Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Kiss_my_reticle

British Heavy cruisers please...

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
71 posts

The Royal Navy had some very impressive ships that were not so paper thin and nerfed as the RN cruiser line is currently.  It takes a lot of luck to survive, let alone win in a match with British cruisers as they are now. My Leander, Fiji, Edinburgh and Belfast (all skippers are Admiral of the fleet) are brilliant ships and great fun to play, but I certainly notice there have been balance "tweeks"...

 

HMS Devonshire (County-class heavy cruiser) , HMS Achilles (Warrior class) , HMS Suffolk (Monmouth class), HMS Argonaut (Dido-class) , HMS York (York class) might be reasonable examples of fairly early Heavy/Armoured cruisers.

 

Also, why were HMS HOOD's torpedo tubes omitted? The German tech tree for example has Battleships with torpedoes. I feel I am correct in saying that HOOD was fitted with 2 × 2 – 21-inch tubes.

 

Is there some bias against the Royal Navy?? food for thought 
 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Beta Tester
672 posts
4,821 battles

Concerning the torpedo tubes, (I may be wrong but I believe I read this somewhere) WG won't model submerged / fixed torpedo tubes. Hood (may she RIP) had 2 below the waterline (1 pt, 1 stbd), and 4 above (2 pt, 2 stbd); all of them fixed ie. non rotating. I've only surmised this from the following link and its associated pics. Hope this clarifies.

 

Hood's torpedo loadout

 

Wrt your avatar, were you onboard the Jupiter?

 

Regards.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,380 posts
15,503 battles
1 hour ago, Drowned_Rat said:

Is there some bias against the Royal Navy?? food for thought 

 

Lesta spent a lot of time modelling and testing Russian guided missile destroyers before adding British battleships, that should tell you everything.

It's a Russian game for the Russian market ...but when British ships get added they're usually very good.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPAM-]
Players
119 posts
9,443 battles
4 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

The Royal Navy had some very impressive ships that were not so paper thin and nerfed as the RN cruiser line is currently.  It takes a lot of luck to survive, let alone win in a match with British cruisers as they are now. My Leander, Fiji, Edinburgh and Belfast (all skippers are Admiral of the fleet) are brilliant ships and great fun to play, but I certainly notice there have been balance "tweeks"...
 

Every ship of the game got its stats balanced before being added to the game. 

 

The RN Cruiser is one of the cruiser line for now. It's a "High Risk, high reward" kind of line. Minotaur is such a fantastic ship, but require a lot of skill to benefit from it. It's the way CL should be.

4 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

Is there some bias against the Royal Navy?? food for thought 

I mean, I know that some ships may are questionable about their balancing, but how can you even think about that ?

 

Belfast have a ridiculous combination of DPM, Smoke, hydro and radar. It's currently the best cruiser of her tier and was a nightmare during the ranked season at tier VII. Conqueror is just a huge rain of salt for her opponents, with extremely powerful HE , mega heal and excellent concealment. And yeah, whereas her AP aren't the best for her tier, she can still deal an huge amount of burst against cruiser, with lowered chances of overpenetrating the target.

 

Nelson is also a beast for her tier. Hood is decent. It's not that good, but it's not bad either. Warspite is doing pretty fine for her tier too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,056 posts
2,939 battles
2 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

The Royal Navy had some very impressive ships that were not so paper thin

 

Both the "impressive" and "not paper thin" are debatable.

 

2 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

HMS Devonshire (County-class heavy cruiser) , HMS Achilles (Warrior class) , HMS Suffolk (Monmouth class), HMS Argonaut (Dido-class) , HMS York (York class) might be reasonable examples of fairly early Heavy/Armoured cruisers

 

Excuse me ? Did you just classify the Dido class as heavy cruisers ? Dyou even know anything about the RN at all ? xD

 

2 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

Also, why were HMS HOOD's torpedo tubes omitted? The German tech tree for example has Battleships with torpedoes.

 

No fixed TT. Funny it seems to bother ya with Hood but all other for BBs with fixed TTs from other nations it doesn't seem to matter...

