Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
S4pp3R

My proposed IJN CL line

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
316 posts
4,646 battles

I'll give you props for showing the IJN cruisers some love and for putting in the effort.

I .. dunno, honestly. I'm not really feeling the "flavor" here vs. the other light cruisers in the game, or any kind of desire to play them over the 203mm ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
Just now, Rina_Pon said:

I'll give you props for showing the IJN cruisers some love and for putting in the effort.

I .. dunno, honestly. I'm not really feeling the "flavor" here vs. the other light cruisers in the game, or any kind of desire to play them over the 203mm ships.

Yeah it'd be a niche line, personally I didn't enjoy Mogami 155s but that could have been no IFHE and T8 MM, thanks for the props!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,340 posts
8,848 battles

Looks good!

Though I would prefer to leave the leave the 203 Mogami where it is, just rename it to Mikuma/Kumano/Suzuya. Imo the Takao class should remain as Premium ships and Maya should in her AA refit should be reserved as a Premium, perhaps after the CV rework.

As for the flavour, I am thinking the IJN CLs should have best in class stealth, lowest gun range and maybe longer ranged torpedoes. So they are CLs which can stealth torp larger ships, while using the guns to deal with DDs. After all, the IJN CLs like the Kuma and Sendai classes were historically used as Destroyer leaders, so I am thinking perhaps they could play as a cross between a torpedo destroyer and a stealthy gun cruiser. This could also provide interesting options for the player - they can choose to mount a Spotter plane to play as a regular gun CL, or accompany the team's DDs in torping stuff while also protecting them with your guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
1 hour ago, Thyaliad said:

Looks good!

Though I would prefer to leave the leave the 203 Mogami where it is, just rename it to Mikuma/Kumano/Suzuya. Imo the Takao class should remain as Premium ships and Maya should in her AA refit should be reserved as a Premium, perhaps after the CV rework.

As for the flavour, I am thinking the IJN CLs should have best in class stealth, lowest gun range and maybe longer ranged torpedoes. So they are CLs which can stealth torp larger ships, while using the guns to deal with DDs. After all, the IJN CLs like the Kuma and Sendai classes were historically used as Destroyer leaders, so I am thinking perhaps they could play as a cross between a torpedo destroyer and a stealthy gun cruiser. This could also provide interesting options for the player - they can choose to mount a Spotter plane to play as a regular gun CL, or accompany the team's DDs in torping stuff while also protecting them with your guns.

Fair point with regards to Mogami, I won't fight you there - I understand.

As far as the rest - not so sure. I feel like you are pushing a bit too close to IJN gunbote DDs and folks will want to have a reason to play either.

My idea is basically to take Mogami(155) as an idea for T8 CL and push it further from there, without invading other T10 CLs.

Further to this is if you go with spotter plane, you are doing the range thing which means you can't have absurd stealth particularly in view of the torps. Although you could argue the other way for an almost Perth range v spotter balance so I do understand.

*shrugs* I like your points regardless, thanks for the feedback and the compliment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles

Thinking about it more, I'd do a gunbote DD range spectrum and a CA range spectrum and have the CLs in the middle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles

Oyodo dont have torpedoes launcher mate, 

 

You want better T9-T10 look the bottom of those 

From top to bottom : Mogamin, Tone, Zao, Oyodo, Agano, Agano Kai, and Mutant Harugu-lol-anta  with 24 x 100 mm Daka guns 

IJNcruisers.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
81 posts
4,797 battles
2 minutes ago, humusz said:

Mutant Harugu-lol-anta  with 24 x 100 mm Daka guns 

Oh heck no. Harugumo doesn't have enough guns for you? :Smile_hiding:

I like the look of Agano Kai though, what are her specs? 4x2 155 mm with 2x4 tubes?

 

3 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

5x3 155s, or perhaps take the ‘Zao’ route and do 4x4 155s

IMO quad turrets should be a French-only thing and 4x3 155 would do nicely if other aspects like reload, traverse and shell performance are good. 5x3 in a Mogami layout would be better because 4x3 cruisers are too many ingame already.

