Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
40902nd

Proposal: USN Large Cruiser Line

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

114
[FLTF1]
[FLTF1]
Members
186 posts
5,219 battles

I am a great fan of the Super-Cruisers in game, especially the American cruisers Alaska and Puerto Rico. Before you, I humbly submit a proposal for a branch split from the American Heavy Cruiser line, starting from Tier VII. Names of the tier VII & VIII ships are randomly generated and checked with a list of USN Cruisers from WWII to avoid repeats.

Pros:
+Big Guns
+Large Health Pools

Cons:
-Large Size
-Poor Concealment

The line is initially entered by researching the FCS for the New Orleans, and is a same-tier side-hop, similar to how the Battleship and Destroyer lines branch off.

Tier VII
Heavy Cruiser Study, Scheme 2 (Alaska Preliminary Design)
USS Arlington

s511-14.jpg

Displacement: 15,750t
Health Points: ~34,250-39,200
Length: 700ft at waterline
Beam: 72ft
Speed: ~32-34 kts
Belt: ~6-inches (152mm)
Main Armament
4x3 8"/55 Mk 15 (w/o super-heavy shells)
AP: 4,600 dmg
HE: 2,800 dmg, 14% Fire Chance
-Longer Reload and Turret traverse than New Orleans, worse dispersion

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38 (127mm)
Additional AA Guns

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
 

Scheme 2 was the smallest of the Alaska-Class premils. She's about 20% larger than the New Orleans-Class and represents the player's first forays into the Large Cruisers of the USN. While similar to the CA-B, which is the Baltimore-Class in-game, she still a different ship. Without the Super-Heavy AP and certain balancing choices, she should be able to feel like her own ship. Her inclusion is by no means mandatory, though she is meant as a transitional ship. She represents the difference between the traditional USN CA line and the Large Cruiser, in that they get bigger, quicker.

 

Tier VIII
Heavy Cruiser Scheme 4-A "Convertible" (Alaska Preliminary Design)
USS Montgomery

s511-16.jpg

Displacement: 17,500
Health Points: ~37,500-42,500
Length: 710 ft at Waterline
Beam: 74.5 ft
Speed: 33.1 kts
Belt: ~7.5-inches (190.5 mm)
Main Armament
4x3 8"/55 (w/ super-heavy shells, 203mm)
AP: 5,000 dmg
HE: 2,800 dmg, 14% Fire Chance
Upgradeable:
3x2 12"/50 Mk 8 (305mm)
AP: 8,900 dmg
HE: 4,300 dmg, 27% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38
Additional AA

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Repair Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar

This is probably the most interesting ships in the line for me, as there are two ways to play her, depending on which gun you choose. If you stick with the stock 8", she'll play like a traditional USN CA, just bigger. She should have similar DPM to Baltimore, but she should still edge her traditional cousin out just slightly. Something around a 15 second reload, more or less, though I am always willing to change this. To avoid completely overshadowing the Baltimore, this ship will be more sluggish on the helm, slightly slower start/stop and a wider turning circle, coupled with a slower turret traverse and some other factors, which will hopefully make the Baltimore feel better closer in, though the exact details would need to be done in play-testing.

The neat trick with this this ship is that there are 2 ways to play her. The second way is unlocked with her upgraded guns, switching from four turrets, each armed with three 8-inch guns to three turrets, armed with dual 12". These guns are the same found on Alaska, just with less of them. The arrangement is still AB-X, like on the Alaska, just with one barrel less per turret. The cost of mounting these guns will be a loss of DPM. Potential damage per salvo drops from 60,000 to 53,400, which might be enough justification to keep the reload the same, but if the ship performs too well, the reload can be increased to 20 seconds. These guns should allow for this ship to hit harder, but there should still be merit to taking the 8-inch guns, leading to a diversity of gameplay within the same ship.

 

-Premium-
Tier VIII
Heavy Cruiser Scheme 3 (Alaska Preliminary Design)
USS Akron

s511-15.jpg

Displacement: 17,500
Health Points: ~37,500-42,500
Length: 710 ft at Waterline
Beam: 74 ft
Speed: 32 kts
Belt: ~7-inches (177.8mm)
Main Armament
3x2 12"/50 Mk 8 (305mm)
AP: 8,900 dmg
HE: 4,300 dmg, 27% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38
Additional AA

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Repair Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar

This is much like her tech tree counterpart, but without the convertible feature, she is just a straight 12-inch gun cruiser. A possibility is to give her a gimmick, like removing Radar for smoke or something, but she is largely there as a trainer for this line of ships and as for something to buy to support the game. She should be slightly worse than a fully upgraded Montgomery.

