Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Riggsie15

Suggestion: Royal Australian Navy in World of Warships

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[S_X_S]
Member
5 posts
3,463 battles

There a 2 parts to this post

  1. A complete RAN Destroyer line in the tech tree
  2. Possible RAN premium ships

 

I see HMAS Vampire (I) will be being released soon (hopefully).  I thought that before Wargaming release any more premium Australian destroyers they should be made aware that the RAN has the potential to fill a full destroyer line.  Yes all the ships are British but they vary slightly and would be a viable fill.  At the rate Wargaming is releasing ships and lines, they will soon run out of viable major country lines.  The RAN was the largest minor nation navy in WWII and can fill a destroyer line all the way to tier X, without the need of paper ships. 

 

I have, based off the limited number of British destroyers in game all ready (including the British designed Pan Asian destroyers), compiled a possible line for the RAN. 

 

Cruisers

  1. HMAS Yarra (II) Grimsby Class Sloop.  Constructed in Australia, completed in 1936.  Armed with 3 x 4-inch guns she charged a Japanese force of 3 cruisers and 4 destroyers while escorting a convoy in 1942.

 

Destroyers

  1. HMAS Stalwart (I) Admiralty S Class.  Commissioned 1920.  5 Ships

Armament: 3 x 4-inch; 1 x 2-pdr; 4 x Lewis MGs

Torpedos: 4 x 21-inch

Speed: 36 knots

 

  1. HMAS Anzac (I) Modified Kempenfelt Class Destroyer Leader. Commissioned 1920.  1 Ship

Armament: 4 x 4-inch; 2 x 2-pdr; 4 x Lewis MGs

Torpedos: 4 x 21-inch

Speed: 34 knots

 

  1. HMAS Vendetta (I) V and W Class.  Commissioned 1933.  4 Ships

Armament: 4 x 4-inch; 1 x 2-pdr; 5 x MGs

Torpedos: 6 x 21-inch

Speed: 34 knots

Note: Vendetta was the only RAN V&W Class to survive WWII

 

  1. HMAS Stuart (I) Scott Class Destroyer Leader.  Commissioned 1933.  1 Ship

Armament: 5 x 4.7-inch; 1 x 3-inch; 2 x 2pdr; 5 x MGs

Torpedos: 6 x 21-inch

Speed: 36 knots

 

  1. HMAS Quickmatch Q Class.  Commissioned 1942.  5 Ships

Armament: 4 x 4.7-inch; 1 x quadruple 2-pdr; 6 x 20mm

Torpedos: 8 x 21-inch

Speed: 34 knots

 

  1. HMAS Napier N Class.  Commissioned 1940.  5 Ships

Armament: 6 x 4.7-inch; 1 x quadruple 2-pdr; 4 x 20mm; 4 x .5-inch MGs

Torpedos: 10 x 21-inch

Speed: 36 knots

 

  1. HMAS Arunta (I) Tribal Class.  Commissioned 1942.  Constructed in Australia.  3 Ships

Armament: 6 x 4.7-inch; 2 x 4-inch HA; 1 x quadruple 2-pdr, 6 x 20mm (replaced by 40mm in 1945)

Torpedos: 4 x 21-inch

Speed: 36 knots

Note: A good idea would be to make the twin 4-inch mount a DP secondary and not just AA.  This was how it was historically used and would give it the edge over the N Class.

 

  1. HMAS Tobruk (I) Battle Class.  Commissioned 1950.  Constructed in Australia.  2 Ships

Armament: 4 x 4.5-inch DP; 12 x 40mm

Torpedos: 10 x 21-inch

Speed:31 knots

Note: All main armament mounts are forward of the bridge.

 

  1. HMAS Voyager (II) Daring Class.  Commissioned 1957.  Constructed in Australia.  4 ships

Armament: 6 x 4.5-inch DP; 6 x 40mm

Torpedos: 5 x 21-inch

Speed: 30.5 knots

Note: The last 2 are peace time ships their aa armament could be improved to represent their war fighting capability.

 

All these ships are real and viable.  Just a thought for the devs once they start running out of tech tree lines for the major powers.  If this line is not to be made at least the Arunta should be made a premium.

 

Part 2.  My pick for premium RAN ships.

 

  1. Tier 7

HMAS Australia (II) Kent Class CA.  Commission 1928

Fitted out for 1945 Lingayen Gulf

Armament: 8 x 8-inch; 8 x 4-inch; 2 x 8-barrelled 40mm; multiple 40mm bofors mounts and 20mm guns

Torpedos: 8 x 21-inch

Speed: 31 knots

Note: Australia (II) would make a great tier 7 and would be comparable with the York or Admiral Hipper.  During the battle of Leyte Gulf she was hit by the first kamikaze aircraft.  Though historians put the first officially replanned kamikaze a few days later.  At Lingayen Gulf she would receive another 5 kamikaze hits and survive.  With her aa armament she had at Lingayen Gulf she would make an effective all round cruiser for tier 7.

 

  1. Tier 8

HMAS Arunta (I) Tribal Class DD.

