piritskenyer

While certainly victim to powercreep, I still find her quite workable. Yes, the torp angles are weird, and yes, you need to show quite a bit of skin to expose the rear turret, but the ship itself remains pretty effective when played to her strengths. Maybe the problem lies with me, as I failed to hate multiple generally disliked ships (and I still maintain that moving Pensacola down a tier is a mistake, because she was just fine at T7), but I think that Aoba is workable, good even, as a T6 cruiser and that is why I have confidence that the Yorks will be too.

Aoba is generally speaking a rather good T6 ship. 11 seconds reload, torps, good enough maneuverability, speed... I for one have no problem making the ship work in T6, and I think she scales pretty well in the matchmaking.

Pretty much, but more like New Orleans' guns in Baltimore's turrets on Helena's hull. The 12 second reload would indeed be a good reload rate, for the exact reasons you gave. I'm hesitant on the subject of heal, we shall see. HP wise she'd indeed be a bit lower than B-more, but the actual belt is thicker (160mm/6.4" vs 152mm/6"). Secondary armament would also be unique.

Aoba

No. Combining AP shells and HE shells is the recipe for chaos and revolt. I think they should have split AP and HE, possibly with the AP shells being SAP receiving similar bounce characteristics as the USN CA AP. That said, the 8" guns used by the RN are generally accepted to have been able to manage a good 5 r/m/g, meaning a 12 second reload wouldn't at all be a far fetched idea. I definitely don't think they would need smoke, but they could possibly do with a heal, maybe not the supergeal of the CL's, but that's to be seen. DEFAA I'm not so sure about. Single torp launch is a stable RN staple at this point, so that's not even a question. Radar could possibly (probably) be added too.

A slight problem with including HMNZS Achilles would be that we already have Achilles' sister ship, HMAS Perth in the Commonwealth tree at T6. Arethusa I could get on board with, as well as a premium Dido, but Dido would need to be quite differently balanced from Atlanta, as the 5.25" guns fired a bit slower and there are only 5 turrets on the ship. I'm also on board with HMAS Australia, although saying she got away unscathed is a bit of an overstatement, as in october 1944 - january 1945 she suffered one ramming and 4 kamikaze attacks.

Well a second BB line growing out of what used to be BC's... I don't know, but sounds workable to me :P

You call that trolling? Wow, talk about low standards.

So? Does that make cruiser players stupid or something?

What's your deal with cruiser players really?

I occasionally suffer from that as well... Best I can advise is try to turn it to your advantage and fire at targets with the sun in your back, although I realise that is often not an option :(

I've got my doubts concerning the names there. The ones we came up with with @Trainspite were as far as I know based on historical never realised proposals. TZoli's drawings here get their names from... Where? Also, on those drawings: while they do look interesting, they do seem to have quite bad rear turret angles, both of them. Furthermore, for their projected time of introduction I would more likely imagine a secondary battery similar to that of the ingame Neptune, so 4.5"/45 Mk V DP's instead of the Mk III in BD mountings. The after funnel on the 3x3 design also looks kind of really far to the rear there... EDIT: I would also imagine that at that time the RN would design ships exclusively with transom sterns, based on what their progression was. I personally follow Train's thinking in that the entire BC line should be pished one down compared to yours, so the Admiral class BC's should be T7 at best with Renown as T6, Tiger T5, etc.

No, what that means is that the torps have a magnetic trigger that detonate the warhead when it gets inti close proximity of an object with noticable magnetic distortion, for example a steel ship hull. This would mean ingame that a torpedo doesn't actually need to hit the ship square on to explode and do damage through shockwave. What you were referring to are homing torpedoes, a completely different story.

90 kts/10.5km torps at TX wut

That could be London, although I'd much rather have her in the regular tree in one way or another, or it could be Norfolk 1943 fit or Sussex 1942-43 fit. London would be the most distinct in terms of appearance and fit, being a unique ship in the entire County class, but like I said, I'd rather have her in the regular tree somewhere.

Oh god, what are you on? The CA branch would/should branch out at T5 with the - Hawkins class. 7x 7.5" guns with 6 of them to a broadside. - T6 would be the York class, with probably an Exeter-style and a fictional late war AA refit with Exeter in her final form as a prem CA. - T7 County class (scroll up for more info) - T8 Surrey class (planned, never built modified County) - T9 "Benbow" a 1940 CA proposal 3x3x 8"/50 Mk X - TX "Drake" 1940 CA proposal with 3x3x 9.2"/47 Mk X Battlecruisers as they existed can go up to T6, with proposals (and the proposed refit dor Hood) they can be an entire line of their own, but using existing BC's as hightier cruisers doesn't work.

Yeah, that :P I see it did that for you too sometimes. But you can look completely in opposite direction with freecam and not see what your guns are pointing at. And I'm not questioning OP's responsibility, just saying.

Umm, ever heard of the freecam? You know, hold rmb and look around while guns remain fixed?

I was joking. About the smoke that is.

Year 27 of "no gf life" I can now levitate.

"Too much rust" My se... lovelife. ;-;

So basically a USN CA where the player lost the 1 key? Seriously speaking, not sure it'd be all that good an idea, but you know... Maybe smoke too? :D

Also, do you guys think RN CA's should/could get heal? I would think yes (seen thier service histories and based on the CL's reasoning of "empire cruisers"), but in more limited numbers (1-2), due to access to HE but no smoke.

I think London - County could be a similar divergence/convergence scenario to that of the JPII and Ferdinand in WoT of old at T8. The tree could fork in two after Exeter, offering the 3-funnel counties on one side, and London on the other (I'm not kidding myself, I'd get both), and then the two ships would lead into the same Surrey. There maybe could be some minor practical differences between the two ships (I'm thinking utility), but otherwise they would have the same gunnery, AA and general stats. Or maybe London would have to be a prem (pretty cheap solution tbh).

The Japanese went well over the limit with the Mogami class (and the Takao as well, I think). When they reported the displacement numbers to the treaty supervisors, the RN DNC supposedly said: "either they are building their ships out of paper or they are lying" Did you read my reply on the last page btw? I'm fine with either a London-looking ship pr a 3-raked-funnel one, but I defo want London ingame in one form or another. She just represents the overall RN look of the late 30's and 40's better IMO.