 

2 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

Is there some bias against the Royal Navy?

If there was that'd actually be realistic xD but sadly no dear, both UK CL & UK BB are actually quite powerful tho not always in the cleanest way.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
263 posts
8,596 battles

Im still waiting for a premium Exeter, British CAs would be a lovely addition to the game though some May be hard to balance. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEWD]
Beta Tester
67 posts
6,939 battles
5 hours ago, Drowned_Rat said:

 

HMS Devonshire (County-class heavy cruiser) , HMS Achilles (Warrior class) , HMS Suffolk (Monmouth class), HMS Argonaut (Dido-class) , HMS York (York class) might be reasonable examples of fairly early Heavy/Armoured cruisers.


 

 

Light and Heavy cruiser designations are not given out based on the level of armour, but generally relating to the calibre of the main armament and vessel displacement. Courtesy of the London Naval Treaty (1930), a light cruiser is one that has a main armament which does not exceed 6.1 inches (155mm) and a displacement that doesn't exceed 10,000 tons. A heavy cruiser is one that the main armament does not exceed 8 inches (203mm).

 

Warrior Class - First Class Cruiser, predates light and heavy designations entirely.

Dido Class - definitively a light cruiser, 5.25inch guns, 5600 ton displacement. 

 

During the period of designations that would apply to the Warrior Class, RN didn't even use protected or armoured as designations, both were considered "First Class Cruisers".

 

The only true Heavy Cruisers for RN within appropriate time frames ie in accordance with the London Naval Treaty of 1930, would be Hawkins Class, County class and York class - whilst the dev team have been known to fabricate ships to fill spaces in a line, they would be hard pressed to do so with 3 options to work from, all of which would roughly equate to no more than a T4->T7 spread.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
71 posts
5 hours ago, LastButterfly said:

 

Both the "impressive" and "not paper thin" are debatable.

 

 

Excuse me ? Did you just classify the Dido class as heavy cruisers ? Dyou even know anything about the RN at all ? xD

 

 

No fixed TT. Funny it seems to bother ya with Hood but all other for BBs with fixed TTs from other nations it doesn't seem to matter...

 

If there was that'd actually be realistic xD but sadly no dear, both UK CL & UK BB are actually quite powerful tho not always in the cleanest way.

I'm am so humbled by your pedantic knowledge of all things RN. Thanks for having nothing better to do than pick holes in my post.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
405 posts
3,282 battles
2 hours ago, GiantKiw1 said:

Dido Class - definitively a light cruiser, 5.25inch guns, 5600 ton displacement. 

I guess the Dido class (and sub classes) could be called AA cruisers. I've seen them listed as such in a some accounts (such as ones about Royal Navy carriers in the Mediterranean). Besides, those 5.25 inchers probably wouldn't be much good in a gun fight with another cruiser, they lack the range and shell weight to compete with a 6 inch gun. But as an AA mount, they were just terrifying. Not quite 5"/38 god, but certainly not to be sniffed at. I think one of the sub classes used the same 4.5" gun mounts that were used on the Queen Elizabeth and Renown, which definitely pushes them into being AA cruisers, rather than just light cruisers.

 

But in terms of treaties, the Dido seems to fit as a light cruiser. I wonder if a premium Dido is in the works at the moment?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
71 posts
7 hours ago, Kevbar said:

Concerning the torpedo tubes, (I may be wrong but I believe I read this somewhere) WG won't model submerged / fixed torpedo tubes. Hood (may she RIP) had 2 below the waterline (1 pt, 1 stbd), and 4 above (2 pt, 2 stbd); all of them fixed ie. non rotating. I've only surmised this from the following link and its associated pics. Hope this clarifies.

 

Hood's torpedo loadout

 

Wrt your avatar, were you onboard the Jupiter?

 

Regards.

