Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
invicta2012

More Premiums!

99 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
On 4/8/2019 at 8:55 AM, fumtu said:

And what would be difference with New Orleans? Heal for slower reload? First I think that if there is one cruisers from NO class that should be added as premium that cruiser should be USS San Francisco just due her history (17 battle stars, the second most decorated cruiser and the third most decorated ship in the USN)

Similar to the differences between Helena and Boise. Heal traded for slower reload, slightly weaker AA and other consumable changes. A more durable CA in the US line is quite appealing. I agree that San Francisco is a very notable ship of the line, but the whole Atlantic /Pacific Fleet split is quite interesting too, and does give opportunities for Arctic camo and the like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder, Alpha Tester
1,645 posts
866 battles

HMS Agincourt is my #1 desire to have as a premium right now.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles
2 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Similar to the differences between Helena and Boise. Heal traded for slower reload, slightly weaker AA and other consumable changes. A more durable CA in the US line is quite appealing. I agree that San Francisco is a very notable ship of the line, but the whole Atlantic /Pacific Fleet split is quite interesting too, and does give opportunities for Arctic camo and the like. 

 

Well I like NO and wouldn't mind getting premium ship from the class

 

1 hour ago, invicta2012 said:

They could also think about giving her back the Heavy AP she had at Tier VIII.... 

 

NO never had SSH while it was T8. Balti at T9 was the first ship to get them. It was quite surprising when it keep it on T8. NO keep her guns when donwntiered to T7, just lost a RoF and maybe some range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles

 

6 minutes ago, fumtu said:

NO never had SSH while it was T8. Balti at T9 was the first ship to get them

Ah, drat. I suppose you can't have everything. 

 

9 minutes ago, fumtu said:

Well I like NO and wouldn't mind getting premium ship from the class

Quite so. I think the game needs more heavy cruisers and making one more durable wouldn't hurt at all - the whole "Glass Cannon" thing gets a little dull after a while. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
9 minutes ago, Lord_Holland_of_Wessex said:

HMS Delhi

The original one or the funky AA cruiser version with the American Destroyer guns? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
1,411 posts
3,712 battles
16 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Didn't know about this - after a quick Google, she looks like she would be a suitably unusual addition...

 

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Delhi_(D47))

Hm. Basically a Nicholas with a citadel.

 

Not quite sure where it would fit in without some major tweaks though. As a 1941 refit it feels a bit too modern to be a tier 4. At the same time, a Danae hull at T5 or more... I'm skeptical.

 

And I suspect the AA might end up a little oppressive for T4 CVs.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
7 minutes ago, Uglesett said:

Hm. Basically a Nicholas with a citadel.

Not quite. The ship she nicked the guns from - the Edison -  was a Benson class destroyer. She's high tier US DD guns on a low-Tier RN CL hull. It's an interesting (and flawed) mix - you'd have trouble getting more than two of them into play against surface opponents without losing your citadel. She's Tier V on my line of Royal Navy AA cruisers (which is Carlisle (IV) / Delhi (V) / Dido (VI) / Scylla (VII) / Ceylon (VIII) / Superb (IX) / Tiger (X)...

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles

Problem with Delhi is that while she new guns in the same refit she lost her torpedo tubes. Having only 5 guns as main armament on such fragile platform doesn't sound as a fun. Maybe some fictional refit in which she keep at least one torpedo launcher per side would be better option.

 

11 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

She's Tier V on my line of Royal Navy AA cruisers (which is Carlisle (IV) / Delhi (V) / Dido (VI) / Scylla (VII) / Ceylon (VIII) / Superb (IX) / Tiger (X)...

 

That is a terrible line. Ceylon is subclass of Crown Colony (Fiji in game) Class which traded one main gun turret for one quadruple pom pom mount. And even then she would have worse AA then Edinburgh. Superb is even worse case when compared to Neptune. One less turret, not to mention that Superb main guns were not DP, less AA guns, worse AA guns, less torps... But the worst thing is Tiger at T10. Just compare it to Minotaur:

  • less HP due being lighter then Minotaur project
  • 2x2 vs 5x2 6inch guns - 60% less gun power!
  • 3x2 vs 8x2 3inch AA mounts
  • 0 other AA guns vs 10x2 20mm
  • 0 vs 4x4 torpedo tubes

There is no way that Tiger could be anywhere above T6, even there she would need some fictional upgrades like additional AA guns and the most important some torpedoes as she would be too weak compared with other T6 cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
3 hours ago, fumtu said:

Ceylon is subclass of Crown Colony (Fiji in game) Class which traded one main gun turret for one quadruple pom pom mount. And even then she would have worse AA then Edinburgh. Superb is even worse case when compared to Neptune. One less turret, not to mention that Superb main guns were not DP, less AA guns, worse AA guns, less torps... But the worst thing is Tiger at T10. Just compare it to Minotaur:

  • less HP due being lighter then Minotaur project
  • 2x2 vs 5x2 6inch guns - 60% less gun power!
  • 3x2 vs 8x2 3inch AA mounts
  • 0 other AA guns vs 10x2 20mm
  • 0 vs 4x4 torpedo tubes

There is no way that Tiger could be anywhere above T6, even there she would need some fictional upgrades like additional AA guns and the most important some torpedoes as she would be too weak compared with other T6 cruisers.