 

Tier IX
12" Gun Cruiser Study CA2-A
USS Samoa

s511-07.jpg

Displacement: 25,600
Health Points: ~49,300-57,500
Length: 800 ft
Beam: 85.1 ft
Speed: 33.5 kts
Belt: ~7-inches (177.8mm)
Main Armament
3x3 12"/50 Mk 8 (305mm)
AP: 8,900 dmg
HE: 4,300 dmg, 27% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38
4x4 1.1"/70 Mk 1 AA
Numerous 20mm

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Repair Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar -or- Catapult Fighter -or- Spotter Aircraft

Bad news first: This ship is inferior to Alaska. This, however, is not only by design, but desired, as Alaska is more of a Tier 9.5, while this ship can be properly balanced for Tier 9. She has less HP and armor, but she still has the same hard-hitting 12" guns (reloads adjustable for balance), and her AA has taken quite a bit of a hit to her med-range AA, having only 4 quad 1.1" instead of the 14 quad 40mm Bofors of Alaska, but that can be fixed with a Hull B, if need be. All-in-all, she should be a nice ship for the tier, without the hang-ups that nerfing a premium like Alaska could bring.

 

Tier X
USS Guam

[Insert Alaska Here]

Displacement: 34,803
Health Points: 60,800
Length: 808.5 ft 
Beam: 91 ft
Speed: 33 kts
Belt: 9-inches (228.6mm)
Main Armament
3x3 12"/50 Mk 8 (305mm)
AP: 8,900 dmg
HE: 4,300 dmg, 27% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38 (127mm)
14x4 40mm Bofors
34x1 20mm Oerlikans

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar -or- Catapult Fighter -or- Spotter Aircraft

Alaska, but better. That is how this ship should be described. Slightly faster guns that are slightly more accurate, among other things to make up the .5 tier difference between Guam and Alaska. A possibility is to give her a 'what-if' weapons overhaul, replacing her 40mm bofors with the twin 3" mounts seen on Worcester and Des Moines. She won't have the raw tankiness of Puerto Rico, but she shouldn't, she is a different ship. Where Puerto Rico, with her 12 guns and BB dispersion, relies on weight of fire to hit targets, Guam can more comfortably rely on her Cruiser dispersion to achieve hits.

 

 

Below are now defunct stats, preserved for reference sake.

Spoiler

 

Tier IX
USS Guam

[Insert Alaska Here]

Displacement: 17,500
Health Points: 60,800
Length: 808.5 ft 
Beam: 91 ft
Speed: 33 kts
Belt: 9-inches (228.6mm)
Main Armament
3x3 12"/50 Mk 8 (305mm)
AP: 8,900 dmg
HE: 4,300 dmg, 27% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6x2 5"/38 (127mm)
Many AA guns (Same as Alaska, will update later)

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar -or- Catapult Fighter -or- Spotter Aircraft

I hate to do this to this ship, I really do, but most everyone agrees that the Alaska is a Tier 9.5 ship, so the Guam needs to suffer a beating from the nerf bat in order to bring her down to 'only' a tier IX. However she is nerfed, though, she will still be a potent force on the sea, with her large guns and amble health pool. She is a huge step up from the previous ship in terms in just about all aspects. As she is an Alaska-Class, though, there is not much I can say. I chose Guam over Hawaii because I have other plans for that particular ship.

 

Tier X
Battle Scout (October 1915) [Modernized]
USS Samoa

s584091.jpg

Displacement: 32,000
Health Points: ~64,500-69,500
Length: 800 ft
Beam: 94 ft
Speed: 35 kts
Belt: 6-inch (152mm)
Main Armament
2x3 14"/50 Mk B (355.6mm)
1x2 14"/50 Mk B (355.6mm)
AP: 10,000 dmg
HE: 4,750 dmg, 22% Fire Chance

Secondary Armament
6-10x2 5"/38 (127mm) (Part of modernization process)
Various AA

Consumables
Damage Control Party
Repair Party
Defensive AA Fire -or- Hydroacoustic Search
Radar -or- Catapult Fighter -or- Spotter Aircraft

The crown-jewel of the Large-Cruiser line. She does not carry the largest guns of any Super-Cruiser, that honor still remains with Siegfried. The logical choice for the top slot already exists in the game as the Puerto Rico, so I was forced to make due with a much older design. However, I was careful with my selection; there are still plenty of candidates to choose from should I ever have the insane desire to make a Battle Scout line... though whether it would fall into the Battleship or Cruiser category, game-wise, I have no clue.

Back on topic, the jump from tier 9 to 10 is less jarring than from tier 8 to 9. The Samoa loses a barrel, but increases the size, and therefore the punching power, of her guns. In general, she should be able to punish any cruiser, though she should be an XP-Piñata if she is out-played. As she is an old design, being placed in amongst much newer ones, more liberties should be taken, especially for the sake of balancing. Aspects like secondaries, AA, and armor should be taken with a grain of salt, since what I want here isn't actually a Battle Scout, but a what-if Large Cruiser that is based at least partly one a plan that was actually put to paper.

