Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'light cruiser'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - Asia Language Based Communities
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
    • 한국어 커뮤니티
  • Mod Section
    • Player Modifications
  • Public Test Forums
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
  • Locked Threads
    • Locked Threads

Calendars

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Drag Interests

Found 11 results

  1. S0und_Theif

    British Tech Tree Suggestion

    Hi WG Dev team, Good day to you all, I would like to propose branch lines for the British tech tree. Please have a look and consider this suggestion. BB will have 3 or 4 branch (depend if WG will implement G3 battlecruisers) Branch 1 -> Main Branch (Already in the game) Branch 2 -> Battlecruiser Branch 3 -> Forward Facing BB Branch 4 -> Forward Facing CC DD will have 2 branch. The Main line and the "Intended Armament" branch CA/CL will have 3 branch. CL branch -> Already implemented CA branch -> Questionable to implement due to her main armament is of heavy cruiser, but her armor is light cruiser. You could citadel them with no problem. Though armament can be compensated to fire every 10 sec. AP rounds only? CLAA branch -> Britain's answer to Atlanta, but less 3 turrets or 6 guns. Today I'll start in the reverse order. I'll start from the destroyer aka "loliboats" Original DD line is untouched and will only explain the branch line or the "intended armament branch" T9 Jutland (133 mm / 5.25 in ) Note: She is Jutland "Battle Class" in all aspect, except, instead of the puny 113 mm (4.5 in), she will be armed with 133 mm (5.25 in), which was the original armament for this ship. But due to shortage of the weapon, the British opt for the 113 mm (4.5 in). T10 Daring (133 mm / 5.25 in) Note: She is Daring "Daring Class" in all aspect, except, instead of the puny 113 mm (4.5 in), she will be armed with 133 mm (5.25 in), which was the original armament for this ship. But due to shortage of the weapon, the British opt for the 113 mm (4.5 in). Additional note to WG: The 113 mm (4.5 in) is now the worse performing guns in terms of penetration. Even with Inertia fuse armed, most ships cannot be penetrated. Would request to update the penetration value of the 113 mm. The current value makes the guns useless and only tickles enemy ships. Thanks Next is Cruisers. Will update in the following days.
  2. S0und_Theif

    German Tech Tree Suggestion

    Hi WG Dev team, Good day to you all, I would like to propose branch lines for the German tech tree. Please have a look and consider this suggestion. BB will have 2 branch, the battleship and battlecruiser branch CA/CL will have 3 branch, light cruiser, heavy cruiser, and pocket battleship The pocket battleship branch will merge together with the battlecruiser branch at T9. This is due to limited information on Germany's Plan Z, and since Gneisenau's main armament was upgraded to DD will have 2 branch, the 128 mm (5 in) branch and the 150 mm (5.9 in) branch. At T8, Z 23 had the option to mount wither 128 mm (5 in) or 150 mm (5.9 in), but looses the 150 mm (5.9 in) at T9, the Z46. The branch line will allow the player to play the 150 mm (5.9 in) at T9 and T10. Like the Italian T9 and T10, Germany also labeled them as cruisers "Spahkreuzer / SP" but they are comparable to France's Mogador class Large Destroyer, hence they can still be counted as destroyers "Zerstorer / Z" Today I'll start in the reverse order. I'll start from the destroyer aka "loliboats" Original DD line is untouched and will only explain the branch line or the "150 mm (5.9 in) branch" T9 SP1 / Z40 Note: Basically a Z46 armed with 6 - 150 mm (5.9 in)/ 48 guns (3 x 2). Arrangement of 1 forward, 2 aft turret. Note: Due to her size, she is also mounted with 10 - 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes (2 x 5) Note: Germany intended to hide her "cruiser" size by naming her Z40, only later to be named SP1. T10 SP? / Z ?? Note: Basically a Z52 armed with 6 - 150 mm (5.9 in)/ 48 guns (3 x 2). Arrangement of 2 forward, 1 aft turret. Note: Due to her size, she is also mounted with 10 - 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes (2 x 5) Note: Like in the previous tier, Germany intended to hide her "cruiser" size by naming her Z??, only later to be named SP?. Note: Due to her design, she can counter the French Mogador, French Le Fantastique, Italian Etna, Italian Attilio Regolo " Capitani Romani", and the Russian Khabarovsk. Next is Cruisers. Will update in the following days.