 

In the 1950s - which is in scope of the game - Ceylon ended up with 5 x 2 and 8 x 1 40 mm Bofors - which is fine for VIII.. There were so many plans for Superb that I lose count but she remains viable even if stacked with Bofors in every location, and as for Tiger - yes she does only have 4 6 inch guns but they are the ones on Minotaur, and she also has the fully auto 3 inch AA/secondaries (90 rpm) and - if we're allowed to believe in Soviet Battleships - they could pretend that they actually worked! 

 

The balancing act with RN cruisers is the size and prominence of their citadel as composed to their damage output, so there might be an argument for making these ones rather less likely to explode, as they have less damage potential. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles
40 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

In the 1950s - which is in scope of the game - Ceylon ended up with 5 x 2 and 8 x 1 40 mm Bofors - which is fine for VIII.

 

It is still not much better then Edinburgh with has two more 2x4inch mounts. And when you compare that number of guns with for example amount of Bofors guns on Cleveland or Baltimore it doesn't look that impressive.

 

Quote

There were so many plans for Superb that I lose count but she remains viable even if stacked with Bofors in every location, ...

 

Just compare it with Neptune. 3x3 vs 4x3 6inch guns. Even if you give Superb same turrets as Neptune that is still 25% less guns. 5x2 4inch guns vs 6x2 4.5inch guns. again even if you give Superb same secondaries again that is 20% less guns. Not mention that Neptune also has lot of Bofors and 20mm guns. Even with DFAA Superb won't be better or even close to Netune AA power.

 

Quote

... and as for Tiger - yes she does only have 4 6 inch guns but they are the ones on Minotaur, and she also has the fully auto 3 inch AA/secondaries (90 rpm) and - if we're allowed to believe in Soviet Battleships - they could pretend that they actually worked!

 

And Minotaur has same 3inch guns and more of them, 8 vs only three mount on Tiger. Not counting that Tiger didn't have torps or AA guns of other caliber. Even if you give her more AA guns, and one triple or quadruple torpedo launcher per side she is still not even close Minotaur. Minotaur is already a good AA platform and, with exception of torpedoes, all her armament is capable of shooting at planes so Tiger would not bring anything new in that matter. Mino would have same main guns but more of them (150% more of them, or you can say that Tiger would have 60% less guns that Mino), Mino would have same mid range AA guns but again more of them and Mino would have more (if you give Tiger some torps) torpedoes, and also more health. Even if WG bump Tiger AA values so that her AA would be better than Mino it would be OP against CVs but total garbage vs anything else. And that is the greatest problem with her. Her armament is pitiful vs other T10. Even against T9 or T8. If you have ship that is only good against AA and you end in the game without CV you are useless if not even disadvantage to your team. And that is main problem with all those ships. Anything above T6 on your line is simply outclassed by other cruiser on the respective tiers.

 

AA cruiser as a concept in this game is not viable if it can't deal with other ships too. It is ok if those ships have less main armament but offer improvements in other categories. Ships in you line don't. Only thing that Tiger could offer over Minotaur are concealment and maneuverability. But the fighting capability of the ship against both surface ships and planes are way lower and thus unsuitable for this tier. This is usual problem when someone is trying to put line of only real ships when it is not possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
6 hours ago, fumtu said:

But the fighting capability of the ship against both surface ships and planes are way lower and thus unsuitable for this tier. This is usual problem when someone is trying to put line of only real ships when it is not possible.

That's a reflection of the fact that some elements of this game lack subtlety and are a bit about "brute force numbers". These ships certainly would be weaker than many equivalent pure gun cruisers in a straight out gun fight - that's realistic. However there is absolutely no reason they couldn't be given balance in other ways, based on post-war technology and elements the current RN CL lines don't have - HE main battery shells, Proximity fuse HE AA weaponry, improved hydrodynamics, enhanced fire control (giving more range, better dispersion, improved primary AA/flak burst efficacy), enhanced passive detection of enemy ships, planes, torpedoes, etc. The Tiger class does require some careful handling but Ceylon/Swiftsure and Superb are very similar to what we already have in the game, and I'm sure plenty of RN CL captains would have traded at least one turret for HE shells at some point in the game....

 

7 hours ago, fumtu said:

If you have ship that is only good against AA and you end in the game without CV you are useless if not even disadvantage to your team.

