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

Commonwealth CL line, DD line intro [my proposed]

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles

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.

Edited by S4pp3R
Minor layout errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,658 posts
10,425 battles
56 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

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.

I wouldnt mind Common wealth ship if its not plain copy pasta. I would give CW CL line a creeping smoke and playstyle that favour actively dodging shots using your maneuverability and long action time smoke instead of static island waifus gameplay.

Well what you suggest might be nice , if you remove any spotting assist consumables to balance out its strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
19 minutes ago, legionary2099 said:

I wouldnt mind Common wealth ship if its not plain copy pasta. I would give CW CL line a creeping smoke and playstyle that favour actively dodging shots using your maneuverability and long action time smoke instead of static island waifus gameplay.

Well what you suggest might be nice , if you remove any spotting assist consumables to balance out its strength.

Literally hydro is it... The 'spotting' aircraft is Perth's thing and she doesn't have a heal.

The Radar at high tiers is in smoke slot, a la RN CLs, PA DDs

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
2 minutes ago, Max_Battle said:

Aussie ships to punch on in.

Brawl me mate!

OZZIE OZZIE OZZIE!

You like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,840 battles

its line that seems melted faster in radar

14km range in TX, and same gun with flatter arc (diffrrent ammo or something lol?) mean it cant shoot over island

its seem horrid experience to play - like entire line of huang he

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
80 posts
4,786 battles

Tier 5: Danae-class

Danae is a T4 in the RN CL line, I doubt WG would even consider a Danae at T5, unless premium.

Tier 7: Bellona

This class cannot be the same tier as Atlanta, less guns and worse guns. Even with 4s reload on those guns, this ship still has less DPM and HP than Atlanta/Flint. Dido-class (5 turrets) can be T6 and Bellona-subclass (4 turrets) should be comfortable at T5. Leander is overall a better design than Dido.

Tier 8: Crown Colony-class

3x3 so this is Ceylon-subclass. Same hull as Fiji, but 1 less turret (which is worse than Fiji already). Unless this has Main Battery Reload Booster (MBRB), I don't see this as T8.

Tier 9: Swiftsure-class

Again, not a good ship at T9. Neptune has 40-50% more displacement than this ship, and 1 more triple turret. This class has the HP of a Crown Colony-class, which is less HP than Edinburgh. This is a T7 design.

 

The late tier ships (except the T10) aren't heavy designs -> they will have little HP to survive anything. Also, these are all CLs so they do not have protection. RN CLs in the game get citadelled with DD APs. Today I citadelled a Neptune several times with Edinburgh's short-fused AP. That's how thin their armor is. 14km is also DD kind of gun range. If what you have in mind was something of DDs in the guise of cruisers, I'm sorry, because citadels exist on all cruisers in this game. You don't even have to make a mistake to be severely damaged or destroyed. BBs with 406 mm and larger guns may citadel these ships bow-on. Sure thay can have Perth creeping smoke and normal HE/AP but these ships just can't survive anything too long. The only way I can see these ships work is them not having citadels (referring to the T7, 8, and 9), but that's just being unrealistically wishful.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
7 hours ago, humusz said:

its line that seems melted faster in radar

14km range in TX, and same gun with flatter arc (diffrrent ammo or something lol?) mean it cant shoot over island

its seem horrid experience to play - like entire line of huang he

The idea isn't to sit in smoke and fire over islands in a defensive way but to support DDs and make ambush moves.

I think people are getting a bit lost in 'realism'. WG are not a sim company, they are an arcade company; they use base-level stuff we know about ships/tanks and then they balance them for the game.

Simple, make CW CL far tankier than the RAN CLs, which isn't hard at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
5 hours ago, Paladinum said:

Tier 5: Danae-class

Danae is a T4 in the RN CL line, I doubt WG would even consider a Danae at T5, unless premium.

Tier 7: Bellona

This class cannot be the same tier as Atlanta, less guns and worse guns. Even with 4s reload on those guns, this ship still has less DPM and HP than Atlanta/Flint. Dido-class (5 turrets) can be T6 and Bellona-subclass (4 turrets) should be comfortable at T5. Leander is overall a better design than Dido.

Tier 8: Crown Colony-class

3x3 so this is Ceylon-subclass. Same hull as Fiji, but 1 less turret (which is worse than Fiji already). Unless this has Main Battery Reload Booster (MBRB), I don't see this as T8.

Tier 9: Swiftsure-class

Again, not a good ship at T9. Neptune has 40-50% more displacement than this ship, and 1 more triple turret. This class has the HP of a Crown Colony-class, which is less HP than Edinburgh. This is a T7 design.

