances. Plus with her whole bet covering the ship it could giver her an added level of survivability that most US ships wouldn’t get, sure it’s not a full on icebreaker bow but it still provides a safety net (or maybe not). Really it doesn’t matter to much which of the three 8 gun designs that have their MB split in half would be chosen for a tier 5. Though funnily enough I think one of the reasons the USN stopped the fast Wyoming’s was because the Kongō’s had the same number of gun just with more oomph.

2 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

I'm all for adding CA2-D - I'll be first to admit my salt levels over everything with PR are still pretty damn high, the problem is it has to be done right because some people tossed out a ton of money for it as a tier 10 cruiser. If were rating it a BB, and to tier 8, stripping it of slot 6, DEF AA, and Radar would hopefully be enough to avoid rioting, maybe one or two other tweaks I can't yet think of. Given some of the armour protection I've seen suggested in designs maybe making these have decent secondary guns wouldn't be the worst idea. 

I’d honestly love for my proposed Samoa’s final hull to be turned into a tier 8 premium BB since that way you have Montana secondary guns at a tier where 5in secondaries can be threatening compared to the larger Graf Zeppelin’s secondaries. (I use the 5in/54 because I used the art that Trolzi made for it that said it had 16 5in/54 guns instead of the PR’s 5in/38’s.)

 

2 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

To combine the last 2 points a bit - I think there is a bit of confusion. I believe your tier 9, 12 gun Iowa is the same ship I'm talking about at tier 10, were just defining it differently as it was part of the Iowa design process - but the overall look and all of the ship in the configuration ends up resembling more the Montana than Iowa. As to the 6 inch guns - it's one of those cases of 'intended but development issues' deals from what I can find. They originally wanted to use a so far unclear number of 6 inch DP twin mounts, if not triples, that were originally going to be part of Cleveland's Main Battery as well - however there were development issues that delayed it till you get to ships like Worcester. Seeing as it's a game - and they rectified things like Hood's damaged water main that hurt her speed - along with the fact his was a never built, we can rectify the switch to 5/38's due to delays and all to either the originally intended Cleveland armament, or the same DP guns on Wor. Which can kinda keep things more toward helping differentiate these a bit from the other USN ships by having 6 inch guns as more of a mainstay through the line, and maybe tweak how it's AA works using a different DP gun that can have longer range

All of the designs besides the 8inch armored fast BB use the 6in/42’s (or whatever caliber Worcester’s guns are), but this design specifically called for the use of the 5in/38 (or maybe it would’ve used the Montana’s secondaries). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[TWE]
Beta Testers
245 posts
1,577 battles

You already know how I feel about this subject @skytank_invader, so I won't patronize you with breaking down your choices, especially since we actually agree on a lot of it! But I will take @WanderingGhost position her in the sense that yes, jumping around in main battery sizes like that at the upper tiers are going to make them very awkward to not only balance methinks, but also trying to build suitable captains w/o having a dedicated captain for each ship (nearly).  Nonetheless, still a thumbs up from me! :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,202 posts
12,101 battles
17 hours ago, skytank_invader said:

When it comes to turret layout Mobile isn’t that different from any other ship in the line besides the tier 4, which is the only ship where it’s main battery isn’t perfectly split in half. The Mobile could work since with there only being two turrets it means you have to get used to the idea of halving half your potential firepower only accessible in most circumstances.

It is in the sense of 2x 4 gun turrets as opposed to 4x 2 gun turrets. There is a very big difference in having those turrets split in to two from how rounds are dispersed, fired, ability to fight (losing one bow gun is already bad, but losing the only forward turret is worse), ability to get more guns on even if it's only 3/4 without sacrificing angling at the wrong time, etc. 

After tier 4 - the entire line is either 4x2 or 4x3 (unless I'm forgetting something like a 3x3) which handles and plays differently in the long run to a 2x4 setup. Harder to draw a same tier comparison in the same tech tree cause France has a lot of odd ball layouts, but its the same as how with current gameplay Gascogne and Bismarck both have 8x 380 mm guns basically, but it's the same setup differences, 2x4 vs 4x2. There are situations where I can angle to at least get turret 3 on target, without overly compromising my armour, or if running away get turret 2 on target as well in the same situation - something I can't always do for what would be full firepower in Gascogne. I play it differently as well knowing that 50% of my overall and all of my forward firepower is history if I lose that forward turret. 