  3. Hi WG Dev team, Good day to you all, I would like to propose the Italian tech tree. Although my research is incomplete, I would like to ask for everyone's help in filling in the missing ships. WG team also can have input if they have books or historic plans of the Italian Navy. Missing links: T3 BB T10 BB (Although the T10 BB has names, their configuration is very much theoretical. Usually, what France build, Italy answers and vice versa. Pretty much like what UK builds, Germany answers and vice versa.) T4 CL/CA T8 - T10 CA (Though a pretty much possible T8 and T9 CA will have 10 - 203 mm guns in {3 x 2} and {2 x 2} config, while T10 CA will either have 12 - 203 mm guns or 9 to 10 larger than 203 mm guns if any data exists) I kinda understand why WG have difficulty in implementing the Italian tech tree. I'm not sure but they may be facing the same challenges on getting info in Italian ships. Especially on T8 to T10. WG wants it to be as historically accurate as possible. Which I really appreciate and thank them for their hard work. Although my suggestion may not be read or noticed, I hope this suggestion may help them a bit on the research. Please have a look and consider this suggestion. The Italians have main armaments that has fast velocity and heavy shells. Fast velocity shells = overpens in close range??? Heavy shells = limited range??? Italian consumable gimmick = ? (I'm sure WG is working on this, but anyone can suggest a gimmick. Maybe from the space battle or haloween?) BB main line -> This branch is the main battleship line plays almost like US and Russian BB but has that Italian feel / gimmick BB branch line ->This branch line is some what of an odd ball. It looks, fells, and smells like a Battlecruiser but it doesn't. Small decrease in gun calibre/caliber, and small increase in speed while armor stays the same, while playing as an Italian, these ships feels like you have played them before in France, Germany, USA, UK, and Soviet Tech tree. DD line -> Italian DD line. Destroyer Note: Falco shares her class with Romania. Look into Romanian Destroyer Marasti Class and Regele Ferdinand Class Quick detail 1939 config -> 5 x 1 120 mm, 1941 config -> 2 x 2 120 mm Destroyer Note: Like WOT, the P43 was a heavy tank on paper but it is really a medium tank in real life practice and in the WOT game. Same thing will apply to T9 Etna and T10 Attilio Regolo "Capitani Romani Class". Destroyer Note: According to Wikipedia, T9 Etna and T10 Attilio Regolo "Capitani Romani Class" are consdered as crisers. But their design is more of a "Flotilla Leader", hence a "Large Destroyer" like France's Mogador of T10 and Russia's Khabarovsk of T10 are counter these ships. CL line -> Light cruiser line (T4 no Data) CA line -> Heavy cruiser line (T8-T10 no Data) Cruiser note: Since there is no known light cruiser design after Duca degli Abruzzi / Giuseppe Garibaldi, it is uncertain if there will be a T8 light cruiser line. If -> Theoretical T8 light cruiser exist with 12 guns Light cruiser line stops at T8 and the next re searchable tier will be T8 heavy cruiser, thus ending the light cruiser tech tree. Else If -> Theoretical T9 light cruiser design possible Light cruiser line continues till T10. Else -> Light cruiser line stops at T7 and the next re searchable tier will be T8 heavy cruiser, thus ending the light cruiser tech tree. Cruiser note: French and Italian tech tree will have this similarities. What France makes, Italy responds and vise versa. Battleship T3 ???? Armament: ?? x 305 mm (12 in) guns ?? x 120 mm (4.7 in) guns Note: I do not have any idea on this and there are no preliminary designs I can find. Personal Opinion: I can only think of 3 designs for this tier (they are not historical and it is only my personal idea or opinion): Design 1: 12 x 305 mm (12 in) guns (6 x 2) - Regina Elena class design. Main armament and secondary armament is armed with dual 305 mm guns (1 Bow, 1 Aft, 2 Port, 2 Starbord). She can fire only 4 turrets per broadside. She will feel like Turenne (French T3 BB) Design 2: 8 x 305 mm (12 in) guns (4 x 2) - Dante Alighieri design but guns are in dual mount in four turrets instead of triple mount. This will make Dante Alighieri feel skinnier due to less number of guns, but give you an idea how Dante Alighieri should be played. Design 3: 9 x 305 mm (12 in) guns (3 x 3) - Dante Alighieri design but guns are in triple mount but in three turrets instead of four. This will make Dante Alighieri feel short and plays like Normandie (French T6 BB). T4 Dante Alighieri Armament: 12 x 305 mm (12 in) guns (4 x 3) 20 x 120 mm (4.7 in) guns (12 x 1 and 4 x 2) 14 × 76.2 mm (3 in) guns (14 x 1) Note: If you are familiar with Soviet BB Gangut or Okt. Revolutsiya, she will play the same as those Soviet BB. T5 Leonardo da Vinci Armament (As built): 13 x 305 mm (12 in) guns (3 x 3 and 2 x 2) 18 × 120 mm (4.7 in) guns (18 x 1) 14 × 76.2 mm (3 in) guns (14 x 1) Armament (Modernized) (Optional) (Hull C): 10 x 320 mm (12.6 in) guns (3 x 2 and 2 x 2) 12 × 120 mm (4.7 in) (6 x 2) 8 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/47 AA guns (4 x 2) Note: She is the 3rd sister of Conte di Cavour and Giulio Cesare. Note: Leonardo da Vinci was sunk while her 2 other sister survived WW1 and got modenized. Option: Hull C, should Leonardo da Vinci survived WW1, she whould get the same upgrade as Conte di Cavour and Giulio Cesare or better. T6 Francesco Caracciolo Armament: 8 × 381 mm (15 in)/ 40 guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (12 x 1) 12 × 102 mm (4 in) guns (6 x 2) Note: She is direct counter to QE2 and Bayern Main Branch T7 Michaelangelo or Raffaello Armament: 8 × 381 mm (15 in) /40 or 50 guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) /55 guns (4 x 3) 12 × 90 mm (3.5 in) /50 AA guns (12 x 1) 20 × 37 mm (1.5 in) /54 AA guns (10 x 2) 32 × 20 mm (0.79) Breda MG (16 x 2) Note: Preliminary design for Vittorio Veneto class. 