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

[REVISED] British Heavy cruiser line proposal

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles

A bit of a disclaimer: the estimated HP, based on the ships’ standard/full displacement, for the ships aren’t 100% accurate (no longer seems to be accurate). 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.

 

My other ship line proposals:

 

All new ships

Tier IV: Hawkins-class

Tier V: York-class

VI: London-subclass (County-class)

Norfolk-subclass (County-class)

VII: Kent-subclass (County-class)

Surrey-class

VIII, IX and X: details will be down below

 

The ships:

HAWKINS-CLASS

TIER 4

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 28.000 (Hull A), 32.600 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 7x1 191 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x2 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 8x1 76 mm guns

Speed: 31 knots

 

 

YORK-CLASS

TIER 5

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 25.200 (Hull A), 29.100 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 3x2 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x1 102 mm DP guns

Speed: 32 knots

 

 

LONDON-SUBCLASS (COUNTY-CLASS)

TIER 6

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 28.200 (Hull A), 34.700 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 4x2 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x1 102 mm DP guns

Speed: 31,5 knots

 

 

NORFOLK-CLASS (COUNTY-CLASS)

TIER 6

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 29.200 (Hull A), 35.600 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 4x2 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x2 102 mm DP guns

Speed: 31,5 knots

 

 

SURREY-CLASS

TIER 7

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 28.300 (Hull A), 35.800 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 4x2 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x1 102 mm DP guns

Speed: 30 knots

 

 

KENT-CLASS (COUNTY-CLASS)

TIER 7

Spoiler

 

Estimated HP: 29.200 (Hull A), 36.200 (Hull B)

Primary armament: 4x2 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x1 102 mm DP guns

Speed: 31,5 knots

 

 

CA SKETCH 1/1940 – 12,5k TON

TIER 8

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Sussex

Estimated HP: 33.200 (Hull A)

Primary armament: 3x3 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: unknown, possibly 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 4x2 102 mm DP guns

Protection: 127 mm belt, 63/76 mm deck

Speed: 32,5 knots

 

 

CA SKETCH 1/1940 – 15,5k TON

TIER 9

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Lancaster

Estimated HP: 38.800 (Hull A)

Primary armament: 3x3 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: unknown, possibly 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 6x2 102 mm DP guns

Protection: 152 mm belt, 63/76 mm deck

Speed: 33 knots

 

 

CA DESIGN C 1/1941

TIER 9

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Lancaster

Estimated HP: 37.800 (Hull A)

Primary armament: 3x3 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: unknown, possibly 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: unknown, probably 6x2 102 mm DP guns

Protection: 114 mm (belt), 51-102 mm (deck)

Speed: 31,5 knots

 

 

CA DESIGN iii 3/1941

TIER 9

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Lancaster

Estimated HP: 40.000 (Hull A)

Primary armament: 3x3 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 6x2 114 mm DP guns

Protection: 114 mm (belt), 51-102 mm (deck)

Speed: 32 knots

 

 

CA SKETCH 2/1940, 8-INCH

TIER 10

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Devonshire

Estimated HP: 50.000

Primary armament: 4x3 203 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 6x2 114 mm DP guns

Protection: 179 mm (belt), 102 mm (deck)

Speed: 33,5 knots

 

 

CA SKETCH 2/1940, 9,2-INCH

TIER 10

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Devonshire

Estimated HP: 50.000

Primary armament: 3x3 234 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 6x2 114 mm DP guns

Protection: 179 mm (belt), 102 mm (deck)

Speed: 33,5 knots

 

 

CA SKETCH 9/1939, 9,2-INCH

TIER 11

Spoiler

 

Proposed name: Thing that should not be added

Estimated HP: displacement unknown

Primary armament: 4x3 234 mm guns

Torpedoes: 2x3 533 mm torpedo tubes

Secondary armament: 6x2 114 mm DP guns

Protection: 179 mm (belt), 102 mm (deck)

Speed: 33 knots

 

 

I removed the Premiums because they are both out of place and they are so hard to tier.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
889 posts
3,805 battles

At the request of the original poster, I would like to express some of my personal thoughts on the proposed British Heavy Cruiser branch at the cost of digging this thread up.

Hawkins-class at Tier 5 may be a bit underpowered, similiar to the case of Emerald: World War-I era guns and a both outdated and inefficient layout. A friend of mine have once claimed that there existed interim studies of British heavy cruisers of an AB-X layout of twin 190-mm turrents based on a hull developed from Hawkins-class (seems somewhat like a British Aoba, both in configuration and in development history), maybe it would work better here. And instead demote Hawkins to Tier 4 where she would work better there.

