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

Graf Zeppelin

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,212
[GLHF]
Beta Testers
4,968 posts
15,562 battles

 

We will see this beautiful carrier on game? :) 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Wouldn't be surprised to see her as a standalone premium if the Saipan is successful.

 

Otherwise, there are supposedly enough paper designs to make a full German CV tree, where the Graf Zeppelin would likely be a tier 8.  That said, a tech tree that would otherwise be entirely composed of paper ships would be pushing it even for WG, so I wouldn't expect it anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[NO2BB]
Members
306 posts
4,921 battles

Not until like 2020 probably which is a shame because the game desperately needs another cv line to add more  diversity to cv game play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,212
[GLHF]
Beta Testers
4,968 posts
15,562 battles

Wouldn't be surprised to see her as a standalone premium if the Saipan is successful.

 

Otherwise, there are supposedly enough paper designs to make a full German CV tree, where the Graf Zeppelin would likely be a tier 8.  That said, a tech tree that would otherwise be entirely composed of paper ships would be pushing it even for WG, so I wouldn't expect it anytime soon.

 

Well they did that with the russian cruiser line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,632 posts
10,276 battles

Not until like 2020 probably which is a shame because the game desperately needs another cv line to add more  diversity to cv game play. 

 

Up next, RN CVs, starting with Ruler-class :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Well they did that with the russian cruiser line. 

 

They kinda did, but I'd still rather have a line where half the ships never made it off a vodka-soaked napkin than one where all but a single ship never made it off a beer(maybe schnapps)-soaked one... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

So far my research finds designs viable for tiers 4-8, with GZ being 8, the other 1 or 2 I didn't include are at best mid tiers, nothing useful for highest tiers. Tier 9 I'm working on a modification to the GZ based on changes they considered during it's construction that could have been applied to subsequent ships (B-D hull's, one name that's come up for the other ships as a possibility is Peter Strasser. Tier 10 is essentially taking the fact they planned, but never got to designing, a successor to the GZ class which would have likely built off lessons they would have learned from it and intel of other carriers, and the grandiose design tendencies of some German projects in general. Slowly but surely I'm working on AA/DP gun layouts for the tier 9 to replace the Italian/German CV I had there, but the work I've done on a line is linked in my sig. Carriers, brief descriptions, bit on the thought process, and air group numbers and planes for them.

 

Short version of that mammoth post is:

 

- Effectively a destroyers worst nightmare up close and at range (partially as a gameplay thing, also because German CV designs were based more around repelling ships like destroyers getting closer, hence GZ's larger guns, as well as aircraft considerations.)

- DB focus - Aside from the fact mentioning dive bombers most anyone will think stuka somewhere immediately after, Germany lacks even drawing board TB's without making things up, so aside from tier 4, and maybe 5-6 (through a stuka and 2 FW 190 variants that could carry torps), Germany would be fighters and DB's only (similar to how USN is atm), However, they'd get what equivalates to USN 1000 pound bombs sooner (possibly a little less power if needed for tiering) and at top tiers 2000 pound bombs (and no, not double the damage of current USN 1000 pound bombs).

- Basically for aircraft 109 variants and Stuka's (tested for CV use) FW-190 fighter [A,D series] and ground attack variants [F,G series] (subs in for a couple tiers where Stuka's and DB designs lack) - bit of a step up from the 109 in firepower and all (fighter variants) and succeed the Stuka in the ground attack role (GA variants), and at the top the TA 152 (further evolution of the 190, actually built) and the Ju-187 "super Stuka" which made it as far as wind tunnel tests and the starting's of a mock up before they pulled the plug (estimates on performance felt it wasn't enough of an improvement on the D variant stuka), which is basically a stuka streamlined, better armoured, given the engine used in late model 190's and if I recall right the TA 152, improved defensive armament, improved payload, and the insane idea of a tail that rotated down to give the TG a 100% clear shot at a tailing aircraft.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[XPLCT]
Members
1 post
3,802 battles

I would love to see German CV's, if they would only release the Graf Zeppelin as premium ship I'd buy it. Probably 2 of them to give one to my German friend as well.