8 guns in 4 turrets T8 Vittorio Veneto Armament: 9 × 381 mm (15 in) /50 guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) /55 guns (4 x 3) 12 × 90 mm (3.5 in) /50 AA guns (12 x 1) 20 × 37 mm (1.5 in) /54 AA guns (10 x 2) 32 × 20 mm (0.79) Breda MG (16 x 2) Note: Italy's answer to Richelieu Class. Plays like N. Carolina and Monarch. Note: Battle of Vittorio Veneto (WW1) T9 Caporetto (UP.41) Armament: 9 × 406 mm (16 in) guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) 12 × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns (6 x 2) 20 × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns (10 x 2) Note: UP.41 design. Looks, fells, and smells almost like Sovetsky Soyuz class (Russian T9 BB) Note: Battle of Caporetto (WW1) T10 Repubblica Armament (Design 1 - 4 Turret): 12 × 406 mm (16 in) guns (4 x 3) or 8 x ???mm guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Armament (Design 2 - 4 Turret) Andrea Doria type: 10 × 406 mm (16 in) guns (2 x 3 and 2 x 2) or 8 x ???mm guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Armament (Design 3 - 3 Turret): 9 x ???mm guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Note: Direct counter to French T10 Republique / Libertie Note: It is unknown if Italy has made plans for a larger calibre/caliber guns no larger than 457 mm (18 in) in this . The largest guns goes to Japan's monstrosity Yamato Note: Since there is no concrete design after and beyond UP.41, I just speculate that Italy may have thought of a design beyond UP.41 but did not came to light as they fell first after WW2 and faced financial hardship. Personal Opinion: I can only think of 3 designs for this tier (they are not historical and it is only my personal idea or opinion): Design 1: She could have 4 turret slots, but armed with 406 mm in 4 triple mount or ???mm in 4 double mount Design 2: She could have 4 turret slots, but armed with 406 mm in 2 triple mount and in 2 double or ???mm in 4 double mount Design 3: She could have 3 turret slots, but armed with ??? mm in 3 triple mount Side Branch T7 Andrea Doria or Caio Duilio Armament (Modernized 1937): 10 x 320 mm (12.6 in) guns (3 x 2 and 2 x 2) 12 × 135 mm (5.3 in) guns (4 x 3) 10 × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns (10 x 1) 16 x 37 mm (1.5 in) Breda AA guns (8 x 2) 16 x 20 mm (0.79 in) Breda AA guns (8 x 2) Note: I am very sure one of them will be a premium like Dunkerque and Strasbourg or Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Note: She will be familiar as plays like Lyon and KGV. Small calibre/caliber for her tier but has many guns. T8 Filippo Lippi Armament: 6 × 381 mm (15 in) /40 or 50 guns (3 x 2) or 9 x 343 mm (13.5 in)/ 50 guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) /55 guns (4 x 3) 10 × 90 mm (3.5 in) /50 AA guns (10 x 1) 20 × 37 mm (1.5 in) /54 AA guns (10 x 2) 32 × 20 mm (0.79) Breda MG (16 x 2) Note: Another preliminary design for Vittorio Veneto. Note: She will be familiar as plays like Gneisenau. (Which will be moved to T8 because of the battle cruiser suggestion I will make in the future) Side Note: Yes, there is really an Italian painter called Filippo LippiIts and not to be confused with the band "Fra Lippo Lippi" which is Norwegian. Stitches and Burns. T9 Isonzo (UP.41) Armament: 9 × 381 mm (15 in) guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) 12 × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns (6 x 2) 20 × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns (10 x 2) Note: UP.41 design. Looks, fells, and smells almost like Sovetsky Soyuz class (Russian T9 BB) but armed with 381 mm Note: Battle of Isonzo (WW1) Note: She will be familiar as plays like Iowa or Sovetsky Soyuz with a twist. T10 Impero Armament (Design 1 - 4 Turret): 12 × 381 mm (15 in) guns (4 x 3) or 8 x ???mm guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Armament (Design 2 - 4 Turret) Andrea Doria type: 10 × 381 mm (15 in) guns (2 x 3 and 2 x 2) or 8 x ???mm guns (4 x 2) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Armament (Design 3 - 3 Turret): 9 x ???mm guns (3 x 3) 12 × 152 mm (6 in) guns (4 x 3 or 6 x 2) ?? × 90 mm (3.5 in) AA guns ?? × 37 mm (1.5 in) AA guns Note: She will be familiar as plays like Montana, Conqueror or Iowa , Lion with a twist. Note: It is unknown if Italy has made plans for a larger calibre/caliber guns no larger than 431 mm (17 in) in this branch. The largest guns goes to Japan's monstrosity Yamato Note: Since there is no concrete design after and beyond UP.41, I just speculate that Italy may have thought of a design beyond UP.41 but did not came to light as they fell first after WW2 and faced financial hardship. Personal Opinion: I can only think of 3 designs for this tier (they are not historical and it is only my personal idea or opinion): Design 1: She could have 4 turret slots, but armed with 381 mm in 4 triple mount or ???mm in 4 double mount Design 2: She could have 4 turret slots, but armed with 381 mm in 2 triple mount and in 2 double or ???mm in 4 double mount Design 3: She could have 3 turret slots, but armed with ??? mm in 3 triple mount Next is Cruisers Full details in the following days.
