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

Super Battleship Dreadnoughts and their Origins

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles

As i reviewed it Before, Lets start with Kansas

Kansas is Much well known as a South Dakota, in a WW2 pre build also a What if the USA wants to build gigantic Dreadnoughts at their time or The Pacific States of America (In the Kaiserreich Era) planned to built more super Battleships in the era.

Original Design:

227e9c915898ad3edff93514a3e211e2.png?width=978&height=489

1944 Version:

[ img ]

Re-incarnated as Kansas (1945 version):

Kansas Tier VIII American Battleship

Topic Source:

Minnesota is somewhat Unique, she's based on the BB-47 Washington, not a South Dakota, Originally, This was the last Battleships to become the end of the Further Colorado-class and South Dakota Class in origin, she would have any light of the day if she wasn't sunk as a Target Practice

The stillborn USS Washington's (BB-47) hull, sitting in her berth ...

 

Washington (BB 47)

USN Ships--Washington (BB-47)

BB-47 was Reincarnated into USS Minnesota, she is Larger compared to Kansas (the former South Dakota) and carried the same 4x3 406mm guns:

Minnesota Tier IX American Battleship

 

Lastly is the Vermont

 

The Vermont is one of those "Tillman" Maximum Battleships, they copied and Hybrid the IV-II And the Preliminary design of the Ship itself

Preliminary:

image.png.eab936f4c9a3f84e79a010389bf8b03f.png

IV-II:

[ img ]

Vermont (Reincarnated Battleship, Mashed up Designed Hull from the Preliminary, Turrets from IV-II , 1945-Postwar Version):

World of Warships: New U.S. Battleships sighted on the horizon!

Topic Source:

 

Edited by IJN_Katori
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,546
[151ST]
Member
2,623 posts
10,466 battles

Great post @IJN_Katori!

I do wonder whether WG will end up boosting the speed and general mobility...

It's one thing to be that sluggish at Tier 6, it's another to have that at 8-10...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[CLAY]
[CLAY]
Member
638 posts
3,274 battles

I have to add that Vermont is based on Tillman I design, which were modified to carry 457 mm guns as opposed to the specified 406.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,448 posts
6,166 battles
3 hours ago, Earl_of_Arland said:

I have to add that Vermont is based on Tillman I design, which were modified to carry 457 mm guns as opposed to the specified 406.

Also judging from their respective models it is clear that the Tier IX Minnesota is also South Dakota 1920, though with deeper modernization like California (as comparison New Mexico) and West Virginia 1944 (as comparison Colorado).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[IWN]
Member
265 posts
2,862 battles

To be honest, if WG decide that the new US bb line would be a battlecruiser type, then it would be workable but as of now, looking at the stat especially the armor and the speed, they would probably be the first one to die in the battle. So while historically I give WG 5/10, but for the gameplay, 1/10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
698
[SALT]
Member
2,044 posts
10,542 battles

2a245397fc.png

A bit about Florida, its one of prelimenary design for NC

 

 

1132eb36e1.png

Kansas Design were heavily influenced by their rivals Nagato and QE

Edited by humusz
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles
10 hours ago, S4pp3R said:

Great post @IJN_Katori!

I do wonder whether WG will end up boosting the speed and general mobility...

It's one thing to be that sluggish at Tier 6, it's another to have that at 8-10...

Vermont's Armor and stats updated @S4pp3R

 

23 knots before -> 30 knots (Now)

 

Manueverability will be affected as well, hopefully they'll be fast.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,448 posts
6,166 battles
24 minutes ago, IJN_Katori said:

Vermont's Armor and stats updated @S4pp3R

 

23 knots before -> 30 knots (Now)

 

Manueverability will be affected as well, hopefully they'll be fast.

Excuse me but what the heck??? That's a significant change/buff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[-CAT-]
Member
2,490 posts
11,585 battles
2 hours ago, humusz said:

2a245397fc.png

A bit about Florida, its one of prelimenary design for NC

I just don't like WG naming her "Florida".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida-class_battleship

But I don't mind WG naming her Delaware / N. Dakota.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware-class_battleship

Since I want Florida and Utah as T4 tech tree and T4 premium respectively.

 

Besides, Utah did saw action in WW2. But was sunk in Pearl Harbor. While both Wyoming and Arkansas was in active duty from 1941 - 1947. Making them in par with New York and Texas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,274
[FORCE]
Member
2,451 posts
12,288 battles
1 hour ago, IJN_Katori said:

Vermont's Armor and stats updated @S4pp3R

 

23 knots before -> 30 knots (Now)

 

Manueverability will be affected as well, hopefully they'll be fast.

Wait how can it be faster than Conqueror?

27 or 28 knots would be more reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[-CAT-]
Member
2,490 posts
11,585 battles
1 hour ago, IJN_Katori said:

Vermont's Armor and stats updated @S4pp3R

 

23 knots before -> 30 knots (Now)

 

Manueverability will be affected as well, hopefully they'll be fast.

WG gave KM ships and RN BB passive IFHE (1/4 pen value).

WG could just give thicc BB passive fire and flooding prevention skill instead of a speed buff. Though I don't mind they buff the speed to 25 knots.
Instead of 60 sec fire, they are down to 45. And instead of 40 sec flooding, they are down to 30. (Admiral Graf Spee parameters)
Adding FP skill would benefit them the most. Though I wish WG could update the skill as Fire and Flooding Prevention (FFP).
Deals 10% less fire and only has 3 fire, and deals 10% less flooding and only has 1 flooding. Now that is worth the 4 points commander skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
728
[LBAS]
Member
3,089 posts
14,550 battles

If you lads reading this

 

8 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

WG gave KM ships and RN BB passive IFHE (1/4 pen value).