According to the arrangement of French, U.S. and Italian heavy cruisers, I think that the actually-built County-class should be placed at Tier 6 as typical representives of the earlier, 1920s generation of Treaty cruisers alongside with Pensacola and Trento. Which specific ship to choose remains a problem, and we may observe significant upgrades of armor belt thickness when mounting the B-hull as many earlier County-class cruisers have upgraded their armor protection during their service. On the other hand, it would be very easy for Wargaming to choose and produce a county-class premium not only for the British but for the Commonwealth as well. A significantly upgraded County-class may work in Tier 7 through gimmicks and soft-stats tweaks though.

As some of the best treaty cruisers of the 1930s like Algerie, New Orleans and Zara now occupied Tier 7, at least I think Tier 7 of British CA should be the canceled Surrey-class heavy cruisers with significantly improved, though still of fairly questionable effectiveness in game, armor protection with an 140-mm belt and 70-mm deck.

My friend also agreed that Wartime British heavy cruiser studies from 1940~1941 would work as candidates of Tier 8~9 British CAs, as the case of French cruisers, choose a smaller variant for Tier 8 and a stronger one for Tier 9; another possible choice is a rumored late-1930s study of a triple-turrent armed CA under Treaty restrictions prepared for a partial breakdown of the treaty system before the war broke out.

Personally speaking, I would warmly welcome a 234-mm gun armed Quasi-cruiser killer as the top tier British CA. Unfortunately, though there once existed an article about British cruiser-killer studies I know in Tieba community of China, Baidu has deleted it for effectively no reason. What a shame. Though it seems that a triple-turrent armed variant would be powerful enough and the quad-turrent armed variant would be somewhat overkill.

Edited by Project45_Opytny
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
889 posts
3,805 battles

Also, that friend of mine has proposed something interesting: British "Heavy" cruiser branch can start in even Tier 2 with armored cruisers! He proposed that Warrior-class armored cruiser can be used to fill in the blank in the lower tiers, though he has not decided what to use to fill the other blank yet: early studies of Hawkins-class or another suitable armored cruiser.

I have made a second thought about Hawkins-class and find that she may be a little overpowered for Tier 4 (she would become the first Tier 4 "heavy" cruiser in the game), maybe we could describe her situation as being a Tier 4.5 design, somewhat similiar to the stock-hull Furutaka. However I think it is still possible to balance her with some soft-stats nerfs like gun handling, rudder shift time and concealment (existing cases include Duguay-Trouin and Pensacola). However, if Wargaming decides to give British CAs with some powerful gimmicks like smoke, all existing plans can uptier a bit I believe.

The case of Dido-class is a bit tricky: she is a DP-guns armed AA-cruiser in deed, however currently I am not sure about how effective the British 133-mm DP guns are. According to the in-game stats they are slightly better than the 127/25 DP guns used on American treaty cruisers and modernized Standard Battleships, however in turn they are significantly less powerful in terms of anti-aircraft effectiveness than the legendary 127/38 DP guns. And if we place her at Tier 6, she would still occasionally face Tier 8 CVs, while place her at Tier 5, this not only would deprive her right of participating in many current Scenario Operations, but she may massacre the air groups of the already weak Tier 4 CVs and break the balance there. This depends on how powerful are the QF 5.25-inch guns exactly.

Also I agree your choice of HMS Sirius, though mainly because of her personified character in another series of anime I have known about earlier instead :)

Also...err...anyone interested in HMS Delhi? After her extensive refit in the US in 1941, this Danae-class light cruiser was re-armed with 5 127/38 DP guns and the related fire-control system directly taken from a USN Fletcher-class destroyer. However, she had all her previous armaments, including the torpedo tubes which would make a huge difference in-game, removed completely, and she is still a Danae-class CL with a long and exposed citadel with an exposed 25-mm (historical value) roof. Also, almost paradoxically, her mid-range AA defence would be weaker than the Tech-tree Danae thanks to the latter's ahistorical octuple 40-mm Pom-Pom mounts amidships.

Edited by Project45_Opytny
Something more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles

@Project45_Opytny to be honest, I haven't visited this line in a while (a very long while) and it is bound for issues.

Will gather more sh*ts to adjust it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[JIMMY]
Member
3 posts
6,618 battles

Not that it would happen, but, be nice to see they bring 2x commonwealth (Australian) cruisers on the board..

HMAS Canberra ( county class) 

HMAS Sydney (1911 Chatham claas)

Both these ships hold a place in naval history

Just a simple wish 

cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[151ST]
Member
1,438 posts
7,599 battles

Interesting read! Would be nice at some point...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
2 hours ago, bagster1959 said:

Not that it would happen, but, be nice to see they bring 2x commonwealth (Australian) cruisers on the board..