Also Oyodo is a very bad ship for T7. No torps, very few guns, no guns backward, and those guns are 10s reload (same 155 mm as Mogami's). At T7 every CL does 8s or less reload (Helena, Fiji and Shchors have ~7,5s) so I'd only put her at T5. Even T6 is kinda pushing it.

What I can say is pushing Mogami into the CL line as the new T9. Her HP rivals Ibuki, and 15 really good guns means she can deal with many problems (of course some buffs are needed, like torpedo angle). T8 can be a 4x3 155 mm design using Mogami's guns and the T10 could be a 5x3 with improved reload and torpedoes. Or just make a Zao with 5x3 155, change nothing else and call it a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
2 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Oh heck no. Harugumo doesn't have enough guns for you? :Smile_hiding:

I like the look of Agano Kai though, what are her specs? 4x2 155 mm with 2x4 tubes?

There always not enough daka

agano kai only have addition of another turret in aft, it have improved engine and AA radar though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
81 posts
4,797 battles
3 hours ago, humusz said:

 

agano kai only have addition of another turret in aft, it have improved engine and AA radar though

As per tradition of this game, Axis ships aren't allowed to have Radar... :Smile_sad: 

German radar ship when?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,340 posts
8,848 battles
7 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Further to this is if you go with spotter plane, you are doing the range thing which means you can't have absurd stealth particularly in view of the torps. Although you could argue the other way for an almost Perth range v spotter balance so I do understand.

Yup, the idea is players would have to choose how to play their ship. Use spotter plane and forego the good stealth? Or forget about the guns and just focus on concealment and torps. In that sense, it would be kinda like Radar Des Moine vs Spotter plane Des Moine.

6 hours ago, Paladinum said:

Also Oyodo is a very bad ship for T7. No torps, very few guns, no guns backward, and those guns are 10s reload (same 155 mm as Mogami's). At T7 every CL does 8s or less reload (Helena, Fiji and Shchors have ~7,5s) so I'd only put her at T5. Even T6 is kinda pushing it.

Perhaps Agano Kai can be placed at Tier 7 instead of Ooyodo. Ooyodo could be made Premium with some gimmick centred around her floatplanes, since she is an aviation cruiser like Tone.

Though to be frank, gunpower-wise none of the Tier 5-7s are going to be good without WG buffing them somehow. Which is why suggested making the line, or at least the T5-7 ships, more torpedo-focused. Because even Agano at Tier 6 is relatively underpowered with only 3x2 152mm guns. But the interesting feature for the Agano class is the centreline torpedo tubes, which is usually only found on DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
8 hours ago, humusz said:

Oyodo dont have torpedoes launcher mate, 

 

You want better T9-T10 look the bottom of those 

From top to bottom : Mogamin, Tone, Zao, Oyodo, Agano, Agano Kai, and Mutant Harugu-lol-anta  with 24 x 100 mm Daka guns 

IJNcruisers.jpg

Yeah I know...
If you read my post I actually say that and mention that it was added to keep consistency with the rest of the line...

The idea of the 'line' would need to be consistent, a shift to 100mm would be a bad idea IMO, not to mention it's already been 'done' by gunbotes.

 

7 hours ago, Paladinum said:

IMO quad turrets should be a French-only thing and 4x3 155 would do nicely if other aspects like reload, traverse and shell performance are good. 5x3 in a Mogami layout would be better because 4x3 cruisers are too many ingame already.

Also Oyodo is a very bad ship for T7. No torps, very few guns, no guns backward, and those guns are 10s reload (same 155 mm as Mogami's). At T7 every CL does 8s or less reload (Helena, Fiji and Shchors have ~7,5s) so I'd only put her at T5. Even T6 is kinda pushing it.

What I can say is pushing Mogami into the CL line as the new T9. Her HP rivals Ibuki, and 15 really good guns means she can deal with many problems (of course some buffs are needed, like torpedo angle). T8 can be a 4x3 155 mm design using Mogami's guns and the T10 could be a 5x3 with improved reload and torpedoes. Or just make a Zao with 5x3 155, change nothing else and call it a day.

Yeah that's why I was leaving it open.