  4. S0und_Theif

    French Tech Tree Suggestion

    Hi WG Dev team, Good day to you all, I would like to propose branch lines for the French tech tree. Please have a look and consider this suggestion. The Frenchy way Consumables: artillery WD40, and NOS BB main line -> The french way, all guns forward (The french makes things different. Think different) BB branch line -> The traditional way with maximum alpha and a bit of french touch (Quad turret) BB Note: Gascogne is not the premium Gascogne, but rather her armament configuration of 1 front 1 rear turret. I currently do not have a name for her. DD torpedo boat line -> Your usual torpedo loli-boats with 550 mm french baguette. Usually armed with 130 mm. Smaller than her other branch. Small size means better concealment compared to her "large" branch. DD "large" boat line -> A implied they are "large" compared to other loli-boats. Usually armed with 139 mm and really fast for her size. (If you have Aigle, she is good practice boat for this line) Due to large size, their concealment suffer, but with her 139 mm guns will make you think twice. (Larger than Lada's (Russian) 130mm but smaller than BMW's (German) 150mm) CL line -> French light cruiser line, artillery WD40 and NOS at T6. CA line -> Early access to CA like Japan, but no artillery WD40 and no NOS Cruiser note: Since there is no known light cruiser design after De Grasse / Chateurenault, it is uncertain if there will be a T8 light cruiser line. If -> Theoretical T8 light cruiser exist with 12 guns Light cruiser line stops at T8 and the next re searchable tier will be Charles Martel, T8 heavy cruiser, thus ending the light cruiser tech tree. Else If -> Theoretical T9 light cruiser design possible Light cruiser line continues till T10. Else -> Light cruiser line stops at T7 and the next re searchable tier will be Charles Martel, T8 heavy cruiser, thus ending the light cruiser tech tree. Cruiser note: French and Italian tech tree will have this similarities. What France makes, Italy responds and vise versa. Battleship T3 Turenne No change T4 Courbet No change T5 Bretagne No change T6 Normandie No change Forward Guns Branch (The French way) T7 Strasbourg Armament: 8 × 330 mm (13 in)/50 guns (2 x 4) 16 × 130 mm(5.1 in)/45 guns (3 x 4 and 2 x 2) 8 × 37 mm (1.5 in)/50 guns (4 x 2) 8 × 13.2 mm (0.52 in)/76 Hotchkiss MG (8 x 1) Armour: Belt: Dunkerque: 225 mm Strasbourg: 283 mm Deck: Dunkerque: 115 – 125 mm Strasbourg: 127 – 137 mm Turrets: Dunkerque: 150 – 330 mm Strasbourg: 160 – 360 mm Conning tower: 270 mm Note: Armour shows the difference between Dunkerque and Strasbourg. While both ships will have 26s reload time, only Dunkerque will get the WD40 Armament reload booster, while Strasbourg dose not. Question: Should Dunkerque move up to T7 along with her sister Strasbourg or stay at T6? T8 Richelieu Armament: 8 × 380 mm (15 in)/45 guns (2 x 4) 9× 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) Note: No change. Side Note: Richelieu's Hull A is similar to Clemenceau, the 3rd sister of the Richelieu class, where she recieves 2 extra secondary turrets in her sides insted of usual AA armament of 37mm and 13.2mm were placed. T9 Alsace (N3) Armament: 12 × 380 mm (15 in)/45 guns (3 x 4) 9 × 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) 24 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/45 guns (12 x 2) Note: No change. Note: The only odd one in the branch as she has rear turret. Side Note: N3 design was the approved design by France since the 380 mm in quad turret is already a proven gun. N2 design would be 9 x 406 mm and N1 would be 9 x 380 mm. T10 Liberte Armament: 8 x 431 mm (17 in)/50 guns (2 x 4) 16 x 127 mm (5 in)/54 guns (8 x 2) 9 x 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) Note: Republique has 1 forward and 1 rear turret, Liberte has both turret in front and none in the rear. Traditional Style Branch T7 Lyon Armament: 16 x 340 mm (13.4 in)/45 guns (4 x 4) 24 × 130 mm(5.1 in)/45 guns (4 x 4 and 4 x 2) 40 × 37 mm (1.5 in)/50 guns (20 x 2) 24 × 13.2 mm (0.52 in)/76 Hotchkiss MG (12 x 2) Note: No change. Side Note: there were 2 other designs for Lyon and they can be sold as premium. Other Design 1 (Turret Configuration): There was a competing design for Lyon with 2 turrets forward (A, B)and 2 turrets rear (X, Y) (The center turret (C) was moved forward). This means she can fire 8 guns insted of only 4. (source: Journal of United States Artillery, example Tourville) Other Design 2 (Armament Size): there were plans to mount Lyon with 8 380 mm guns, but later abandoned due to time constraints. Personal Opinion: Lyon seems to have a mistake in her design in an engineering stand point. Her funnel is in the front near the bridge tower. Does this mean either the engine is between Turret A and Turret C and have extra long gears to the propeller. Or the engine is in the correct position (which is near in the middle) and have created a long shaft funnel to go forward. Which may heat up the magazine room in Turret C and cause catastrophic explosion. I know im being nit picky on this but it just looks wrong. We can open a discussion this in another topic in the forum. T8 "Gascogne" type Armament: 8 × 380 mm (15 in)/45 guns (2 x 4) 9× 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) Note: She is Gascogne in all manner and configuration but she is not Gascogne. Gascogne is a premium and will find another name for her, but the configuration of the armament replicates Gascogne. T9 Flandre (N2) Armament: 9 × 406 mm (16 in)/?? guns (3 x 3) 9 × 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) 24 × 100 mm (3.9 in)/45 guns (12 x 2) Note: Flandre is the 4th sister of the Alsace class. France always likes to make fun of the 4th sister as they are different than the other 3. (i.e. Richelieu -> Gascogne, Lyon -> Tourville) Note: The N2 design arms her with 406 mm (16 in) instead of 380 mm (15 in) in 9 guns. Note: She will look, feel, smell like Iowa class due to her number of guns and configuration. Side Note: N3 design was the approved design by France since the 380 mm in quad turret is already a proven gun. N2 design would be 9 x 406 mm and N1 would be 9 x 380mm. T0 Republique Armament: 8 x 431 mm (17 in)/50 guns (2 x 4) 16 x 127 mm (5 in)/54 guns (8 x 2) 9 x 152 mm (6 in)/55 guns (3 x 3) Note: No change. Next is Cruisers Full details in the following days.