 

WhanderingGhost that German CV line Proposal (WiP) of yours is a very nice post I also like the link to the Wiki pages gave me something interesting to read :P

 

Also don't forget we are talking about Germany, they made some awesome machine's so if they would have actively used these CV's at large scale they might have had MEsserschmidt or one of the other Manufacturers design and build Fighters and maybe TB's just for Carrier.

 

Think about it, they had fighterjets at the end of the war, so they could probably have build better Torpedo bombers then the Biplanes I saw in the video.

Edited by kloze12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

It's possibble german carrier might get some of the twin engined stuff like the BF-110, and ME-410.

 

Hell with that what we might even at the extreme get is some navalised form of the level flight twin engined bombers as the german replacment for TB's. Though i'd love a DB focused strike package carrier myself, much easier to aim both normal and manual and less of a micro nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[TSG4R]
[TSG4R]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles

It's possibble german carrier might get some of the twin engined stuff like the BF-110, and ME-410.

 

Unlikely unless you want to seriously nerf the GZ's air wing size -- Much like Royal Navy CV designs, the armored deck and other emphasis on protection over carrying capacity in the GZ (and, presumably, likely hypothetical follow-on designs) meant she had a relatively small hangar and therefore air wing complement when compared to US and Japanese designs of similar displacement -- only 42 single-engine Bf-109 and Ju-87.  Replace these with twin engine planes like Bf-110s, and you'll get even fewer.  In addition to just plain being larger, twin engine planes limit how much hangar space you can reclaim by using a folding wing design -- at best, you can fold only the outer part of the wing.  Twin-engine a/c also require larger elevators and considerably complicate deck operations -- lots more danger area from those twin props.

 

The first CVs to be designed from the ground up to service twin-engine aircraft were the Midway class, which were a lot larger than the GZ (or any other WWII-era CV, for that matter).  It was intended for the Midway class to carry the F7F twin-engine night fighter, though in actuality I don't think F7Fs ever operated off of Midway class carriers.  Many of the Essex class were later modified to handle larger (jet but also some twin-engine prop) aircraft, but they were always very cramped and not ideal for operating the larger 1950s-60s combat aircraft types.

Edited by ForgMaxtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

Unlikely unless you want to seriously nerf the GZ's air wing size -- Much like Royal Navy CV designs, the armored deck and other emphasis on protection over carrying capacity in the GZ (and, presumably, likely hypothetical follow-on designs) meant she had a relatively small hangar and therefore air wing complement when compared to US and Japanese designs of similar displacement -- only 42 single-engine Bf-109 and Ju-87.  Replace these with twin engine planes like Bf-110s, and you'll get even fewer.  In addition to just plain being larger, twin engine planes limit how much hangar space you can reclaim by using a folding wing design -- at best, you can fold only the outer part of the wing.  Twin-engine a/c also require larger elevators and considerably complicate deck operations -- lots more danger area from those twin props.

 

The first CVs to be designed from the ground up to service twin-engine aircraft were the Midway class, which were a lot larger than the GZ (or any other WWII-era CV, for that matter).  It was intended for the Midway class to carry the F7F twin-engine night fighter, though in actuality I don't think F7Fs ever operated off of Midway class carriers.  Many of the Essex class were later modified to handle larger (jet but also some twin-engine prop) aircraft, but they were always very cramped and not ideal for operating the larger 1950s-60s combat aircraft types.

 

Weather or not it would make IRL sense is kind of besides the point, they're going to be badly strapped for decent aircraft otherwise, but these offer a whole slew of designs for covering the gap. Sure it may not have made sense, sure IRL it would have cut air-wing capacity badly and sure IRL it  might have had all kinds of headaches, i agree wholeheartedly on that. But if they're looking for an upgrade over the existing base without going straight to jets thats their only real option AFAIK, (The Ardo also provides a nice top end level bomber if they go that route, though that's serious speculation on my part)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,719 posts
4,106 battles

Not until like 2020 probably which is a shame because the game desperately needs another cv line to add more  diversity to cv game play. 