 

 

Next on my list are:
USN Battleship Cruisers
USN Secondary-Focused Battleships
USN Anti-Aircraft Cruisers
USN Battle Scouts
RN Battlecruisers
KM Battlecruisers
KM Panzerskiffe Redux (Again)

Prelim Investigations: (Don't expect anything to come of these, they are more to see if I can get enough information to build these)
USN Torpedo Destroyers
USN Hybrids
IJN Battlecruisers
IJN Secondary Battleships
IJN Light Cruisers
RN Alt. Destroyers
KM Light Cruisers

Edited by 40902nd
  • Cool 6
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
303
Members
384 posts
4,319 battles

You really should be paying attention to what you're copy+pasting, because it is easy to tell that things are wrong. T9 you listed 3x2 12" instead of 3x3, T10 you listed with the same displacement as the T8...

I do not particularly like the line as I don't find the T9 & T10 to be noticeably different from one another, but that's a different issue. There was also a 4x2 10" design I thought would've worked for this line which you've not used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[POO69]
Beta Testers
71 posts
11,156 battles

Nice work - I am all for another line of U.S. ships with guns that don't either have near-earth-orbit shell arcs or wonky dispersion.  

Tier VII - The idea of having a tougher Tier VII heavy cruiser, but with some limits on the firepower, is very appealing.  I actually sold my Tier VII U.S. heavy cruiser a long time ago (they reshuffled the line since, might have been Pensacola at the time) because I could not be bothered to learn how to keep it from being vaporized.   Been thinking of buying it back - too many Tier X games for the Baltimore, my favorite ship in the game.  (More likely to go for the Indianapolis for the increased range & radar.)

My first thought was that going back to "regular" lower-tier 8" AP is not enough of a "nerf", since I find that the Tier VIII+ Heavy AP does not do much anymore.  However, this might be just the armor escalation at the higher tiers over the last year or two - Heavy AP might be OP for the lower part of the Tier V - IX range.  

Range of guns - The older lines, Japanese and U.S., got left behind in the cruiser range wars.  I would use the opportunity of a major change of lines to correct this (for both lines, actually).  For example, if you were to leave your Tier VII with the stock Baltimore range but increase the range for Tier VIII and above to be consistent with the other lines it would keep a meaningful distinction between the tiers.

One further thought - I would be tempted to start the split at Tier VIII.  The reason being that the USS New Orleans would become something of a road block to the present higher-tier U.S. cruisers.  I.E. - why would you take The USS New Orleans over your proposed USS Arlington?  Even with increased firepower, the vulnerability of the New Orleans would make her so much more difficult to play effectively.  On the other hand, if you actually favor a more defensive play style (the kind that the light cruisers generally encourage) it might be worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
19,046 posts
7,143 battles

I like it. An old WoWs friend of mine and I discussed a possible all-12" USN large cruiser line at one point back in...2018 I think, utilizing a lot of the same designs. Of course this was back when we could have put the now-infamous Puerto Rico in as a tier 10. More depth into that would have made us realize that CA-2D might not have been the most viable pick for line consistency.

Quote

Prelim Investigations: (Don't expect anything to come of these, they are more to see if I can get enough information to build these)
\
KM Light Cruisers

You won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
131
[MUG-T]
Members
368 posts
3,840 battles
1 hour ago, _Sarcasticat_ said:

 

You won't.

WG probably could have made a CL line considering all these paper German cruisers they've given us

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
19,046 posts
7,143 battles
26 minutes ago, frankfletcher_1 said:

WG probably could have made a CL line considering all these paper German cruisers they've given us

 

Even then. 

I've tried, and I have more resources than almost anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114
[FLTF1]
[FLTF1]
Members
186 posts
5,219 battles

@Fr05ty Thank you for pointing out those errors. As for the 10" armed cruiser, I am assuming that you are referring to the Battle Scout/Scout Cruiser design of around 1915? I'm on the fence about making a semi-serious* Battle Scout line, using that as either the tier VI or VII. I really like the idea of the 4-A "Convertible" design, since it brings multiple gameplay options, drastically changing how it plays with a simple upgrade, and I would like to keep a continuity of feel if possible.

*Serious thought, but not seriously expecting it to ever be implemented in any form.

@Old_Guard I should have explicitly stated this, as it was my intention for the USS Arlington to be a side-step from the New Orleans, meaning you'd have to at least partially research through it, like, say, though the FCS. The plan isn't to obsolete any existing lines, but to add more flavors. Thanks for pointing that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×