IMO it'd be kinda cool to continue the Mogami's 'tanki-ish' for a CL idea, meaning some of the Zao-hull strengths could be used. The idea with the 4x4s was to do an IJN thing and 'strap more guns on'.

Still as 9-10 would be in actuality 'paper' or even 'theoretical' ships, there's a lot of room, design-wise and I would argue to keep the lines 'flavour', I don't see a shift away from number of guns being a good idea...

Out of all the ships in the line, the one that doesn't fit the most is Oyodo, except from the perspective that it shifts between the 152s to the 155s, using a different ship that also achieves this would be good. Personally I left her in as the start of the 'spotter' plane flavour.

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
4 hours ago, Grygus_Triss said:

I kinda like Mogami where it is, purely for the uniqueness of being able to be a light, or heavy cruiser.

Yeah I understand that, however Mogami (155) really doesn't fit with the rest of the line and could be effectively used as a base-line for high-tier IJN CLs... 'A bit tanky, good torps, good stealth, good DPM'.

 

1 hour ago, Thyaliad said:

Yup, the idea is players would have to choose how to play their ship. Use spotter plane and forego the good stealth? Or forget about the guns and just focus on concealment and torps. In that sense, it would be kinda like Radar Des Moine vs Spotter plane Des Moine.

Perhaps Agano Kai can be placed at Tier 7 instead of Ooyodo. Ooyodo could be made Premium with some gimmick centred around her floatplanes, since she is an aviation cruiser like Tone.

Though to be frank, gunpower-wise none of the Tier 5-7s are going to be good without WG buffing them somehow. Which is why suggested making the line, or at least the T5-7 ships, more torpedo-focused. Because even Agano at Tier 6 is relatively underpowered with only 3x2 152mm guns. But the interesting feature for the Agano class is the centreline torpedo tubes, which is usually only found on DDs.

Yeah, the trick is having it fill that gap perfectly and I liked the idea of early spotter planes to compensate for less range, could go hand in hand with proper buff to T8 IJN CA range to correct the range progression in that line.

I get the issue with Oyodo, 100%. Definitely open to changing her, as I said this is proposed and was primarily based off actual CL progression for IJN. The T7 would need to bridge the gap between Agano and Mogami, either in number of turrets or transition to 155s - definitely open to either.

The thing that annoyed me more about Oyodo than anything was lack of torps, that more than anything made her stand-out in the line.

The T5-7s were completely based off actual ships, so definitely would need to be adjusted for balance, easy enough to do. Just adjust the reload and 'balanced', which to be honest WG has definitely done in other areas of the game.

Yeah I like that feature of Agano, gives her a bit of uniqueness in the line. It also allows the addition of big torp launchers without going down the 4x# route (2x per side). You could even argue that would enable any ship placed in the T7 slot to mount 4x#... Again with the 3x2 turrets, could be balanced with refire rate, however when writing up the line I kept thinking 'this would be a better 5, need something to properly fill 6-7'.

The route in the end I took was ships I could quickly find information on (wiki) and pursue the actually-built route over pure IJN CL line consistency. Still I wanted to get something down to get people thinking and get the community commenting, as demonstrated above there are many folks with far more information and knowledge than I have.

 

1 hour ago, MatterCore said:

TX IJN  CL

Furutaka Hull B + Mogami 155 + WASD hax >> 6x3 155 + 4x4 610 :cap_win:

LOL, nah gime Zao hull with better turning radius+rudder shift!!! kek.

Although I do like the 6x3 idea - however would always argue for more torps ----4x5s!!!

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Member
4,472 posts
25,644 battles
Just now, S4pp3R said:

LOL, nah gime Zao hull with better turning radius+rudder shift!!! kek.

Although I do like the 6x3 idea - however would always argue for more torps ----4x5s!!!

Heavy cruiser heavy guns heavy armed

Light cruiser light guns light armed :Smile_child:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
1 minute ago, MatterCore said:

Heavy cruiser heavy guns heavy armed

Light cruiser light guns light armed :Smile_child:

Oh I know but how good would it be!