From what I find of the Wyoming one - it has Wyoming's armour, and like most of the line for what it is - seems to actually have a pretty solid belt that could bounce shells if they hit at an angle - a lot of them feel like basically cruisers upgraded to battleships. Put that Wyoming against Kongo yeah Kongo has bigger guns - Wyoming has better protection. It's also very much more like the rest of the line in terms of main battery setup and layout - as well as similar to the BB's it will likely branch off of - so there won't be the same adjustment to only having the 2x4 turrets. 

But that's me - to me Mobile Bay would be like Florida or Oklahoma - the ship that kinda rolls with the line and is released as part of the event but as a premium/reward given that it's an odd layout for a US ship. Would I play iy, most likely, I do like Gascogne despite it being different - but I do like that Gascogne is a separate entity from the tree because of it's setup because while the tier 10 is actually similar (one downside to the tree design) it's different from all the rest. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[KENT]
Members
25 posts
6,065 battles

Well.  That was certainly an interesting read.

For starters, the T2 and T3 'battleships' both don't really fit with WG's design philosophies, nor, really, does the T4.  They also don't fit very well with what the rest of the line does, and are hecking overpowered as you wrote them, so really, this line split should start at T5, letting you progress from Wyoming to New York or Mobile Bay.

And Mobile Bay looks... almost balanced.  A 2.0 sigma value on a T5 battleship is a bit much, though; knocking it down to 1.8 would probably be fair.  That's what the very similar Kongo has.  Otherwise, even with a weak belt, Mobile Bay is going to be *the* seal-clubbing instrument of choice, between the icebreaker and highly accurate guns.

But then we get to T6, and, well, even with how squishy it is, its guns are once again going to overperform.  It's a shotgun battleship with high accuracy and high reload, and WG doesn't like to do that, especially at low and mid tiers.  One of those traits is going to have to go, and it's probably going to be the accuracy.  1.7 or 1.8 sigma would almost certainly be healthier for the game.

The T7 I like a lot and have no real complaints against, other than that its AA suite will need to be toned back.  Even with battleship traits, it's gonna be too much.  Puerto Rico has an excellent AA suite for a T10, even without Defensive Fire slotted, and taking that down to T7 is gonna give you a no-fly zone.  The 5"/54 is also going to make this ship a genuinely excellent secondary platform, which is kind of funky, but not really problematic.  It also might need to have Puerto Rico's infamous, citadel-proof hidden 140mm waterline plate removed.

The T8 also seems pretty well-suited for its tier.  It's got very good guns with a fast reload, but not a lot of them, sturdy armor, and a reasonable top speed.  It really feels like an anomaly in the tech line, being a battleship with very balanced, generalist characteristics, as opposed to the rocket-powered derp machines at the other tiers of this line.  It really needs 6 more knots of speed and 70-100mm less belt armor to fit in with its predecessor and successor.

The T9, USS Illinois, runs into a similar problem to the T5 and T6.  Its guns are just a little bit too good, even though it is squishy.  Too accurate, too hard-hitting, too many barrels.  Knocking it down to a 35 second reload would probably fix that.  I'm also baffled by the sudden appearance of Defensive AA Fire.  It doesn't need that.  YEET.

And then we get to the T10, USS Louisiana.  And oh boy, this thing.  I want it.  I want it bad.  But the way you have it, there's a few things that don't make sense.  The big one being, no matter what the US Navy's design teams were smoking, the 8"/55 was not and was never going to be an effective dual purpose gun.  Making them a part of the ship's AA battery makes Stalingrad and Smolensk look realistic.  Removing that weirdness, the ship retains the strong jank energy that characterizes the rest of the line, with a unique main battery.  This thing puts out so many shells.  And with standard battleship dispersion on those guns, well, it makes things very interesting.  There's not a ship like it in the game, and that means I can't really comment on how balanced it would be.  It'd need playtesting to discern anything about its balancing, simply because of how different it is from everything else.

Edited by masterfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
10 hours ago, masterfish said:

 

Well.  That was certainly an interesting read.

For starters, the T2 and T3 'battleships' both don't really fit with WG's design philosophies, nor, really, does the T4.  They also don't fit very well with what the rest of the line does, and are hecking overpowered as you wrote them, so really, this line split should start at T5, letting you progress from Wyoming to New York or Mobile Bay.