 

German BBS are this year their DDs probably next year. Russians may get a BB line I'm not sure. RN/Australia this year for DD's maybe and a finished line by the end of next year full base trees by 2019 at worst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[TSG4R]
[TSG4R]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles

 

Weather or not it would make IRL sense is kind of besides the point, they're going to be badly strapped for decent aircraft otherwise, but these offer a whole slew of designs for covering the gap. Sure it may not have made sense, sure IRL it would have cut air-wing capacity badly and sure IRL it  might have had all kinds of headaches, i agree wholeheartedly on that. But if they're looking for an upgrade over the existing base without going straight to jets thats their only real option AFAIK, (The Ardo also provides a nice top end level bomber if they go that route, though that's serious speculation on my part)

 

IMHO, it would be extremely weird to have a nation that has never actually fielded a single aircraft carrier displaying technology that wasn't successfully implemented by countries with extensive experience building and fighting aircraft carriers until the late 1950s.

 

I'm totally down with the Graf Zeppelin being added  as a premium German CV somewhere in the Tier VI - VIII range, launching some sort of navalized Bf 109 & Ju-87 variants.  If another aircraft type is needed, even though there's almost no historical basis for it, I wouldn't have a problem with a hypothetical navalized Fw-190 variant. But anything like twin-engine prop or jet carrier aircraft flies off into la-la fantasyland for a game that sets itself in the 1900s - 1940s time range as far as I'm concerned.

 

And regardless, if the game is going to add another full Tier IV-X Carrier line, clearly the Royal Navy is the place to start as they actually fielded a substantial range of carrier hulls.  Anything beyond this is quite a ways down the road and probably not worth wasting much more than idle speculation upon.  If more KM ships are desired, far better to start with the DDs and BBs that actually existed, or at least had some paper basis, than pie-in-the sky CVs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,366
[-K-]
Members, Beta Testers
3,105 posts
10,299 battles

- Basically for aircraft 109 variants and Stuka's (tested for CV use) FW-190 fighter [A,D series] and ground attack variants [F,G series] (subs in for a couple tiers where Stuka's and DB designs lack) - bit of a step up from the 109 in firepower and all (fighter variants) and succeed the Stuka in the ground attack role (GA variants), and at the top the TA 152 (further evolution of the 190, actually built)

 

Overall a good post, but I disagree with TA 152 making an appearance, as it was designed for high-altitude, anti-bomber work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

IMHO, it would be extremely weird to have a nation that has never actually fielded a single aircraft carrier displaying technology that wasn't successfully implemented by countries with extensive experience building and fighting aircraft carriers until the late 1950s.

 

I'm totally down with the Graf Zeppelin being added  as a premium German CV somewhere in the Tier VI - VIII range, launching some sort of navalized Bf 109 & Ju-87 variants.  If another aircraft type is needed, even though there's almost no historical basis for it, I wouldn't have a problem with a hypothetical navalized Fw-190 variant. But anything like twin-engine prop or jet carrier aircraft flies off into la-la fantasyland for a game that sets itself in the 1900s - 1940s time range as far as I'm concerned.

 

And regardless, if the game is going to add another full Tier IV-X Carrier line, clearly the Royal Navy is the place to start as they actually fielded a substantial range of carrier hulls.  Anything beyond this is quite a ways down the road and probably not worth wasting much more than idle speculation upon.  If more KM ships are desired, far better to start with the DDs and BBs that actually existed, or at least had some paper basis, than pie-in-the sky CVs.

 

I should point out the US successfully flew b-25's off a carrier on one occasion so it isn;t post 1940's tech at all. A giant hassle yes, (as the US found out with that one off op),, but not post 1940's.