*Shrugs* I'll leave the finer details to WG/those in the know, however Furu (B) after Mogami(?) going backwards a bit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
1 hour ago, S4pp3R said:

Yeah I know...
If you read my post I actually say that and mention that it was added to keep consistency with the rest of the line...

yeah, and thats why, it should not be on the line

IJN light cruiser envisioned not as fleet escort as other navies do, but as Destroyer Squadron leader. you have DD leader on other navies like soviet alt DD branch for example. but not for Japan. they used Cruiser to do the Job.

They prioritise Heavy Cruiser to acomodate their "Outgun" opponent doctrine. Destroyer squadron act as skirmisher and fleet scout, thats why Many IJN light cruiser way smaller and undergunned than their opponent but carry more Floatplanes than their size should suggest. Mogamin is exception since its designed as Heavy Cruiser first, with small caliber gun to Trick the Treaty limitation. its not designed as Light cruiser first, but as Heavies 

If you draw line on what IJN come up, the Anti Air cruiser - DD leader was their end point. you could say their end point is closer to Atlanta or De Grasse (the 1946 one). or an alternate take would be akin of Kitakamis line, Torpedo spaming Light Torpedo Cruiser line as possible alternative ( start scream in horror you plebs - tremble before wall of skill cruiser line).  rather than Zao with 155mm guns.

and ofc Torpedo cruiser envision to carry Kaiten as their end game weapon - like cruiser oi do, you know that Homing torpedo that aimed by humans on board (thats wont made the cut though)

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
24 minutes ago, humusz said:

yeah, and thats why, it should not be on the line

IJN light cruiser envisioned not as fleet escort as other navies do, but as Destroyer Squadron leader. you have DD leader on other navies like soviet alt DD branch for example. but not for Japan. they used Cruiser to do the Job.

They prioritise Heavy Cruiser to acomodate their "Outgun" opponent doctrine. Destroyer squadron act as skirmisher and fleet scout, thats why Many IJN light cruiser way smaller and undergunned than their opponent but carry more Floatplanes than their size should suggest. Mogamin is exception since its designed as Heavy Cruiser first, with small caliber gun to Trick the Treaty limitation. its not designed as Light cruiser first, but as Heavies 

If you draw line on what IJN come up, the Anti Air cruiser - DD leader was their end point. you could say their end point is closer to Atlanta or De Grasse (the 1946 one). or an alternate take would be akin of Kitakamis line, Torpedo spaming Light Torpedo Cruiser line as possible alternative ( start scream in horror you plebs).  rather than Zao with 155mm guns

Yeah agreed, however some give and take for the sake of the game would of course be necessary.

The Mogami question is interesting and I know it was designed around that treaty, however keep the CL/A definition in mind. CA = 203mm+ CL is under that.

My idea for the CLs was to push the idea of Mogami (155) as a CL to a T10 theory, thus the half-joking Zao hull idea.

While they are different games, if you use WoT as a reference point a lot of theoretical ships will make it into the game, particularly in view of the fact that their business model relies on new content. As opposed to tanks, where a lot of prototypes were made, warships will need to rely on paper and theory.

Thanks for your feedback!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
1 hour ago, S4pp3R said:

Yeah agreed, however some give and take for the sake of the game would of course be necessary.

The Mogami question is interesting and I know it was designed around that treaty, however keep the CL/A definition in mind. CA = 203mm+ CL is under that.

My idea for the CLs was to push the idea of Mogami (155) as a CL to a T10 theory, thus the half-joking Zao hull idea.

While they are different games, if you use WoT as a reference point a lot of theoretical ships will make it into the game, particularly in view of the fact that their business model relies on new content. As opposed to tanks, where a lot of prototypes were made, warships will need to rely on paper and theory.

Thanks for your feedback!

The story basicly, when the treaty hit. IJN have hit their quota for heavy cruiser.

However they still have around 53.000 tons cap for light cruiser. However Japan at that time already solidified their Light cruiser doctrine (where cl act as squadron leader for dd. A squadron composed of 4 flottila each with 3-4 ships. They would do skirmish and force in recon while doing mass saturated torpedo attack at night. The light cruiser will acomodate a rear admiral amd his staff in IJN version of american CIC (combat information center).