  5. Hi Waregameing Dev Team, Would like to suggest to add Swedish Cruiser Gotland (with 6 guns, 4 turrets) at T5 or T6 and Tre Kronor and/or Gota Lejon at T6 or T7. Like Polish Destroyer Blyskawica, they may be premeiums and may or may not have unique playstyle. And fly the Swedish flag. Side Note: Gota Lejon was sold to Chile as Almirante Latorre, possible for future Pan-American cruiser premium. I noticed that these cruisers may resemble German T5 Konigsberg or T6 Nurnberg style. Maybe the game play may not be far from that but should be different enough to be unique.
  6. Yes. Yes it is. Before any stone is thrown, there are valid historical designs that can make it to the line. https://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/zplan/cruiser/kreuzerm/tech.html https://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/zplan/cruiser/kreuzerq/index.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-class_cruiser And this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Lützow_(1939) “Lützow was originally designed as a light cruiser version of the Admiral Hipper-class heavy cruisers, armed with twelve 15 cm (5.9 in) guns instead of the Admiral Hipper's eight 20.3 cm (8.0 in) guns.” And an image (from somewhere I fail to remember): A bit of a disclaimer: the estimated HP, based on the ships’ standard/full displacement, for the ships aren’t 100% accurate (but I did some tests and the results are very close). WarGaming may use different sources for the ships’ displacements. It’s a formula(s) I stole from someone I know and I do not have the permission to give them to anyone else. The line: VII: M-class Q-class VIII: Hull A Hipper with Königsberg's guns IX: Hipper with Nürnberg's guns X: (Slightly) Modified Hull B Roon with Nürnberg's guns Let’s get into the details: M-CLASS Q-SUBCLASS PROPOSED DESIGN OF LÜTZOW Opinions: + The line in general: I know WG could always make brand new models for the ships but it’d be much easier to put existing models on existing models. That’s basically the concept of the Lützow light cruiser proposal, right? RIGHT??? + Traits: Tanky light cruisers? I mean the M and Q even have “sloped decks”. While I cannot confirm what it truly means, but I assume that “sloped decks” are essentially something similar to “turtleback armor”. “Turtleback armor” is not a technical term by the way. If you view armor profile of a ship like Hindenburg and select to show only the ship’s vital part (the citadel), you will see sloped “sides” of the citadel box, and those edges are called “armored citadel deck slopes”, whose thickness is 60 mm. On German battleships, the armor is arranged differently, so you can’t truly view the actual thickness of the slopes. But they are there. “Sloped deck” on light cruisers. German through and through. The later ships are, of course, as tanky as German heavy cruisers get. That fact needs no more advertisement. 1/4 HE pen, like the heavy cruiser line. + Consumables: I can’t think of any except being identical to the heavy cruiser line already in the game. Would Radar be a good thing? I mean German Hydro is already too good, I don’t think having “German radar” on these ships would be much better than just popping German Hydro, which is long-ranged, lasts longer and can also detect torpedoes. Maybe better Repair Party? Myabe no catapult aircraft (I can see this happen)? + M and Q: Due to the similarities between M-class and Q-class (they are of the same class anyway), I can think of 2 ways: Q-class would the Hull B of M-class -OR- M-class gets in the game as the T7 for the new tech tree, Q-class is a semi-clone as a T6 premium ship. I do have a concern that other T7 cruisers in the game have much better HP pool than those ships (ALL of them to be correct), but M and Q do feature excellent speed and their “sloped decks”. + Lützow: I can think of splitting this CL Hipper into two. This is not a very good way to implement them, admittedly. One as T8 and one as T9. The T8 version will have the 150 mm turrets from Königsberg (7,5s reload) and the T9 (the historical, proposed Lützow) will actually have her designed guns from Nürnberg (6s reload). Since both of the ships would be light cruisers, there would be little problem if the ships have smaller HP pool. For example, all US heavy cruisers will have larger HP pool than all US light cruisers of the same tier – Des Moines’ 50,3k versus Worcester’s 45,4 k. In-game Hipper has 37,3k (Hull A) and 43,8k HP (Hull B), having about the same or slightly more HP than Hull B of some T9 cruisers (Donskoi, Seattle, Ibuki and even Zao – a T10). The very good reload will make up for protection (as if they even lack protection). What I don’t like is making the same ship (the same hull) two different ships in a ship line. But KGV and Monarch exist. Thank to WG for setting the precedence. Also I’d like point out that if the design indeed only changes the main guns of the Hipper-class, then the Fire Control System would still be the same, which means the firing range of these ships would be the best of all the light cruisers in the game: 17.7 km (FCS module B) versus Worcester’s 16.7 km). Even with FCS module A, at 16.1 km, it’s already better than Minotaur. Coupled with the impressive 6s reload, this ship can be really really powerful. + Tier 9 and 10: Alternatively, a light cruiser using Roon’s hull and Königsberg’s guns would do well at T9. Probably too well because of the huge HP pool for a light cruiser. It’s a German ship. It would be characteristically overweight. The last ship of the line would be a largely fabricated design (who’d have thought?) and I can think of 1 of 2 ways. If the T9 is indeed a ship based on Roon’s hull, then the T10 could be using Hindenburg’s hull with Nürnberg’s guns. Admittedly, a ship with Hindenburg’s hull and Nürnberg’s guns can be a very powerful ship in the game. Roon’s hull can have 4 turrets on it easily because: Nürnberg’s turrets are much smaller than Roon’s turrets (being a smaller caliber) and the forward superstructure can be pushed back just a bit to make space for the additional 150 mm turret. Here are my proposed stats of the T8 and T10, T7 is M-class and T9 is the historical proposed Lützow: TIER VIII TIER X