 

 Also i think i see your problem.

 

The Graf Zeppelin isn't going to be a 8 premium. She's going to be a regular T8 in a whole line. If all germany ever got was a one off premium carrier, Stuka's would work. Put a whole line from T4 to T10 in and you need more than just the navalised aircraft Germany actually fielded and in terms of realistic ground attack aircraft more advanced than the various models of Stuka the only things germany built or seriously studied other than jets where the twin engined variety. If they want to do a whole carrier line from T4 to T10 they are going to have to come up with strike aircraft for germany that are not Stuka's and are not Jets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[TSG4R]
[TSG4R]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles

 

I should point out the US successfully flew b-25's off a carrier on one occasion so it isn;t post 1940's tech at all. A giant hassle yes, (as the US found out with that one off op),, but not post 1940's.

 

Yes, I'm sure we all know about the Dolittle raid. I think even my wife who has absolutely no interest in military history could recite a basic summary of the Dolittle Raid.  I assumed that people were intelligent enough to recognize that it is not representative of what was possible in normal, sustainable 1940s carrier ops.

 

But hey, if you want to put carrier launched, twin engine bombers in the game a la the Doolittle Raid, in the game, fine.  (1) They have a lauch prep time something like 4x what carrier squads do in the game right now.  (2) a Tier VIII carrier gets only 16 twin engine bombers which must be launched before any fighters, and (3) once launched these 16 planes can be used to attack exactly once and then any survivors fly off the map, never to be seen again.

 

Oh, and (4) the ordnance load of said twin-engine bombers is actually no better than existing Tier VIII single-engine attack aircraft, they just have longer range.  Which, of course, has absolutely no bearing on WoWs.

 

 The Graf Zeppelin isn't going to be a 8 premium. She's going to be a regular T8 in a whole line...

 

Has this actually been announced as something WG is planning, or is it just the pipe dream being advocated by some KM afficianado players?  Because what I'm saying is that a whole T4-10 CV line for the KM sounds like fantasy to me.  I mean, paper ships that have some basis in designs that were at least on some naval architect's drawing board at some point are one thing, but AFAICT, more than half of a KM CV line would have to be made up completely out of thin air.

 

I know WoWs is a casual wargame and not a historical simulation, but it does seem like WG makes at least some attempt to keep the game anchored in history.  Seems to me a full spectrum of KM CVs would be only one step away from a full out fantasy game.  Might as well just go full-out and add Orc and Zerg Navy ships while you're at it.

Edited by ForgMaxtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

I haven't heard a specific statement that they will, but i distinctly remember general statements that they had plans for full lines for all tree's eventually, (German carriers are probably going to be fairly late arriving ofc). And someone else linked a workable tree upto 8 earlier in the thread. A couple fo purely made up ships is acceptable to me.Not ideal of course, but acceptable.

 

Also the issue with the Stuka's isn't bomb load. It's speed and durability. They can assign whatever durability stats they want and will give good values i'm sure, but there just isn't enough variants to easily cover all tiers IMO and by T8 probably even T7 the slow speed is going to become a serious issue. The twin engined types offer the speed and even more justifiable durability with a decent bomb load. Bear in mind where still talking > 2,000lb's of bombs. Plus the twin engined types whilst rarely overloaded like that could carry a lot more if pushed to the airframes limit than Stuka's. Level bombers are also going to be their only alternative to pure dive bomber setups IMO. And for that twin engined really is the only option with some sort of level bomber mechanic IMO.


EDIT: The only way i could see the GZ as a premium is if they judged that her reliance on stuka required a lower tiering than 8, in which case she won't knock any holes in the line taking her out based on the up-thread post.