 

Technically speaking it should go either:

Phoenix

Omaha ———————Mobile Bay

Or:

Phoenix 

Omaha

Dallas——Pensacola——Mobile Bay

I’m only saying that since the T5 and T6 are closer to the Omaha class than any of the battleships the US made, assuming we’re removing tiers 2-4. If we’re keeping the T4 but just adjusting it the the line should instead go like this.

St. Louise

South Carolina————--Phoenix 

Wyoming——Providence    |

New York  Mobile Bay  <— Omaha

(I know their beautiful aren’t they). Anyways how are Brooklyn and Providence OP? I get Seattle she’s a cruiser that would struggle at T4 probably but still fill a niche role of a battleship by absorbing larger guns with her heavier armor than the rest of the T4 CL’s since she’d be the only CA/ACR at the tier. While at T3 she can do the same role just now with HE spam that her armor could for short periods of time endure. In actually I used to think of potential making a line of USN CA’s that split off of the Erie at T1 and the only major difference would be the Olympia at tier 3 and the refitted version of the Tennessee class ACR’s being the T4 and some other proto Pensacola design fulfilling the T5 slot.

Back on topic, but are they OP because of how their sigma are or is it something else? Since even with the speed advantage over the other T2 ships she is still out gunned, and in the event it get out flanked they’d be easy to kill. The British guns could probably put her down thanks to her weak belt. As for Providence you said it’d probably over preform but how? It’s a Wyoming with less armor, one less turret, and to make up for it is a higher top speed and better sigma.

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

And Mobile Bay looks... almost balanced.  A 2.0 sigma value on a T5 battleship is a bit much, though; knocking it down to 1.8 would probably be fair.  That's what the very similar Kongo has.  Otherwise, even with a weak belt, Mobile Bay is going to be *the* seal-clubbing instrument of choice, between the icebreaker and highly accurate guns.

As icebreaker bows go she’d definitely have one of the smaller ones. The 2.0 sigma was to make up for the weaker armor. At higher tiers she’d probably make a good pick as a cruiser killer. So yah I’ll lower it to 1.8 (eventually).

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

But then we get to T6, and, well, even with how squishy it is, its guns are once again going to overperform.  It's a shotgun battleship with high accuracy and high reload, and WG doesn't like to do that, especially at low and mid tiers.  One of those traits is going to have to go, and it's probably going to be the accuracy.  1.7 or 1.8 sigma would almost certainly be healthier for the game.

How about to make it different from New Mexico in terms of guns I raise the reload to 30sec and lower the sigma to 1.8, it’d still be more accurate than New Mexico. But not have too much of an advantage.

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

The T7 I like a lot and have no real complaints against, other than that its AA suite will need to be toned back.  Even with battleship traits, it's gonna be too much.  Puerto Rico has an excellent AA suite for a T10, even without Defensive Fire slotted, and taking that down to T7 is gonna give you a no-fly zone.  The 5"/54 is also going to make this ship a genuinely excellent secondary platform, which is kind of funky, but not really problematic.  It also might need to have Puerto Rico's infamous, citadel-proof hidden 140mm waterline plate removed.

The 140mm invisible waterline plate isn’t mentioned so it isn’t there, though to remove it from Samoa specifically it would require WG to edit PR damage model. Besides that I’m surprised you didn’t see that Samoa and the next ship also have DFAA.

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

The T8 also seems pretty well-suited for its tier.  It's got very good guns with a fast reload, but not a lot of them, sturdy armor, and a reasonable top speed.  It really feels like an anomaly in the tech line, being a battleship with very balanced, generalist characteristics, as opposed to the rocket-powered derp machines at the other tiers of this line.  It really needs 6 more knots of speed and 70-100mm less belt armor to fit in with its predecessor and successor.

There were other designs to choose from I just picked this one to give people the closest this line gives to what the Lady Lex was going to be. Beside the T6, which is what the Lady Lex was going to be before the Hood showed up. (thanks Britain, because of you America didn’t build the worlds fastest and most heavily armed BC, I hope your happy).

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

The T9, USS Illinois, runs into a similar problem to the T5 and T6.  Its guns are just a little bit too good, even though it is squishy.  Too accurate, too hard-hitting, too many barrels.  Knocking it down to a 35 second reload would probably fix that.  I'm also baffled by the sudden appearance of Defensive AA Fire.  It doesn't need that.  YEET.

No it doesn’t, but I thought it’d make sense for an American ship to be a no fly zone that could help the teams DD’s and CA/CL’s in shooting down aircraft. As for the reload, I’d rather have it raised to match Texas and have the sigma lowered to 1.8. 