  7. G’day Folks, Ok so I’ve been reading up on IJN CLs lately and thought I’d do up a proposed IJN CL line. The line would be defined by stealth, accurate 140-150s, good AA and good speed with some torps thrown in for good measure. The idea would be to be quicker than USN CLs, have on-par stealth, more accurate guns along with some torp ability reflective of the CA line. The downside? No radar. They would have the usual IJN HE advantages along with the flatter arcs of IJN, however with slower turret traverse than their USN counterparts. I would suggest situating their torp quality around IJN CAs, however better reloads or quicker speed. The other balance would be higher tiers not having radar but compensated with spotter-plane, which in combination with better shell characteristics could make them effective long-range flamers. Alternative would be to balance out the range on T8-10s properly, the current range ups and downs on the CA line is stupid. My suggestion would be spotter-plane as ships like the Oyodo had significant Aircraft housings compared to other nations. The current IJN CLs end at T4 with the Kuma, which is essentially the same as Kuma-class and Nagara-class ships from WW2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuma-class_cruiser https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagara-class_cruiser The CA line starting with Furutaka would branch off there at T5, with the CL line continuing. Mogami would be a T8 CL (155s) and replaced with Takao-class at T8 CA spot. Line would like like this: I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Hashidate Chikuma Tenryu Kuma Sendai Agano Oyodo Mogami (155) CL-9 CL-10 Furutaka Aoba Myoko Maya (Takao) Ibuki Zao I have provided wiki-links. Tier 5: Sendai-class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sendai-class_cruiser Essentially the Sendai-class would be an ‘improved’ Kuma-class. It would function like a Kuma, stock, however with improved AA, speed and durability. Same initial gun config as Kuma Hull (B) would add more AA (due to 127s, 25s, etc.) and reduce the turret number by 1 (as per Naka 1943). AA should be very good for tier. Propulsion upgrade to reflect switch to all oil-fed boilers (upping to 36 knots). Range upgrade to 14km 2x4 Torps for 10km Consumables Hydro+F-Plane Tier 6: Agano-class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agano-class_cruiser The Agano-class is an evolution towards late-war CLs She would be defined by: 3x2 152s Decent AA Hull(A), very good Hull(B), Agano was updated as the war progressed Range should be similar to Aoba 37knots 2x4 Torps, 10km Consumables: DFAA/Hydro + F-Plane Tier 7: Oyodo-class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_%C5%8Cyodo The Oyodo-class transitions from 152s to 155s of the Mogami She would be defined by: 2x3 155s Decent AA Hull(A), very good Hull(B) Range of 15km 35knots 4x3 torps, 10km. This is not historically accurate, however keeps it in-line with the line. Consumables: DFAA/Hydro + F-Plane/Spotter. Oyodo should be able to use Spotter as she was designed with significant Aircraft housing. Tier 8: Mogami-class Basically as per Mogami in game currently, however the 155-variant and add a spotter plane option and increase AA rating a little bit. Tier 8 CA: Takao-class/Maya/Chokai Basically like a Mogami (203) but given access to a heal (a la Atago) and access to a spotter plane. By giving her a heal+spotter you are giving her IJNs ‘radar’ equiv. Keep rear-mounted torps and worse stealth than Atago to differentiate. Tier 9: CL-9 This would be a ‘paper’ or theoretical ship. Don’t get angry (yes looking at you Scott) a LOT of warships and tanks in WG titles are paper or theoretical. Just look at Soviet trees… The idea would take push the Mogami-CL idea to its fullest. 5x3 155s, improved turret traverse, slightly better reload Great AA Range 15.5km 36.5 knots 4x4 torps, 12km ones, 10km stock. DFAA/Hydro+F-Plane/Spotter+Heal Max conceal would be around 9.8km Tier 10: CL-10 I see CL-10 as a 155 Zao, perhaps a bit squishier though. 5x3 155s, or perhaps take the ‘Zao’ route and do 4x4 155s, someone here will know which is a better ‘design’ choice. Either way, better turret traverse, better reload. Excellent AA, IMO should be almost competitive with the AA beasts of T10 but definitely a ship CVs want to steer clear of. Range 16km 38 knots 4x5 torps, 12km ones, better reload than Zao DFAA/Hydro+F-Plane/Spotter+Heal Max concealment would be around 9.5km Basically all in all the CL line would blend the actual CLs that IJN built, with better AA values than the CA line but with the evolution of Mogami 155 playstyle. My idea is the combination of speed and good DPM and stealth make this line scary, even without radar. Thoughts?