So, rather than building 5.500 tons class to fullfill the quota and building more DD for their matured doctrine to work. They decide to build 2 class of 8.450 ton class. 

The new class would composed of 6 ships, heavly more armored and gunned. And can fullfill the pressing need for japan lack of heavy cruiser for fleet escort when needed.

The 2 class were mogami and tone. However when Japan pull out of treaty, mogami got upgunned and due to fault, and upgrades during construction tone would be finished as heavies. Naval historian reffer this as lost generation of ijn light cruiser. As tone and mogami do and act as what heavies supposed to do, a deviation of IJN cl doctrine which fitting as both of them were intended to be heavy in disguise

After the mogami and tone, IJN back into DD leader style of light cruiser, thats where conversion like kitakami were propossed.

However after Japan lost much of her naval aviation, there pressing need to have AA cruiser, some kuma and tenryu class were readied for reconstruction. Tenryu AA upgrade were canceled in favor of akizuki, while one of the kuma class (i forgot which one) were scheduled to be converted into AA cruiser, but she got sunk on the way back. 

Infact One of proposed agano kai ideas was using 10cm akizuki gun, the new IJN 10cm gun is proposed to be weapon of choice for light cruiser - or more correctly specialize AA light cruiser of the future. But afaik, the IJN brass decide that building more akizukis is more efficient(which was a wise decision imo)

 

In what if scenario, if midway doesnt result in pressing need for anti aircraft defence in fleet. A light torpedo cruiser would be most likely path of IJN line.

Thats mean start at Kitakami at T8, and more wall of skills ship on T9 and T10. Or dakka dakka line both can be amusing in the end 

 

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,011 posts
7,459 battles
15 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

I’d do up a proposed IJN CL line.

You should work for the WG development team. Maybe they can use you as a contractor?

The existing ships have been grown and “balanced” into a whole over time, reworking the tree would create a fair bit of work. This would be an opportunity to address the power creep that often the older ships suffer from. WG has split and reworked the USN cruiser tree, so I guess they could do the same for IJN cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Member
4,472 posts
25,644 battles
7 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Oh I know but how good would it be!

*Shrugs* I'll leave the finer details to WG/those in the know, however Furu (B) after Mogami(?) going backwards a bit!

pyramid config for 6 turrets same as Furutaka Hull B, better firing angle than Mogami 155

6x3 155 for TX like Worcester or Minotaur << superb firing angle << too OP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
11 hours ago, humusz said:

yeah, and thats why, it should not be on the line

IJN light cruiser envisioned not as fleet escort as other navies do, but as Destroyer Squadron leader. you have DD leader on other navies like soviet alt DD branch for example. but not for Japan. they used Cruiser to do the Job.

They prioritise Heavy Cruiser to acomodate their "Outgun" opponent doctrine. Destroyer squadron act as skirmisher and fleet scout, thats why Many IJN light cruiser way smaller and undergunned than their opponent but carry more Floatplanes than their size should suggest. Mogamin is exception since its designed as Heavy Cruiser first, with small caliber gun to Trick the Treaty limitation. its not designed as Light cruiser first, but as Heavies 

If you draw line on what IJN come up, the Anti Air cruiser - DD leader was their end point. you could say their end point is closer to Atlanta or De Grasse (the 1946 one). or an alternate take would be akin of Kitakamis line, Torpedo spaming Light Torpedo Cruiser line as possible alternative ( start scream in horror you plebs - tremble before wall of skill cruiser line).  rather than Zao with 155mm guns.

and ofc Torpedo cruiser envision to carry Kaiten as their end game weapon - like cruiser oi do, you know that Homing torpedo that aimed by humans on board (thats wont made the cut though)

 

10 hours ago, humusz said:

The story basicly, when the treaty hit. IJN have hit their quota for heavy cruiser.

However they still have around 53.000 tons cap for light cruiser. However Japan at that time already solidified their Light cruiser doctrine (where cl act as squadron leader for dd. A squadron composed of 4 flottila each with 3-4 ships. They would do skirmish and force in recon while doing mass saturated torpedo attack at night. The light cruiser will acomodate a rear admiral amd his staff in IJN version of american CIC (combat information center).