If the RAN destroyer line isn't in the plans

 

  1. Tier 7

HMAS Vengeance Colossus Class CV.  In RAN service 1952

Only 34 aircraft, so tier 9 or 10 plane like the Saipan

 

  1. Tier 2

HMAS Sydney (I) Town Class CL

She was the victorious adversary to KMS Emden

She also went down in history for Australia's first naval victory.

 

Do I think Australia should have its on Navy in WoWs?  Yes.  Do I think the RAN could bring something to WoWs?  Yes.  Thanks Wargaming for a great game and thanks to the devs that read this and consider it.

 

Riggsie15

 

PS.  Australia also had the 4 largest airforce in the world at the end of WWII. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[151ST]
Member
1,027 posts
4,672 battles

I don't think we should be our 'own' faction, but definitely add this as a line in Commonwealth ships. Would like to see some Kiwi ships as prems as well... Cause I hate it when games/anyone forgets our brother nation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[151ST]
Member
2 posts
4,010 battles

Introduce the RAN as 3 or 4 premium ships under the Commonwealth (more than just the Perth and Vampire), then bring in the line of ships for the Commonwealth, including New Zealand ships.  As mentioned above, there are plenty of variations to choose from without having to resort to the "paper navy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S_X_S]
Member
5 posts
3,463 battles
14 hours ago, Ordrazz said:

I want HMAS Australia (I) the battlecruiser, they could use the HMAS Canberra for the cruiser....

 

Ordrazz

Understandable but my argument is that Australia II had a far more active and exciting career than both Australia I and Canberra I.  Due to bad luck and bad timing Australia I saw little action in WWI.  Other than patrols Canberra only real action was sadly it's loss at Salvo Is.  Also to note the Canberra was not refitted as the Australia II was, giving the Australia II the edge in capabilities.  Australia II on the other hand engaged French cruisers and destroyers of Dakar, fought off Jap bombers during the Battle of Coral Sea and was the flagship for the Australia Squadron (aka TF44/TF74).  Most notable though Australia II survived 6 kamikaze hits during the Philippines campaign.  By 1945 her AA was extensively enhanced which would help her hold her own at Tier VII.  

Now Wargamming won't put to of the same names under the one flag.  I feel the Australia II needs to be in the game more than any other ship.  I wait for that day.   Getting back to Australia I, she would only make a Tier II BB or a Tier III Battlecruiser.  My solution is to put in her sister ship HMS New Zealand.  During the war, the battlecruiser participated in all three of the major North Sea battles—Heligoland Bight, Dogger Bank, and Jutland—and was involved in the response to the inconclusive Raid on Scarborough, and the Second Battle of Heligoland Bight. New Zealand contributed to the destruction of two cruisers during her wartime service and was hit by enemy fire only once, sustaining no casualties.  The kiwi gamers would love that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
26 posts
628 battles

Well, This line would make more sense than Pan-Asia line, as the Commonwealth is basically British subordinates in WW2. and most of these ship is developed inside its own country.

 

Good suggest m8, but OZ should merged with NZ and CAN to make a Commonwealth fleet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
160 posts
5,792 battles

I'm all for more commonwealth ships, but I'd want them to be their own commonwealth line, or prefereably added to the British line so captains can be crossed between ships and we'd get more prems to train on. After all, for half of the Second World War, the NZ Navy was actually just the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy. You could have ANZAC Cruiser, Battleship and Destroyer sub-branches of the current British tech tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
25 posts
8,473 battles

I think the above is a great write up. I am all for Commonwealth lines of cruisers and destroyers. 
Some thoughts on how you could make them different to the RN lines:
Cruisers: give them the Perth smoke and HE. 
Destroyers: maybe give them the Perth smoke as well (make it the flavour of the Commonwealth lines), then with the torpedoes, allow the players to choose between shallow and deep water torpedoes (like choosing between AP and HE bombs on US CVs). Give the shallow torpedoes shorter range and worse concealment then the deep water ones. 
Would be very keen to see the Australia as a T3 battlecruiser as well.

Edited by Admiral_Sakene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S_X_S]
Member
5 posts
3,463 battles
On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 3:02 PM, Admiral_Sakene said:

I think the above is a great write up. I am all for Commonwealth lines of cruisers and destroyers. 
Some thoughts on how you could make them different to the RN lines:
Cruisers: give them the Perth smoke and HE. 
Destroyers: maybe give them the Perth smoke as well (make it the flavour of the Commonwealth lines), then with the torpedoes, allow the players to choose between shallow and deep water torpedoes (like choosing between AP and HE bombs on US CVs). Give the shallow torpedoes shorter range and worse concealment then the deep water ones. 
Would be very keen to see the Australia as a T3 battlecruiser as well.

I like your points Sakene.  I to believe commonwealth DDs should have the Perth Smoke.  As for the Australia (I) though, I am not saying she shouldn't be in the game, I think she would be better suited for tier II.  Looking at the balance of tier III BBs she would be quite weak.  With only a broadside of 6 x 12-inch guns, all other BBs would have a broadside of at least 8, and cruiser armour, her speed of 25 knots would be of no advantage.  But we do already have a tier II BB so it's doable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×