10 hours ago, masterfish said:

And then we get to the T10, USS Louisiana.  And oh boy, this thing.  I want it.  I want it bad.  But the way you have it, there's a few things that don't make sense.  The big one being, no matter what the US Navy's design teams were smoking, the 8"/55 was not and was never going to be an effective dual purpose gun.  Making them a part of the ship's AA battery makes Stalingrad and Smolensk look realistic.  Removing that weirdness, the ship retains the strong jank energy that characterizes the rest of the line, with a unique main battery.  This thing puts out so many shells.  And with standard battleship dispersion on those guns, well, it makes things very interesting.  There's not a ship like it in the game, and that means I can't really comment on how balanced it would be.  It'd need playtesting to discern anything about its balancing, simply because of how different it is from everything else.

As for Louisiana (eventually) I’ll turn it into a premium and replace it with another ship equipped with the 406mm/56cal guns with a new lighter shell so it can surpass Slava and Izumo in terms ridiculous pen numbers. It’ll still be on an Iowa hull, or really an Iowa preliminary design so it’ll still have the speed advantage over Montana, Ohio, and Vermont. Anyway the closest thing there is in game to Louisiana would be Lyon since they have the same salvo size just that one is heavier than the other and three tiers lower. But besides that Louisiana probably is one of the last things the community needs since everyone is already complaining about ships such as Smallensk and all the HE spamming ships, this would be like those but on steroids since it’ll have the Des Moines AP making it a Minotaur’s worst nightmare once it and a Des Moines radar spotts them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[VVV]
Members
2,799 posts
5,065 battles

The issue with this proposal is that it combines two very different types of "battlecruiser". ARCs and CBs don't really mix with more BB-like battlecruisers.

I find it very unfortunate that WG used both Alaska and Puerto Rico as premiums instead of making them the core of an ACR + CB line. Though I guess technically it's still possible to put in sister ships to replace them using Guam at T9 and the rest of the territory names at T10. Something like this:

T2: Rochester (ACR-2, ex-New York, 2x2 203mm/35 Mark 3)
T3: Brooklyn (ACR-3, 4x2 203mm/35 Mark 4)
T4: Pittsburgh (ACR-4, ex-Pennsylvania, 2x2 203mm/45 Mark 6)
T5: Memphis (ACR-10, ex-Tennessee, 2x2 254mm/40 Mark 3)
T6: Virgin Islands (Heavy Cruiser Study - Scheme 2, modified with armament of 2x3 305mm/45 Mark 6)
T7: Samoa (Heavy Cruiser Study - Scheme 3, 3x2 305mm/50 Mark 7)
T8: Philippines (CA-2F, 1x3 and 2x2 305mm/50 Mark 8)
T9: Guam (CB-2, Alaska class, 3x3 305mm/50 Mark 8)
T10: Hawaii (CA-2D, same as Puerto Rico, 4x3 305mm/50 Mark 8)

Imade the IRL fairly implausible decision to arm the T6 and T7 with surplus South Carolina and Wyoming guns simply for balance reasons, so they wouldn't be as strong as the top-tier ships' guns while being able to fight ships as low as T5. Also the ex-Tennessee class ACRs had an upgrade proposal to replace the 10" guns with 2x3 203mm/55 Mark 9 (same guns as Pensacola) so that'd be a possible sidegrade option.

The various battlecruiser design studies leading up to the Lexington class could also be used to make a 3rd BB line of CCs and fast BBs. Given how CBs have been handled so far, this is a line that's probably got a better chance of actually happening. This would be my proposal for it:

T4: Congress (Wyoming-equivalent battlecruiser, 5x2 305mm/50 Mark 7, 26-28 knots)
T5: President (Preliminary Design No.145, 4x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 30 knots)
T6: Chesapeake (Preliminary Design No.169, 2x3 and 2x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 35 knots)
T7: Constellation (CC-2, Lexington class, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 2 firing 957.1kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T8: United States (CC-6, Lexington class with major refit, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 3 firing 1016kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T9: Iowa
T10: New Hampshire (BB-65 Scheme 8, 4x3 406mm/50 Mark 7, 33 knots, same armor as Iowa on an extremely long hull)

Iowa would be replaced in main line with Maine (BB-65G, an early Montana preliminary) with 27 knot top speed, 390mm belt armor and 3x3 406mm/50. My names for the pre-Lexington class all come from the original 6 frigates of the US Navy, which seems like a fairly likely source given that half of the actual Lexingtons drew their names from that source.