  8. G'day Folks, Another theorycrafting line incoming! @PeterMoe1963 - tagging you because I know you'll love having a look at this! NB: CW = Commonwealth in this post. Ok so this has taken me a while, however is my take on Commonwealth CL and DD lines. I’m keeping the DD and CL lines in separate posts, mostly because I haven’t finished the DD line yet. Very open to alternative opinions and discourse! I heavily borrow from RN ships to provide points about balance. Either way with CW lines, I’ve tried to give us the ‘slightly different’ versions of things to maintain some difference with RN and often put ships of similar types at slightly different tiers as CW often modified the ships to suit their own purposes. The lines would look like this: I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X CL Grimsby-class Pelorus-class Challenger-class Chatham-class Dunedin Mod-Leander Bellona-class Crown Colony Swiftsure-class ZA Design DD S-class V-class Scott-class A-Class H-Class Tribal-class N-class W-class Daring-class Light Cruisers The CW CLs in my mind would be similar to RN, however play on the smoke mechanics of Perth/Haida and have a lot of soft-buffs. The argument for all this is that often the ships systems would be changed by the CW nation, and often the ships were received after serving with RN. So while you may have a ship that’s above the tier of its peers in the RN, you’re getting a modified version. With the right changes to agility and survivability, the ships become close-DD support, almost a brawler CL. eg: have reduced range (a la Perth) better gun and torpedo arcs Better shell velocity and reload (many tiers have less guns than their peers) better agility (acceleration/deceleration, rudder shift/turn radius) better armour/lower citadels HE. It would all need to be finely tuned by WG but the idea is to play on the range of the Perth and the brawling nature of Haida. The idea being that by having lower citadels and better gun/torp arcs, perhaps even some HP buffs these ships could be excellent close-range brawler CLs. Some of the earlier ships may need speed buffs to keep them balanced with counterparts. Tier 1: Grimsby-class Sloop Ships for Reference: RAN – Yarra, Swan, Parramatta, Warrego, RIN – Indus, NZ Division – HMS Leith, Wellington Armament: 3 x 102mm guns (RAN) mk XVI, or 2 x 120mm guns (RIN) Speed: 16.25-16.5 knots Black Swan (RN) has 3x2 102s mk XIX, so I’m guessing Black Swan has same gun but more of them and newer. You could argue to go the Indus route and use the 120s, or perhaps the Yarra route but better refire rate. Either way, we’re already defining a point of difference. Tier 2: Pelorus-class Ships for Reference: RAN – Pioneer, Psyche Armament: 8 x 102mm, 2 x 1 356mm torpedoes Speed: 20 knots The Weymouth has 8 x 152s and is quicker at 26 knots, however only has AP. So the argument here is that Pelorus would have torps and HE to bridge the gap. By starting to play on CW better arcs or reload, she could work quite nicely at Tier 2. Tier 3: Challenger-class Ships for Reference: HMAS Encounter, HMS Challenger (Australia Station). Armament: 11 x 152mm, 2 x 1 450mm torpedoes Speed: 22 knots The Caledon is more ‘modern’ and features only 5x152s (centre-lined), however is faster (29knots) and has 4x2 torps. The idea here is that Challenger performs somewhat like a St Louis, with a bit of RN thrown in. You can see already how the CW line is a bit ‘behind’ the RN line. Tier 4: Chatham-class Ships for Reference: RAN – Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, NZ Division – HMS Chatham Armament: 8 x 152mm, 2 x 1 533mm torpedoes Speed: 26 knots The CW CL line really starts to lag behind her counterparts in design comparative to other nations. While some nations still have porcupine gunnery designs at tier 4, not many do. CW CLs are this way to show how they often operated old ships for far longer than the ‘Big’ navies of the world. Tier 5: Dunedin Ships for Reference: NZ Division ­– HMS Diomede, Dunedin Armament: 6 x 152mm, 4 x 3 533mm torpedoes Speed: 29 knots Basically a Danae-class ship at T5. Access to repair party (heal) and CW smoke. Tier 6: Modified Leander-class Ships for Reference: RAN – Perth, Hobart, Sydney, RNZN – Leander, Achilles, RIN – Dehli Armament/Speed as per Perth Basically this series of ships would function just like the Perth, however would have access to a heal instead of spotter plane. Perth may need some tweaking with the string of nerfs she's had (smoke nerf, plane in smoke nerf) however I wanted to leave her with the Spotter/Smoke combo as her own, which would distinguish herself from the line ship. Tier 7: Bellona-class Ships for Reference: RNZN – Bellona, Black Prince Armament: 4 x 2 133mm, 2 x 3 533mm torpedoes Speed: 34 knots Bellona-class is a bit of a funny one. She has 133mm guns at T7 and less torpedoes than her predecessor. The obvious solution to the guns is to offer up increased penetration metrics to match the line and for the torpedoes, due to being ‘newer’ increased