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

British Battleship/Battlecruiser line split

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

80
[COOP2]
Members
409 posts
10,778 battles

Not the first time it's been mentioned, but I was thinking about it so why not post it. A line split can be at tier 3 and go all the way to tier 9 with what existed or would have existed. Tier 10? I'm sure you guys making the big bucks can think of something.

Keeping it short and sweet:

  • Tier 3: Invincible or Indefatigable, not many guns and can probably only shoot 6 at a time due to wing turrets, and not much armor at 4-6 inches but these are fair trades at tier 3 for a 25-26 knot speed. Although I would feel sorry for the tier 3 cruisers.
  • Tier 4: Princess Royal (Lion class) or Queen Mary, same but 2 less guns as Orion, 27-28 knots, 9 inches or so of armor, good match at this tier as they were the Orions' battle cruiser contemporary
  • Tier 5: Tiger, similar to tier 4 but with better gun layout and some parts of the ship were better armored, KGV's battle cruiser contemporary
  • Tier 6: Repulse, at tier 6 because she didn't receive the upgrades her sister did, should work fine at tier 6 being 32 knots with only six 15 inch guns, need to differentiate between Repulse and Renown
  • Tier 7: Renown, extra upgrades compared to Repulse. Gneisenau works at tier 7 with six 15 inch guns, so can Renown, I'm sure it can be figured out, even though she would have a 9 inch belt, but Amagi is ok at tier 8 with a 10 inch
  • Tier 8: Anson or Howe (upgraded Admiral class), I think there were plans for upgrades to Hood herself, or upgrades for the never built ships, none of which happened. This could work at tier 8, if not then you may have to do some hand waving here.
  • Tier 9: G3 design, the nine 16 inch guns, 14 inch armor belt, and 32 knot speed would be a perfect tier 9 ship. Dare I say #2 at this tier behind Musashi (better belt armor than an Iowa).
  • Tier 10: I don't know if any further battle cruiser designs existed or not. This might be where some creativity is needed, or maybe there was another 18 inch gun battleship design the British were kicking around that might work.
Edited by Ironshroud
spelling errors
  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
928
[WOLFB]
Members
3,205 posts

sounds great but I am sure you will get a weird breakout like the US Navy and get some ships you never wanted. 

 

But I like the list you have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,507
[IND8]
[IND8]
Members
1,400 posts
12,502 battles

How about this setup:

British Battlecruisers
British Heal and engine boost (T8), but normal HE
IV Invincible
V Princess Royal
VI Renown
VII Anson (Hood)
VIII J3 Jellicoe
IX G3 Beatty 
X K3 Britannia

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,071
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,149 posts
17,105 battles
57 minutes ago, Ironshroud said:

Not the first time it's been mentioned, but I was thinking about it so why not post it. A line split can be at tier 3 and go all the way to tier 9 with what existed or would have existed. Tier 10? I'm sure you guys making the big bucks can think of something.

Keeping it short and sweet:

  • Tier 3: Invincible or Indefatigable, not many guns and can probably only shoot 6 at a time due to wing turrets, and not much armor at 4-6 inches but these are fair trades at tier 3 for a 25-26 knot speed. Although I would feel sorry for the tier 3 cruisers.
  • Tier 4: Princess Royal (Lion class) or Queen Mary, same but 2 less guns as Orion, 27-28 knots, 9 inches or so of armor, good match at this tier as they were the Orions' battle cruiser contemporary
  • Tier 5: Tiger, similar to tier 4 but with better gun layout and some parts of the ship were better armored, KGV's battle cruiser contemporary
  • Tier 6: Repulse, at tier 6 because she didn't receive the upgrades her sister did, should work fine at tier 6 being 32 knots with only six 15 inch guns, need to differentiate between Repulse and Renown
  • Tier 7: Renown, extra upgrades compared to Repulse. Gneisenau works at tier 7 with six 15 inch guns, so can Renown, I'm sure it can be figured out, even though she would have a 9 inch belt, but Amagi is ok at tier 8 with a 10 inch
  • Tier 8: Anson or Howe (upgraded Admiral class), I think there were plans for upgrades to Hood herself, or upgrades for the never built ships, none of which happened. This could work at tier 8, if not then you may have to do some hand waving here.
  • Tier 9: G3 design, the nine 16 inch guns, 14 inch armor belt, and 32 knot speed would be a perfect tier 9 ship. Dare I say #2 at this tier behind Musashi (better belt armor than an Iowa).
  • Tier 10: I don't know if any further battle cruiser designs existed or not. This might be where some creativity is needed, or maybe there was another 18 inch gun battleship design the British were kicking around that might work.
My proposition was pretty similar, there are some alphabetti-spaghetti design names (K3, K2 etc.) which can work at high tiers.
 
KXO230m.jpg
 
 
 
 
 
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,601
[REVY]
Members
8,523 posts
6,118 battles
3 minutes ago, mofton said:
My proposition was pretty similar, there are some alphabetti-spaghetti design names (K3, K2 etc.) which can work at high tiers.
 