 

 

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[TSG4R]
[TSG4R]
Members
972 posts
5,062 battles

Also the issue with the Stuka's isn't bomb load. It's speed and durability. They can assign whatever durability stats they want and will give good values i'm sure, but there just isn't enough variants to easily cover all tiers IMO and by T8 probably even T7 the slow speed is going to become a serious issue. The twin engined types offer the speed and even more justifiable durability with a decent bomb load. Bear in mind where still talking > 2,000lb's of bombs. Plus the twin engined types whilst rarely overloaded like that could carry a lot more if pushed to the airframes limit than Stuka's. Level bombers are also going to be their only alternative to pure dive bomber setups IMO. And for that twin engined really is the only option with some sort of level bomber mechanic IMO.

 

Ju-87 covers up through T7 just fine -- The top speed of the later Ju-87 variants (e.g., Ju-87D) is almost identical to the SBD's, and the SBD is the USN dive bomber in-game through T7.

 

If there simply must be KM CVs above Tier 7, you could tap the Ju-187 design -- the so-called "Super Stuka." Though I've always found that design to be a little fanciful so it wouldn't be my first choice.  So why not just assume the KM follows the Luftwaffe's lead in single-engine attack craft, and develops a navalized version of the Fw-190?  The largest bomb depicted in the game now is 1,000lb, and the 190G could carry that just fine. There was also a torpedo bomber variant of the Fw-190 (the F-8/U2-3) that wasn't produced in huge numbers, but did see wartime service.

 

Or you could tap the Me 155 design, which did eventually make it as far as a flying protoype.   The Me 155  was originally commissioned and designed to be a carrier fighter (to eventually replace the Navalized Me 109s on the GZ), but the second design variant (the Me 155A) was modified to turn it into an attack aircraft capable of carrying a 2,200lb. ordnance load.  The Me 155 would be therefore seem to be a very good basis for a hypothetical mid-1940s KM carrier attack aircraft.

 

Regardless, any of these single-engine designs is far more plausible to me than twin-engine Me 110s or 410s being used operationally from carrier decks.

Edited by ForgMaxtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

The 187 is basically going nowhere. It's no better than the 87 it would replace from a quick read. Looking it up the 155 does look promising. It might fill the gap. To be fair i'd never heard of it before you brought it up. It's certainly possibble it would do the job and some of the later versions of the FW-190 G models that never made it to production could do the job now i've gone digging, (thanks for the tip, i'm a lot better when it comes to produced aircraft than stuff that was testbeds and maybes, or was produced in tiny numbers like a lot of late war designs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
52 posts
3,696 battles

Not until like 2020 probably which is a shame because the game desperately needs another cv line to add more  diversity to cv game play. 

 

The British are the only Viable CV line that doesn't necessarily need paper ships.  Some good Premium Ships would be

Graf Zeppelin - German

Flugzeugträger B - German

Regia Giuseppe Miraglia - Italy

Aquila - Italy

Sparviero - Italy

Bearn - French

Dixmude - French

Commandant Teste - French

Edited by Hammeric
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
834 posts

 

The British are the only Viable CV line that doesn't necessarily need paper ships.  Some good Premium Ships would be

Graf Zeppelin - German

Flugzeugträger B - German

Regia Giuseppe Miraglia - Italy

Aquila - Italy

Sparviero - Italy

Bearn - French

Dixmude - French

Commandant Teste - French

I will agree on other countries Cv. But french cv unless they get those hotchkiss guns working on other ships(German, USA, USSR, & future ships). Then I will agree on the French tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
834 posts

I will agree on other countries Cv. But french cv unless they get those hotchkiss guns working on other ships(German, USA, USSR, & future ships). Then I will agree on the French tech tree.

^ Never mind Bring the French CV.

And someone need some help: http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/82311-the-graf-zeppelinwould-she-fit-into-the-game/page__p__2010982#entry2010982

I never hear of Regia GIUSEPPE MIRAGLIA seaplane carrier until I found this link: http://navypedia.org/ships/italy/it_cv_giuseppe_miraglia.htm

I encourage Italian on everything because no one give them enough credit on WoWP & WoT.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×