 

The late tier ships (except the T10) aren't heavy designs -> they will have little HP to survive anything. Also, these are all CLs so they do not have protection. RN CLs in the game get citadelled with DD APs. Today I citadelled a Neptune several times with Edinburgh's short-fused AP. That's how thin their armor is. 14km is also DD kind of gun range. If what you have in mind was something of DDs in the guise of cruisers, I'm sorry, because citadels exist on all cruisers in this game. You don't even have to make a mistake to be severely damaged or destroyed. BBs with 406 mm and larger guns may citadel these ships bow-on. Sure thay can have Perth creeping smoke and normal HE/AP but these ships just can't survive anything too long. The only way I can see these ships work is them not having citadels (referring to the T7, 8, and 9), but that's just being unrealistically wishful.

Ok let me just stop you there.

Firstly, refire rates in warships are all over the place, so balancing your RoF for tier is remarkably easy and at best loosely based on fact. Changing the stats of a ship that is a similar class, not a big deal.

Secondly, Armour and HP have little to no basis in fact when you are talking about Warships. I'll use the Fiji as an example.
In game:

  • Belt: 114mm
  • Deck 19-38mm
  • Turrets: 25-51mm

In real time:

  • Belt: 83mm
  • Deck: 51mm
  • Turrets: 51mm

So yeah, I fully expect the CW CL line to have some armour given and citadel lowered to give some balance to the ships. Balancing in some way to make them a bit more tanky than RN CLs, not overly difficult without the need to remove their citadels.

HP/Armour have been modeled in the game based off what the ships had and then heavily modified to suit the tier and the line, just look at BBs in general. I don't think it'd be hard for them to do a bit of this for CW. If you go and play WoT and check out tech-tree stats for most of the tanks and the rounds, you'll see how loosely WG care about 'historical accuracy' and that's FINE, it's an arcade game, not a sim.

As far as the Bellona, I can understand your argument however I feel she fits nicely in the line at T7.

Danae can easily be done with some of the armour/cita adjustments I proposed early in the post.

Crown Colony can definitely be balanced at that tier. Again taking into account things like reload and tankiness, it isn't hard to do.

Keep in mind CW would have access to HE, and that is a big deal in comparison to RN. Also keep in mind that I suggested flatter trajectory shells, you could even do velocity adjustments if you wanted to, further delineating the line from RN. Particularly in high tiers, I think you'll find a lot of the balance will be done already simply by having the ability to use HE, a bit of reload and done.

I really do appreciate your insight, I can't stress that enough but I do think you've approached it a little too much from a historical bent and less from a 'thanks easy enough to design/balance for'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
21 posts
3,349 battles

Great post Sapper!

The Royal Australian Navy was the fourth largest Navy in the World during WW2 and we are represented by two premium ships in-game.  A tech tree reflecting the contributions of the Commonwealth nations to victory in the Pacific and Europe is LONG OVERDUE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
486 posts
7,921 battles

Well if you want something different try the Achillies at T6 after her modification and upgrade due to battle damage. 

"While operating off Guadalcanal Island with US Navy Task Force 67 on 5 January 1943, she was attacked by four Japanese aircraft. A bomb blew the top off X turret, killing 13 sailors. Between April 1943 and May 1944 Achilles was docked in Portsmouth, England for repairs and modernisation. Her single 4-inch AA guns were replaced by the dual-purpose QF 4 inch Mk XVI naval gun in four twin mountings, modern radar was fitted, and the damaged X turret was replaced by four QF 2 pom poms in a quadruple-mount"

would be an AA type cruiser different from the British Light CL (the Leander in game already, and also New Zealand crewed ship)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
6 minutes ago, Kapitan_Zur_See_Hoffmann said:

Well if you want something different try the Achillies at T6 after her modification and upgrade due to battle damage. 

"While operating off Guadalcanal Island with US Navy Task Force 67 on 5 January 1943, she was attacked by four Japanese aircraft. A bomb blew the top off X turret, killing 13 sailors. Between April 1943 and May 1944 Achilles was docked in Portsmouth, England for repairs and modernisation. Her single 4-inch AA guns were replaced by the dual-purpose QF 4 inch Mk XVI naval gun in four twin mountings, modern radar was fitted, and the damaged X turret was replaced by four QF 2 pom poms in a quadruple-mount"

would be an AA type cruiser different from the British Light CL (the Leander in game already, and also New Zealand crewed ship)

I kinda see Achilles as a prem release...

The reason I went with the modified Leander class is that there were 3 of them and there's already the Perth to model off...

So idea being, Perth stays unique due to spotter/smoke but the line-version has heal...

You are then changing the role, Perth has a longer grasp but no heal.

Still it's an interesting idea and would lead into Bellona far better...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Alpha Tester
943 posts
5,636 battles
2 hours ago, Anti_FIash said:

Great post Sapper!