KXO230m.jpg
 
 
 
 
 

Would HMS Incomparable ever be able to work in this game?

Fisherincomparable.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles
32 minutes ago, Sventex said:

Would HMS Incomparable ever be able to work in this game?

Fisherincomparable.png

Sure, but it won't be Incomparable like you know. They'll most likely give it the Conqueror treatment (or perhaps Kansas/ Minnesota for a more recent comparison) wherein it's a mostly made up ship but using the as designed Incomparable as a baseline. This is why I avoided it in my line. Granted I made it much harder on myself but eh. As for you @Ironshroud, your line is perfect up to tier VII, where you fall into the classic theorycrafrers trap: overtiering. The Renown-class, even In upgraded form shouldn't be split and stay at tier VI. As for G3, that has the same problem in a tech line that made the Nelson a premium. So it should be a premium as well.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80
[COOP2]
Members
409 posts
10,778 battles
4 hours ago, mofton said:
My proposition was pretty similar, there are some alphabetti-spaghetti design names (K3, K2 etc.) which can work at high tiers.
 
KXO230m.jpg
 

 

5 hours ago, Shannon_Lindsey said:

How about this setup:

British Battlecruisers
British Heal and engine boost (T8), but normal HE
IV Invincible
V Princess Royal
VI Renown
VII Anson (Hood)
VIII J3 Jellicoe
IX G3 Beatty 
X K3 Britannia

 

I like it. I was not aware of some of the designs that could be used to fill in the higher tiers. These end up looking cleaner. Engine boost is a nice idea too for the higher tiers.

 

3 hours ago, Trophy_Wench said:

As for you @Ironshroud, your line is perfect up to tier VII, where you fall into the classic theorycrafrers trap: overtiering. The Renown-class, even In upgraded form shouldn't be split and stay at tier VI. As for G3, that has the same problem in a tech line that made the Nelson a premium. So it should be a premium as well.

Guilty. I was trying to shoe-horn the Renown into tier 7 and an upgraded Admiral into tier 8 for lack of other designs I was unaware of that would work higher up at tier 8. Compared to Gneisenau the Renown has the speed and guns, but not the armor or torpedoes, so tier 6 is a nice comfy spot for her. Tier 7 is good for another Admiral class too.

However, I would like to hear your idea about the G3, as to why it should be a premium. Not saying it's a bad idea, just want to know what you thoughts are as to why it has a problem. The gun layout I assume?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles
10 hours ago, Ironshroud said:

However, I would like to hear your idea about the G3, as to why it should be a premium. Not saying it's a bad idea, just want to know what you thoughts are as to why it has a problem. The gun layout I assume?

In short, yes it is all about that layout. Izumo is really an exception here but only because at the time of development Lesta reeeeally didn't want to have an 18" gun at tier IX so needed to find... something to fill the gap from the 1920s designs to Yamato and well, there you go. However, in every subsequent instance of all forward armament in triple turrets they have made them into premiums in an effort to better homogenize the respective techlines (in terms of playstyle that is.) I would see the exact same thing happen with G3 (which I would give it the name HMS Fisher because why not?) It just gels so poorly with the rest of the, otherwise very conventionally designed line. My own attempt at coming up with a homogenously viable BC-fast BB line went in a very different direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
128 posts
2,134 battles
1 hour ago, Trophy_Wench said:

In short, yes it is all about that layout. Izumo is really an exception here but only because at the time of development Lesta reeeeally didn't want to have an 18" gun at tier IX so needed to find... something to fill the gap from the 1920s designs to Yamato and well, there you go. However, in every subsequent instance of all forward armament in triple turrets they have made them into premiums in an effort to better homogenize the respective techlines (in terms of playstyle that is.) I would see the exact same thing happen with G3 (which I would give it the name HMS Fisher because why not?) It just gels so poorly with the rest of the, otherwise very conventionally designed line. My own attempt at coming up with a homogenously viable BC-fast BB line went in a very different direction.

Izumo is an actual Yamato design that was in the same study as Hizen, in fact there is another design that had a Nelson style turret layout other than that it’s basically the same ship.

As for a ship to follow up G3 there’s always the I3 design, which is a G3 with a weaker belt and is slightly smaller but it gained 9 18in guns in the same turret setup. The biggest problem I think would be finding a good T8 that follows the all turrets forward approach of G3 and I3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles
45 minutes ago, skytank_invader said:

Izumo is an actual Yamato design that was in the same study as Hizen, in fact there is another design that had a Nelson style turret layout other than that it’s basically the same ship.

Oh no, I'm not debating the merit of the Izumo design at all. It definitely existed, my point was simply that that all forward turret design is a radical departure from everything that came before and the Yamato afterwards but that was the compromise they had to make back then. Apologies if that was unclear.