WG could just give thicc BB passive fire and flooding prevention skill instead of a speed buff. Though I don't mind they buff the speed to 25 knots.
Instead of 60 sec fire, they are down to 45. And instead of 40 sec flooding, they are down to 30. (Admiral Graf Spee parameters)
Adding FP skill would benefit them the most. Though I wish WG could update the skill as Fire and Flooding Prevention (FFP).
Deals 10% less fire and only has 3 fire, and deals 10% less flooding and only has 1 flooding. Now that is worth the 4 points commander skill.

The concepts of these super dreadnoughts focuses on speed and armor, flood and fire resistance. Vermont became the test bed for this upcoming Heavy but High speed Battleship line. As Sound was saying. They might have a special trait or a gimmick that is surreal from the original Battleship line (Until Montana).

They might have Special Repair party that can be seen on the RN BBs

Another thing to add could be their Super H.E Shells that could cause multiple fires and Heavier penetration. 

Sigma and Dispersion will be tested according to their performance.

 

Main Battery Reload could be a one of the Battleships consumable of the upcoming lineup.

 

If not. Perhaps they can add Deep water Radar for concept? Who knows?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[-CAT-]
Member
2,490 posts
11,585 battles

After this, a 4th branch can be opened for USN BB. The battlecruiser branch.
Split can start either from T5 or T8.

Names and Armament:
T5 Reprisal = 8 - 356 mm (14 in) / 45 cal
T6 Constitution = 10 - 356 mm (14 in) / 45 cal
T7 Constellation = 12 - 356 mm (14 in) / 50 cal
T8 United States = 8 - 406 mm (16 in) / 45 cal
T9 Cabot = 8 - 406 mm (16 in) / 50 cal or 12 - 406 mm (16 in) / 45 cal
T10 America = 12 - 406 mm (16 in) / 50 cal or 8 - 456 mm (18 in) / 45 cal

Premium T7 = "US Hood" = 8 - 406 mm (16 in) / 45 cal.

Note: 3 (or 5 depends on who you ask) of the ship's name came from carriers.
Note: "US Hood" will be armed with US 406 mm (16 in)/ 45 instead of the British 381 mm (15 in) / 43 cal.

Main goal is speed. 30 - 33 knots.
But the Americans made a mixed approach of firepower and armor. As opposed to the British and Germans.
Firepower is mentioned above.
Armor is from 203 mm (8 in) to 305 mm (12 in). Tough enough against cruisers, but soft enough against battleships.

269032013_Battlecruiser1.thumb.jpg.8c3c83b9f739cda796a9ea7a422e340a.jpg847982533_battlecruiserschemeb.thumb.jpg.3d71172982914f30dcb678b00dff3c33.jpg1114656957_battlecruiserschemec.thumb.jpg.da1daa7d7519bfb8b3eed298266777f4.jpg

USN Hood
259332617_USHood.thumb.jpg.03cf8c0d8007cdb2b55d164200440815.jpg

Note: It's a rush (2 hr) idea / work.

Edited by S0und_Theif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,448 posts
6,166 battles
18 hours ago, S0und_Theif said:

(Snip)

VIII KANSAS:

  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second.

IX MINNESOTA:

  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second;
  • Armor of deck, sides and anti-torpedo bulges increased from 32 to 38 mm;
  • Sigma parameter increased from 1.7 to 1.8

X VERMONT:

  • Deck armor increased from 32 to 51 mm;
  • Sides plating armor increased from 32 to 38 mm;
  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second;
  • Turning circle radius lowered from 960 to 850 m;
  • Sigma parameter increased from 1.7 to 1.9
  • Ballistics were changed: now HE and AP shells will lose speed slower and their flight trajectory became flatter. 

The well-anticipated buffs on Vermont, but WHAT IS THE HECK WITH KANSAS?

Also a friend of mine told me that claims about Vermont's speed buff are all but false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
608
[AN-DO]
Beta Tester
1,745 posts
5,766 battles
25 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

VIII KANSAS:

  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second.

IX MINNESOTA:

  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second;
  • Armor of deck, sides and anti-torpedo bulges increased from 32 to 38 mm;
  • Sigma parameter increased from 1.7 to 1.8

X VERMONT:

  • Deck armor increased from 32 to 51 mm;
  • Sides plating armor increased from 32 to 38 mm;
  • Restoration of hit points by Repair party consumable lowered from 0.66% to 0.5% of maximum hit points per second;
  • Turning circle radius lowered from 960 to 850 m;
  • Sigma parameter increased from 1.7 to 1.9
  • Ballistics were changed: now HE and AP shells will lose speed slower and their flight trajectory became flatter. 

The well-anticipated buffs on Vermont, but WHAT IS THE HECK WITH KANSAS?

Also a friend of mine told me that claims about Vermont's speed buff are all but false.

What is this shit for Kansas?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
608
[AN-DO]
Beta Tester
1,745 posts
5,766 battles
6 minutes ago, S0und_Theif said:

Dev blog.

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/62

 

They nerfed and buffed ships.

They did buff Paulo Emilio's guns, but not torpedo range.

Paolo Emilio is fine but

They single trash nerf a Kansas...

Share this post


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

×