So, rather than building 5.500 tons class to fullfill the quota and building more DD for their matured doctrine to work. They decide to build 2 class of 8.450 ton class. 

The new class would composed of 6 ships, heavly more armored and gunned. And can fullfill the pressing need for japan lack of heavy cruiser for fleet escort when needed.

The 2 class were mogami and tone. However when Japan pull out of treaty, mogami got upgunned and due to fault, and upgrades during construction tone would be finished as heavies. Naval historian reffer this as lost generation of ijn light cruiser. As tone and mogami do and act as what heavies supposed to do, a deviation of IJN cl doctrine which fitting as both of them were intended to be heavy in disguise

After the mogami and tone, IJN back into DD leader style of light cruiser, thats where conversion like kitakami were propossed.

However after Japan lost much of her naval aviation, there pressing need to have AA cruiser, some kuma and tenryu class were readied for reconstruction. Tenryu AA upgrade were canceled in favor of akizuki, while one of the kuma class (i forgot which one) were scheduled to be converted into AA cruiser, but she got sunk on the way back. 

Infact One of proposed agano kai ideas was using 10cm akizuki gun, the new IJN 10cm gun is proposed to be weapon of choice for light cruiser - or more correctly specialize AA light cruiser of the future. But afaik, the IJN brass decide that building more akizukis is more efficient(which was a wise decision imo)

 

In what if scenario, if midway doesnt result in pressing need for anti aircraft defence in fleet. A light torpedo cruiser would be most likely path of IJN line.

Thats mean start at Kitakami at T8, and more wall of skills ship on T9 and T10. Or dakka dakka line both can be amusing in the end 

 

 

Yes I understand that, however taking a historical fact-based choice is NOT what WG does. They make arcade games with a historical bent.

And I honestly don't think that going down the 100mm route would be engaging gameplay or game mechanics give we already have gunbotes.

Thus I was suggesting adding a 155 CL element so you essentially have 3 distinct 'gunnery' lines for non-BB ships for IJN

  • 100mm gunnery DDs
  • 155mm CL gunnery
  • 203mm CA gunnery

I think it would be fun to have and fulfill it's own niche. There are plenty of paper designs to work off and Mogami (155) always felt out of place in game-play. My idea would address that.

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,513 battles
8 hours ago, PeterMoe1963 said:

You should work for the WG development team. Maybe they can use you as a contractor?

The existing ships have been grown and “balanced” into a whole over time, reworking the tree would create a fair bit of work. This would be an opportunity to address the power creep that often the older ships suffer from. WG has split and reworked the USN cruiser tree, so I guess they could do the same for IJN cruisers.

Thankyou, I would love to do this but I doubt they are hiring.
I like doing theorycrafting in a game sense with basis in history and then pushing the theory beyond what was actually done. (WG do this A LOT and mostly I like it).

I'm currently working on CW CL and DD lines, might even do up some proposed premiums. By far the hardest theorising I've done, so many nations to try and work into a 'theme' or line. At T6 do you do the RAN modified Leanders (a la Perth) or do you use HMNZ Leander?
Do you have the Tribal-class DD at T7 (a la Haida) or do you use one of the many DD classes around that time, like Battle-class or something.

Do you make HMAS Canberra/Australia T6, 7 or 8 premiums, there's arguments for all 3...

It's been fun to do so far, trying to make decisions that use some of the RN CL elements and ship classes but making sure it's different enough and logical enough. By far the hardest is replacing Neptune at T9 and Minotaur at T10 but I'm working on it.

NB: Seriously where does Dido-class fit, honest to god - it has 133s, as a CL, but was late war... ...?

 

4 hours ago, MatterCore said:

pyramid config for 6 turrets same as Furutaka Hull B, better firing angle than Mogami 155

6x3 155 for TX like Worcester or Minotaur << superb firing angle << too OP

Hahahaha, yeah that'd be crazy and I understand your point, definitely good food for thought for WG!

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×