45 minutes ago, skytank_invader said:

As for a ship to follow up G3 there’s always the I3 design, which is a G3 with a weaker belt and is slightly smaller but it gained 9 18in guns in the same turret setup. The biggest problem I think would be finding a good T8 that follows the all turrets forward approach of G3 and I3

Which is also part of the reason G3 shouldn't be a techline ship. I mean, you've read my work skytank you know what I came up with to at least try and homogenize a line. Is it ideal? Eh, debatable but I would bet dollars to donuts that WG would take the same stance with this ship that they took with Nelson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
128 posts
2,134 battles
27 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Oh no, I'm not debating the merit of the Izumo design at all. It definitely existed, my point was simply that that all forward turret design is a radical departure from everything that came before and the Yamato afterwards but that was the compromise they had to make back then. Apologies if that was unclear.

Sorry for taking it the wrong way. 

31 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Which is also part of the reason G3 shouldn't be a techline ship. I mean, you've read my work skytank you know what I came up with to at least try and homogenize a line. Is it ideal? Eh, debatable but I would bet dollars to donuts that WG would take the same stance with this ship that they took with Nelson.

Honestly if WG wanted they could strap booster rockets to the P3 design and call it a day, like what they did with Lyon and Normandie. I think since G3 really is the best designed BC Britain made even including the 18in designs it should be apart of a British BC line, I know what you mean though that given WG’s decisions as of late the chances of seeing the G3 in a line would be pretty low.

(even though it would be a contender for best T9 bb if they gave it the designed 16in shells that Nelson and Rodney were going to get before the war broke out. Then again that could also make it sell really well since everyone wants a G3, so making it really good would make people want it even more.)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
672
[VVV]
Members
3,000 posts
5,065 battles
1 hour ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Which is also part of the reason G3 shouldn't be a techline ship. I mean, you've read my work skytank you know what I came up with to at least try and homogenize a line. Is it ideal? Eh, debatable but I would bet dollars to donuts that WG would take the same stance with this ship that they took with Nelson.

I prefer to use F3 at T8, G3 at T9 and I3 at T10. Instead of having G3 be an anomaly, the all-forward layout would be a core part of the British BC line's identity at top tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles
10 minutes ago, Lord_Magus said:

I prefer to use F3 at T8, G3 at T9 and I3 at T10. Instead of having G3 be an anomaly, the all-forward layout would be a core part of the British BC line's identity at top tier.

F3? I don't think I've ever seen drawings of that one. Do you have a link to a source I can view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles

Ah, prelim Nelsons gotcha. I don't see where that ship offers a clear downgrade over the G3 though, beyond speed of course. I'd still stick with my J3 suggestion for tier VIII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
128 posts
2,134 battles
5 minutes ago, Trophy_Wench said:

Ah, prelim Nelsons gotcha. I don't see where that ship offers a clear downgrade over the G3 though, beyond speed of course. I'd still stick with my J3 suggestion for tier VIII

They would've had 15in/50cal guns opposed to the G3's 16in guns. So it would essentially be a J3 in an all forward setup, main battery wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TWE]
Beta Testers
376 posts
1,989 battles
1 hour ago, skytank_invader said:

They would've had 15in/50cal guns opposed to the G3's 16in guns. So it would essentially be a J3 in an all forward setup, main battery wise.

Yup, I saw that in the article. But even so, that doesn't warrant it being much higher than VIII and I completely dismiss any notion of G3 going higher than VIII either. Like I said to OP, he uptiered his top suggestions and they should all be pulled down a tier. I suppose if you wanted to have F2/3 be an alt. tier VII leading to G3 and so on, ok  sure I guess, but I think pretty much everyone whos interested in BCs would agree that they would prefer to see Admiral-class be the tier VII BC. Now IF you wanted to make a line of high tier, forward armament BCs starting at tier VIII and commit to that playstyle shift, ok fine! But, no matter what it would start with G3 since it was the presumed successor and the ship closest to being built. Also, lets not forget that G3's 16" guns are Nelsons guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
672
[VVV]
Members
3,000 posts
5,065 battles

G3 would be overpowered at T8. You're talking about the HP pool of an Iowa with the same speed and thicker armor (albeit an above-water citadel so it can get punished more when broadsiding). The Nelson guns would be weak by T9 standards but that's easily handled by just giving her an upgrade option to the 419s of Lion. Those guns were actually designed for G3 and have no real-life connection to Lion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[RNGOD]
Members
69 posts
11,456 battles

I like both of these. As a big RN history buff who actually enjoys playing the RN ships in-game, I would love to see both the battlecruisers and an ASW spec DD line split (when Subs are fully realized). Well done in both cases.

 

I would agree with pulling the G3 out of the tech line and making it a premium, but I do think the upgrades that Renown got make her distinct enough from Repulse to warrant either a premium of one of them or having the class take up two tech line places (maybe leave Tiger out as a premium, down-tier Repulse to tier 5 and slot Renown at tier 6, with Princess Royal at 4, and Indefatigable at 3, with Invincible getting the Dreadnought treatment as a captain trainer/prototype) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×