Edited by Lord_Magus
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[TWE]
Beta Testers
245 posts
1,577 battles
48 minutes ago, Lord_Magus said:

The issue with this proposal is that it combines two very different types of "battlecruiser". ARCs and CBs don't really mix with more BB-like battlecruisers.

I find it very unfortunate that WG used both Alaska and Puerto Rico as premiums instead of making them the core of an ACR + CB line. Though I guess technically it's still possible to put in sister ships to replace them using Guam at T9 and the rest of the territory names at T10. Something like this:

T2: Rochester (ACR-2, ex-New York, 2x2 203mm/35 Mark 3)
T3: Brooklyn (ACR-3, 4x2 203mm/35 Mark 4)
T4: Pittsburgh (ACR-4, ex-Pennsylvania, 2x2 203mm/45 Mark 6)
T5: Memphis (ACR-10, ex-Tennessee, 2x2 254mm/40 Mark 3)
T6: Virgin Islands (Heavy Cruiser Study - Scheme 2, modified with armament of 2x3 305mm/45 Mark 6)
T7: Samoa (Heavy Cruiser Study - Scheme 3, 3x2 305mm/50 Mark 7)
T8: Philippines (CA-2F, 1x3 and 2x2 305mm/50 Mark 8)
T9: Guam (CB-2, Alaska class, 3x3 305mm/50 Mark 8)
T10: Hawaii (CA-2D, same as Puerto Rico, 4x3 305mm/50 Mark 8)

Very interesting. I'm not sure if I've ever seen anyone attempt a full AC- Large/Super Cruiser tech line before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[VVV]
Members
2,799 posts
5,065 battles
21 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Very interesting. I'm not sure if I've ever seen anyone attempt a full AC- Large/Super Cruiser tech line before.

I don't hold out much hope since WG apparently thinks supercruisers can only be premiums.

But I do remember that a Soviet supercruiser line was proposed before supercruiser concept was even unveiled by WG. Unfortunately the thread for it became inaccessible when the subforums for "Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions" got nuked. I have no idea why WG did that or why only some of the old threads got migrated to the main forum of this section, but some interesting stuff got lost in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
296
Members
381 posts
4,319 battles
2 hours ago, Lord_Magus said:

The various battlecruiser design studies leading up to the Lexington class could also be used to make a 3rd BB line of CCs and fast BBs. Given how CBs have been handled so far, this is a line that's probably got a better chance of actually happening. This would be my proposal for it:

T4: Congress (Wyoming-equivalent battlecruiser, 5x2 305mm/50 Mark 7, 26-28 knots)
T5: President (Preliminary Design No.145, 4x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 30 knots)
T6: Chesapeake (Preliminary Design No.169, 2x3 and 2x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 35 knots)
T7: Constellation (CC-2, Lexington class, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 2 firing 957.1kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T8: United States (CC-6, Lexington class with major refit, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 3 firing 1016kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T9: Iowa
T10: New Hampshire (BB-65 Scheme 8, 4x3 406mm/50 Mark 7, 33 knots, same armor as Iowa on an extremely long hull)

Iowa would be replaced in main line with Maine (BB-65G, an early Montana preliminary) with 27 knot top speed, 390mm belt armor and 3x3 406mm/50. My names for the pre-Lexington class all come from the original 6 frigates of the US Navy, which seems like a fairly likely source given that half of the actual Lexingtons drew their names from that source.

I like your line Magus. The one that OP is proposing is a mess in terms of design, balance, progression and flavor, feels like he just grabbed a bunch of designs he liked and shoved them into a line without caring about they fit together. Your line however makes quite a bit of sense on how it progresses and its playstyle. It'd still be good to fine-tune for balance, but I think your proposal doesn't need any changes regarding designs used at a glance.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[TWE]
Beta Testers
245 posts
1,577 battles
53 minutes ago, Lord_Magus said:

I don't hold out much hope since WG apparently thinks supercruisers can only be premiums.

But I do remember that a Soviet supercruiser line was proposed before supercruiser concept was even unveiled by WG. Unfortunately the thread for it became inaccessible when the subforums for "Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions" got nuked. I have no idea why WG did that or why only some of the old threads got migrated to the main forum of this section, but some interesting stuff got lost in the process.