 

 

 

 

Thank you Kevbar. I served on Jupiter during the 1980's. However, we crew swapped with Andromeda, Leander crews were interchangeable (in pairs I think) during refits by design. I just have fond memories of Jupiter as a ship, visits to Rotterdam, Newcastle, Oslo. Basically a masterclass in drinking :Smile_bajan2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
71 posts
7 minutes ago, Centurion_1711 said:

I guess the Dido class (and sub classes) could be called AA cruisers. I've seen them listed as such in a some accounts (such as ones about Royal Navy carriers in the Mediterranean). Besides, those 5.25 inchers probably wouldn't be much good in a gun fight with another cruiser, they lack the range and shell weight to compete with a 6 inch gun. But as an AA mount, they were just terrifying. Not quite 5"/38 god, but certainly not to be sniffed at. I think one of the sub classes used the same 4.5" gun mounts that were used on the Queen Elizabeth and Renown, which definitely pushes them into being AA cruisers, rather than just light cruisers.

 

But in terms of treaties, the Dido seems to fit as a light cruiser. I wonder if a premium Dido is in the works at the moment?

Yes, after I posted I did read up a little on my suggestions. Dido's were indeed Light AA cruisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,056 posts
2,939 battles
20 minutes ago, Drowned_Rat said:

I'm am so humbled by your pedantic knowledge of all things RN. Thanks for having nothing better to do than pick holes in my post.  

 

At your service - although my knowledge of the RN is actually quite limited when compared to some other navys.

And thank you, of course, for posting a suggestion before doing any research. And also for hating on whoever points out the unavoidable mistakes resulting from such a post.

Should have expected it.

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
71 posts
1 hour ago, LastButterfly said:

 

At your service - although my knowledge of the RN is actually quite limited when compared to some other navys.

And thank you, of course, for posting a suggestion before doing any research. And also for hating on whoever points out the unavoidable mistakes resulting from such a post.

Should have expected it.

You are very welcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
2,927 battles

I've read several articles regarding this topic, and have thought about it plenty.  The way I see it, the most sensible way to go about bringing in British CA's would be this. 

 

Like the americans, split either at t4 or t5. Then bring in the heavy cruisers that the UK actually built, and use those as a stepping point to some of the British battle cruisers. That would, for me, be the sensible way that wargaming to go about doing it.  The ships existed, so there is photographs to go by, plus the approved and used blueprints.  It brings in two types of ships for the RN that people have been asking for, so it ticks some boxes and makes some people happy - more cruisers and bbs for the RN! 

 

It also negates the problem of having to do a massive amount of research and theorycrafting of blueprints for ships that never existed in the first place (yes I know that the T8 - T10 RN battleships didn't either) before releasing a line, which in turn gives them more time to look for and make these blueprint ships for in the future. 

 

Anyway that's my two pence put forward.  I'd be interested to know what you all think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
3,076 posts
11,078 battles
1 hour ago, Viperthought said:

I've read several articles regarding this topic, and have thought about it plenty.  The way I see it, the most sensible way to go about bringing in British CA's would be this. 

 

Like the americans, split either at t4 or t5. Then bring in the heavy cruisers that the UK actually built, and use those as a stepping point to some of the British battle cruisers. That would, for me, be the sensible way that wargaming to go about doing it.  The ships existed, so there is photographs to go by, plus the approved and used blueprints.  It brings in two types of ships for the RN that people have been asking for, so it ticks some boxes and makes some people happy - more cruisers and bbs for the RN! 

 

It also negates the problem of having to do a massive amount of research and theorycrafting of blueprints for ships that never existed in the first place (yes I know that the T8 - T10 RN battleships didn't either) before releasing a line, which in turn gives them more time to look for and make these blueprint ships for in the future. 

 

Anyway that's my two pence put forward.  I'd be interested to know what you all think. 

 

WG has said they aren't interested in making any new split trees. So that's a no go and a loss for us.

They also decided that British ships would be the most gimmicky in all the game, just look at the DDs, CLs, and BBs.

 

But going along the idea, using existing BCs at T9 and T10 would be silly, as existing design would have to be fictionally improved to perform at those tiers. It would be possible to put the 1939 Renown as a premium at T8, but that's it.

Instead it would be easier to use the 1939 Admiralty heavy cruiser design for the 15.000 ton heavy cruiser and the last design study from the 1941 study.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×