damage and/or range and/or better reload. The alternative is to switch out her 133s for 152s (not historically accurate), however she was active later many of those down the line. It’s due to these 133s and her smaller size that I’ve placed her at T7, rather than swapped her with Crown Colony-class. I would have her with CW smokes, a heal and improved-range hydro and then start applying the ‘improved’ hydro up the rest of the line. The improved hydro is to compensate for poor range up the line. Tier 8: Crown Colony-class Ships for Reference: RNZN – Gambia, RIN – Mysore, RCN – Quebec Armament: 3 x 3 152mm, 2 x 3 533mm torpedoes Speed: 34 knots Crown-Colony is the over-head class of the Fiji-class. In this circumstance however, most ships from the CW had late refits, which meant they had 3x3 not the 4x3 of the Fiji class. Balance will need to be found with reload, however as per Bellona, CW smoke/(first class in the line with USN Radar), heal, improved-range hydro. Tier 9: Swiftsure-class Ships for Reference: RCN – Ontario Armament: 3 x 3 152mm, 2 x 3 533mm torpedoes Speed: 34 knots Basically an improved Crown-Colony-class ship, improve metrics along the line, Smoke/Radar, heal, improved-range hydro. Tier 10: ZA Design Ships for Reference: In-game Minotaur Armament/Speed as per Minotaur The differences between Mino and ZA would have to come down to balance and the adjustments made based on the CW CL ‘flavour’. Keeping in mind, she needs to be tankier than Mino, not have as fast refire rate (due to HE). Consumables would include Smoke/Radar, heal and improved-range hydro. All in all the trick with the CW CL line will be to keep them tanky enough to provide that close-range support, as I would expect their range never to top 14km at T10, which is danger-zone when you are talking about almost being in radar range and the like. Think about ZA as sort of a tankier, stealthier, aggressive, shorter-range Minotaur. Anyways the ‘flavour’ is just an idea, as far as the ships in the line, there aren’t many other options to fill slots unless you go down a ‘theoretical’ route. Every ship of the line (T10 aside) was picked due to firstly, actually built, then by number of different CW nations to field them. I couldn't get SAN thrown in, however there is a SAN DD at T9, W-class (SAS Vrystaat). The next considerations were the overall 'feel' of the line, and thus the Dido (Bellona) class ends up at T7. You could argue for a flip between T7-T8, however with 133s v 152s and the idea of the line being 'uptiered' ships, I felt it was the right place. I have mostly picked out the DD line based on the same metrics I used with the CLs, it was far easier to find variety to choose from and I used the RN DD line as a basis for 'balancing'. But in all seriousness, having spoken with some currently serving RAN pers, they love the idea of using the shorter range of Perth and 'uptiered' as an idea for a brawler, close-support CL line. Thoughts from the floor? CW DDs (detail) to follow when I have time.
  9. Loshirai14

    IJN Tier 4 Premium Suggestion

    Tier IV - IJN Oyodo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_%C5%8Cyodo Has 6x155mm guns on two triple-gun turrets, no torpedoes and powerful AA. Oyodo can be made as a AA focused Cruiser in-game with the AA consumable and a catapult fighter. those seal clubbing tier 4 and 5 CV's are gonna avoid you specially with a top speed of 34kn. She can have an optional upgrade of 4x203mm on two twin-gun turrets. here's some images of IJN Oyodo
  10. Why not really separate them into Light And Heavy Cruisers? I mean, someone here probably suggested that at some point. Similar to how some tech trees in World Of Tanks have branches that lead to different tanks that offer different play styles. (i.e. the Russian Heavy Tank Line) There's probably enough ships out there to populate both a Light and Heavy cruiser line for both the IJN and the USN. This would be undoubtedly be more relevant to the USN line since it would pretty much define which line makes use of torpedoes or guns. And how about some unique high Tier premium destroyers like a certain representative of the Japanese Shiratsuyu Class (which has a technical reading of being a modification of the Hatsuharu Class of destroyers.) which fought in the First Guadalcanal campaign who managed to heavily damage USS Portland before being hit, badly damaged, abandoned and sunk later. This Destroyer of the Shiratsuyu class is well known in this battle because she has seen using hammocks as sails after being badly damaged earlier. I guess those sails should be seen on the ship if it is ever added to this game (it would probably penalize the ship's overall stealth but would give her a better overall turning rate)
  11. At present, the IJN tree is missing a tier 5 cruiser. I would like suggest that the Agano Class light cruiser as a candidate as its armaments, speed and other stats seem well suited for the tier. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agano-class_cruiser
×