Oh I don't hold any hope for such a line but still, all part of the fun of theorycrafting! 

I know what you mean about the old threads. I'm still miffed that my old French DD thread got eliminated, I was proud of that one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[VVV]
Members
2,799 posts
5,065 battles
38 minutes ago, Fr05ty said:

I like your line Magus. The one that OP is proposing is a mess in terms of design, balance, progression and flavor, feels like he just grabbed a bunch of designs he liked and shoved them into a line without caring about they fit together. Your line however makes quite a bit of sense on how it progresses and its playstyle. It'd still be good to fine-tune for balance, but I think your proposal doesn't need any changes regarding designs used at a glance.

The other thing I considered but discarded (because of the lack of an actual speed difference between the two and the fact that getting a smaller HP pool for T8 would be a weird progression) was moving North Carolina to the fast line as well and replacing her in the main line with South Dakota (1939). While there is a direct design progression from SoDak 1939 to an early Montana prelim to Montana herself, the fact is that NC's mediocre speed makes her too slow to be in the fast line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
117 posts
2,120 battles
3 hours ago, Lord_Magus said:

The various battlecruiser design studies leading up to the Lexington class could also be used to make a 3rd BB line of CCs and fast BBs. Given how CBs have been handled so far, this is a line that's probably got a better chance of actually happening. This would be my proposal for it:

T4: Congress (Wyoming-equivalent battlecruiser, 5x2 305mm/50 Mark 7, 26-28 knots)
T5: President (Preliminary Design No.145, 4x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 30 knots)
T6: Chesapeake (Preliminary Design No.169, 2x3 and 2x2 356mm/50 Mark 7, 35 knots)
T7: Constellation (CC-2, Lexington class, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 2 firing 957.1kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T8: United States (CC-6, Lexington class with major refit, 4x2 406mm/50 Mark 3 firing 1016kg AP shells, 33.5 knots)
T9: Iowa
T10: New Hampshire (BB-65 Scheme 8, 4x3 406mm/50 Mark 7, 33 knots, same armor as Iowa on an extremely long hull)

Iowa would be replaced in main line with Maine (BB-65G, an early Montana preliminary) with 27 knot top speed, 390mm belt armor and 3x3 406mm/50. My names for the pre-Lexington class all come from the original 6 frigates of the US Navy, which seems like a fairly likely source given that half of the actual Lexingtons drew their names from that source.

I'll admit you made a more cohesive line than me. Though there is a reason I picked Samoa at T7 and it was mainly because I remember hearing that (historically speaking) it's guns had either equal or superior pen to that of the guns on the California and New Mexico. I'll also admit that using the Lexington's finalized design probably would have worked out better,  but I decided against it since I always remembered seeing comments on how the US doesn't have enough BC's to make a line, so instead of using the one ship everyone knows about I'd use ones that are slightly less well known. If I were to remake the line I'd probably use this: A more serious Tier IV American Premium BC suggestion (worldofwarships.com) as the T4 with everything continuing on the same until T7 where it'd use the 1930's Fast BB design that was here USN 1934 Fast Battleship - Player Tech Tree and Ship Suggestions - World of Warships official forum (until WG deleted it, the suggestion was really in depth and an enjoyable read, they also made this: USN Large Cruiser Line Proposal - Tier 6-10 - Player Tech Tree and Ship Suggestions - World of Warships official forum which has also been deleted.) but the ship would use 9 (3x3 set up) of the New Mexico's guns, have a 30knot top speed. After that it'd continue on the same as how I have now, until T10 which would be another Prelim Iowa design that has 4 triples only now it'd be replaced with twin 406mm/56cal guns that fire the mk8 at 800+m/s since they'd be more powerful than the 50cal's used on the Montana and the Iowa.

I'd rather keep Mobile Bay since it would add more variety to the line, which is something I think the current US BB split lacked since every ship was a 1920's SD or a heavily modified Tillman 1 in Vermont. I'll admit that the line suffers from too many gun caliber changes with it being:

8in - 10in (8in side grade) - 12in - 14in - 14in - 12in - 16in - 16in - 8in. 

Yours's meanwhile:

12in - 14in - 14in - 16in - 16in - 16in - 16in

and the redone line that I might switch it to:

10in - 14in - 14in - 14in - 16in - 16in -16in

I don't know if the changes I'm proposing to my line make it better but it'd probably be more consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×