The Royal Australian Navy was the fourth largest Navy in the World during WW2 and we are represented by two premium ships in-game.  A tech tree reflecting the contributions of the Commonwealth nations to victory in the Pacific and Europe is LONG OVERDUE.

4ht largest navy? Behind US, UK, IJN.

 So bigger then French, Italian, Russia, Germany, Brazil (2x BB's), Argentina (2xBB's), even Chile (2xBB's), Sweden and Spain could be considered larger. Even Turkey was still running a battlecruiser :cap_wander:

Edited by BigWaveSurfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Alpha Tester
943 posts
5,636 battles

Sorry, may have been a bit harsh above. But if I had to choose between more clones or interesting (real) ships from around the world, I'll vote for the none-clone and none-paper ships every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
159 posts
5,676 battles
2 hours ago, Kapitan_Zur_See_Hoffmann said:

Well if you want something different try the Achillies at T6 after her modification and upgrade due to battle damage. 

"While operating off Guadalcanal Island with US Navy Task Force 67 on 5 January 1943, she was attacked by four Japanese aircraft. A bomb blew the top off X turret, killing 13 sailors. Between April 1943 and May 1944 Achilles was docked in Portsmouth, England for repairs and modernisation. Her single 4-inch AA guns were replaced by the dual-purpose QF 4 inch Mk XVI naval gun in four twin mountings, modern radar was fitted, and the damaged X turret was replaced by four QF 2 pom poms in a quadruple-mount"

would be an AA type cruiser different from the British Light CL (the Leander in game already, and also New Zealand crewed ship)

I actually mentioned this set up as a premium a few years back, you can still find it the the developers suggestions section of the forum in case you want to upvote it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
80 posts
4,786 battles

I guess we have different approaches to ship line speculation then.

I don't put a ship in a tier before considering all historical stats and specs, and all the ships of the same type and tier in the game. If a ship can't be moved to a different tier then and only then I consider what WarGaming can do to make that ship comfortable being in that tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
2 hours ago, BigWaveSurfer said:

4ht largest navy? Behind US, UK, IJN.

 So bigger then French, Italian, Russia, Germany, Brazil (2x BB's), Argentina (2xBB's), even Chile (2xBB's), Sweden and Spain could be considered larger. Even Turkey was still running a battlecruiser :cap_wander:

Yeah

RCN and RAN were massive in terms of ship numbers by the end of the war.

They may not have had BBs, but as the war demonstrated they were now becoming inefficient to build.

It's also how you define 'biggest navy', I'm not sure the metrics used but RCN and RAN independently were considered 3/4 or 4/5... Although were often heaped together as RN...

French I don't know much about, but Germany was wiped, IJN was weak, Italy had already started handing over ships to people and don't make me laugh with your Soviet mention. For the others, by and large; old. Most ships being leftovers from WW1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CLAY]
Alpha Tester
943 posts
5,636 battles

Washington naval treat 1922;  5/5/3/1.75/1.75 US/UK/IJN/Fr./Ity. just to give you an idea of how "weak" IJN was :Smile_facepalm: Look it up if you do not understand it.

It will give you an idea of the major players leading up to WWII.

Oh and before you laugh too much lookup the Russians. Even by wars end they still had 3x BB's and 4x CA's (remember who you are comparing it to)

The WoWS runs 1905 to 1955

 

1 hour ago, S4pp3R said:

Yeah

RCN and RAN were massive in terms of ship numbers by the end of the war.

They may not have had BBs, but as the war demonstrated they were now becoming inefficient to build.

It's also how you define 'biggest navy', I'm not sure the metrics used but RCN and RAN independently were considered 3/4 or 4/5... Although were often heaped together as RN...

French I don't know much about, but Germany was wiped, IJN was weak, Italy had already started handing over ships to people and don't make me laugh with your Soviet mention. For the others, by and large; old. Most ships being leftovers from WW1.

 

Edited by BigWaveSurfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,012 posts
4,497 battles
7 minutes ago, MatterCore said:

where are Royal Navy Heavy Cruisers ? :Smile_child:

I've contented myself to propose lines that may not be top of the priority list, I got some requests for RM lines and RN CAs, I'll be honest they are the sort of lines I would expect to already be in development.

Dunno if I'll finish CW DDs till Monday though.

I think I've done alright though; IJN CLs and CW CLs in one week...

Tbh I expected more theory crafting from this one than IJN, I was sadly surprised it's not the case...

Edited by S4pp3R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,011 posts
7,422 battles
21 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

@PeterMoe1963 - tagging you because I know you'll love having a look at this!

Love to have a look, but not much of a clue, so I cannot make intelligent comments.

Looks like you put a lot of work into this, I really think that WG should get you involved as a contractor. Maybe pay you in doubloons, ahaha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×