HMAS Canberra ( county class) 

HMAS Sydney (1911 Chatham claas)

Both these ships hold a place in naval history

Just a simple wish 

cheers

That would be for the Commonwealth nation, not the Royal Navy... 

 

1 hour ago, S4pp3R said:

Interesting read! Would be nice at some point...

Don't read just yet, I need to change things up lol

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
452
[FORCE]
Member
1,081 posts
10,066 battles

I'm not sure the Dido-class would fit at T5 because the DP guns might overkill the T4 planes. I'd say place her at T6 as a CL, and name her Sirius.

Spoiler

WG could make her a part of another collab event with Azur Lane because Sirius is actually more popular than some characters whom WG introduced during the first collab.

Sirius.thumb.png.4750a14ea05b4642f1b385f71f0cda74.png

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,962
[REPOI]
Member
5,571 posts
23,191 battles

anyone else automatically add a L to dido or is my mind just in the gutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
1 hour ago, drakon233 said:

anyone else automatically add a L to dido or is my mind just in the gutter

Yes. Perv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
889 posts
3,805 battles

A simple personal experiment...

Tier 4 (?) British Premium CL Delhi

Entered service: 1919

A Danae-class light cruiser built at the end of World War I. In 1941, she underwent an extensive modernization refit, which replaced her outdated armaments with U.S. made dual-purpose artillery, significantly enhanced her AA capablities.

Hit points: 21000~23000 (estimated; according to Navypedia her full displacement rise to 6500t after modernization.)

Primary armament: 5 single 127-mm/38 Mk30 dual-purpose guns, in an AB-Q-XY centerline layout. However she had no torpedoes.

Anti-Aircraft suite: 5 single 127-mm/38 Mk30, 2 quad 40-mm QF Pom-Pom, 4 twin and 6 single 20-mm Oerlikons, as her status in 1945.

76-mm belt, 25-mm exposed citadel deck and full waterline-length armored belt scheme typical of a World War-I era cruiser. 29 knots speed and handling like a tech-tree Danae.

Damage Control Party, Repair Party and Hydroacoustic Search (as her AA firepower is potent enough for lower tiers).

What should the other features be?

Edited by Project45_Opytny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[151ST]
Member
1,438 posts
7,599 battles
16 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

A simple personal experiment...

Tier 4 (?) British Premium CL Delhi

Entered service: 1919

A Danae-class light cruiser built at the end of World War I. In 1941, she underwent an extensive modernization refit, which replaced her outdated armaments with U.S. made dual-purpose artillery, significantly enhanced her AA capablities.

Hit points: 21000~23000 (estimated; according to Navypedia her full displacement rise to 6500t after modernization.)

Primary armament: 5 single 127-mm/38 Mk30 dual-purpose guns, in an AB-Q-XY centerline layout. However she had no torpedoes.

Anti-Aircraft suite: 5 single 127-mm/38 Mk30, 2 quad 40-mm QF Pom-Pom, 4 twin and 6 single 20-mm Oerlikons, as her status in 1945.

76-mm belt, 25-mm exposed citadel deck and full waterline-length armored belt scheme typical of a World War-I era cruiser. 29 knots speed and handling like a tech-tree Danae.

Damage Control Party, Repair Party and... Defensive AA Fire?

What should the other features be?

No not DFAA... That would be a nightmare... Planes at that tier shred so easily, hydro I'd be ok with...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[151ST]
Member
1,438 posts
7,599 battles
3 hours ago, Paladinum said:

That would be for the Commonwealth nation, not the Royal Navy... 

 

Don't read just yet, I need to change things up lol

Too late mate!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[151ST]
Alpha Tester
35 posts
5,112 battles

Paladinum

Rather than a repeat of County, Modified County, Slightly Modified County etc, you could pick on some of the Drawings undertaken in the 1930's to help fill the gaps. Say something along the lines of:

T4 Hawkins

T5 - York

T6 - County Class (which ever of the sub types they want to use), would need to be later refits to allow for a half decent AA.

T7 - Feb 1938 Heavy Cruiser (Design A 1938). 9 x 8 inch, with 6 twin 4.5 secondaries, 12 Torp tubes, 6 Mulitple Pom Poms. Protection was to be against its own guns at 90 degree's, and 500Lb SAP dropped from 10,000ft. Good torp protection (against a 750lb charge). Spd 33kts - (I think the Type-A of 1929 would be too weak to put in at Tier 7, same goes for the original HMS Surrey design.........)

T8 - 1939 Design A would work nicely here - protection against its own guns as before, good protection against SAP/AP bombs

T9 - Design A 1940 design - protection as above

T10 - 8 inch 3 x 3 turrets from either the 1941 or slightly later designs (Design A through D - iirc Design B was 8 inch, A 9.2 inch.......so go with design B).

Super Cruiser, either 9.2 inch or 10 inch guns, either 9 for the smaller size, or 6 for the larger size, design had some pretty good protection as well, around the 22,000ton mark. All ships from T7 onward good AA, very good AA medium and close (4 Multiple Pom Poms, and 2 single mounts for the T7, plus 4.5 HA twin secondaries - adds more from there on the designs)

As a premium CL for later for giggles the K25B design with 4 Turrets up forward and 3 after all with twin 5.25 guns..........

H

Edited by H_87A_2CU
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
3 minutes ago, H_87A_2CU said:

Rather than a repeat of County, Modified County, Slightly Modified County etc,

Um, actually, it's just a County in one tier, and Modified County in another tier... :Smile_hiding:

It's not like Fiji and Edinburgh have so many differences :Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
889 posts
3,805 battles

And now, what specific ship in the large family of the County-class cruisers do you think should represent the class as a whole in-game? And which one should represent the Counties in Australian service as a Commonwealth premium?

About the problem of the different Tier 7 proposals, a possible solution I think is to make premium ships using the parallel proposals. If we use Surrey as the Tier 7, Design A 1938 may work as a premium, and verse visa, like the case of Atago and Genova.

According to Navypedia, the 7.5-inch gun mounts of Hawkins-class proved rather clumsy in service. Poor traverse rate and slow rate-of-fire are historical.

Also I remember there are British heavy cruiser preliminary studies with 5 turrents. Could also be an interesting premium perhaps.

I clearly remember that I have seen the sketches of preliminary designs of 1929 heavy cruisers, aka Surrey. However I cannot find them now... maybe in some corner of the NA or EU forum, or even the Russian language Wargaming Wiki.

Edited by Project45_Opytny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
31 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

And now, what specific ship in the large family of the County-class cruisers do you think should represent the class as a whole in-game? And which one should represent the Counties in Australian service as a Commonwealth premium?

Not my issue to be frank. I only put the designs together, specific ships (for premiums) and names (for unnamed paper ships) are still WG's responsibilities. It's not like I only have one design per tier. Sometimes I put as many as 3 in a tier.

I do this for fun. A bit of a thinking exercise. Half-serious suggestions. 

And of course my lines can be so far off WG's version that I may want to cry on the inside. I was off with the Italian cruiser line by ONE whole tier.

 

For T8 - 10, I think a progression of 3x3 203 -> 4x3 203 -> 3x3 234 may be the most logical. Somewhat similar to US CA line, where the T10 compensates for the fewer guns with either alpha or RoF.

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[151ST]
Member
1,438 posts
7,599 battles
7 hours ago, Paladinum said:

Um, actually, it's just a County in one tier, and Modified County in another tier... :Smile_hiding:

It's not like Fiji and Edinburgh have so many differences :Smile_hiding:

Haha, I was waiting for @H_87A_2CU to chime in, we've been discussing RN CAs off and on for the last few weeks...

It depends which route they go to be honest... I mean the differences of Myoko-Ibuki are fairly minimal not to mention Fiji-Edin...

Personally I agree with less Country-class separation, it'd be more interesting.

Also if SN can spam out paper ships for lines and RN has the paper... WG, just go nuts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
3 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Also if SN can spam out paper ships for lines and RN has the paper... WG, just go nuts...

What is SN?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles
28 minutes ago, Otago_F111 said:

Soviet Navy, my guess

Oooooooooh

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,752
Member
3,698 posts
7,465 battles

Soviet Navy is abbreviated as VMF by the way. They do not use ship nane prefix (like USS or HMS).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
458
[SALT]
Member
1,711 posts
9,983 battles
19 hours ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Also I remember there are British heavy cruiser preliminary studies with 5 turrents. Could also be an interesting premium perhaps.

The most Unique one was, Heavy Cruiser design using Nelson style arrangment - the Thurston Heavy Cruiser

9cbec7a147.png

The paper listed those as "Light Cruiser" but this thing was carry 9 - 203mm gun. and this was 1929 Design by Vickers, which make it was "Post Washington Treaty" design which reclasify 203mm as Heavy Cruiser. either they dont get the memo or it was intended ruse

Brits have Nelson as Premium, there should be Nelson-ish Cruiser as premium too, now we just need DD and CV with Nelson-ish arrangement to come as full circle :Smile_trollface:

Edited by humusz
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[151ST]
Member
1,438 posts
7,599 battles
1 hour ago, Paladinum said:

Soviet Navy is abbreviated as VMF by the way. They do not use ship nane prefix (like USS or HMS).

I know, I prefer SN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×