It doesn't have to be that specific a role. And in any case, the game already allows you to take low AA ships into two CV games, as any Normandie or Gallant captain will tell you... as long as you still have some viable options it's OK. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles
Just now, invicta2012 said:

That's a reflection of the fact that some elements of this game lack subtlety and are a bit about "brute force numbers". These ships certainly would be weaker than many equivalent pure gun cruisers in a straight out gun fight - that's realistic. However there is absolutely no reason they couldn't be given balance in other ways, based on post-war technology and elements the current RN CL lines don't have - HE main battery shells, Proximity fuse HE AA weaponry, improved hydrodynamics, enhanced fire control (giving more range, better dispersion, improved primary AA/flak burst efficacy), enhanced passive detection of enemy ships, planes, torpedoes, etc. The Tiger class does require some careful handling but Ceylon/Swiftsure and Superb are very similar to what we already have in the game, and I'm sure plenty of RN CL captains would have traded at least one turret for HE shells at some point in the game....

 

There is no way that you can make Tiger four guns viable at T10. No way. No modern technology, HE or whatever could substitute of what you are calling a "brute force" firepower. Not on that scale. Give her reload of 1sec and it would still not be enough. Because she has ONLY TWO TURRETS. Knock one, and Mino turrets are easy to disable, use repair and soon get knocked again and you are down half of you DPM, not to mention that you are down 100% of firepower on one end of the ship. And she don't have anything else, no torps, no secondaries, nothing. JUST TWO TURRETS WITH FOUR GUNS. Sorry but this is ridicules. Just compare her with ships like Haragumo or Kitakaze or Daring. She would be powerless against them not to mention any T10 cruiser. Tiger is barely suitable for T6 if even there.

 

Also Ceylon and Superb are T7 material at best. Just compare them to every CL we have in game, from T6 to T10. Little extra AA can't substitute for the lack of gunpower. Yes that is how game is based for now. Your main enemy are ships not planes. Sure you can slap five to six consumable to make them viable at T8 but that is just bad design.

 

Just now, invicta2012 said:

It doesn't have to be that specific a role. And in any case, the game already allows you to take low AA ships into two CV games, as any Normandie or Gallant captain will tell you... as long as you still have some viable options it's OK. 

 

Both Gallant and Normandy have weak AA but they are balanced to fight ships and that is where they are good. They are not the only one with weak AA, whole RN DD line is lacking good AA. But as a ships in general they are good. Because they have firepower to deal with other threats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,458 posts
15,503 battles
On 4/11/2019 at 9:50 PM, invicta2012 said:

She's Tier V on my line of Royal Navy AA cruisers (which is Carlisle (IV) / Delhi (V) / Dido (VI) / Scylla (VII) / Ceylon (VIII) / Superb (IX) / Tiger (X)...

 

Scylla has Mk II BD mounts from QE, not the more modern DD mounts. Tiger isn't suited to this game, although the first design would be good for tier 8 with 3x3 RP 10 Mark XXIV turrets.

 

There's a really good RN CL split in the community section somewhere. All small/sneaky with DP guns, something like Coventry > Carlisle > Delhi > Scylla > Dido (RP10 Mark II) > Hawke > Design Z2 > Minotaur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
On 4/12/2019 at 9:58 PM, fumtu said:

There is no way that you can make Tiger four guns viable at T10

Well, perhaps. If I was feeling malicious towards Tier X CVs I would equip Tiger (should be Blake, I suppose) with a baked in Target Acquisition Mod which would increase the detection of surface ships and aircraft (blindfire being a vital part of the 1950s Tiger class requirement) and let her have AA stealth fire capability. This should be the ship which parks behind an island close to a cap and screens destroyers from the attentions of enemy CVs. Minotaur and Worcester have ludicrous numbers of AA and DP main guns so there is no way they can be balanced for this role, but Tiger's 3 x 2 3 inch batteries are much fairer.... especially if they only achieve their maximum 90 RPM through the use of DFAA consumables. Is this unfair? No more so than radar cruisers, which do the same "Gotcha!" on DDs all the time. CV players would just have to adapt.

 

On 4/12/2019 at 9:58 PM, fumtu said:

And she don't have anything else, no torps, no secondaries, nothing.

She's a similar size to Fiji so its possible to get sub 10k surface detection,  add enhanced detection of other ships + torpedoes, as above, and rapid firing DP secondaries with increased range, and this would be a ship DDs might think twice about charging. We have battleships with absurd numbers of secondary guns firing out to 10k from Tier VIII onwards, why not a cruiser with a balanced number going out to 8k? I would, however, make it so that they can only do one job at once.... you'd have to turn off AA batteries for the 3 inch guns to work on the surface.

 

On 4/12/2019 at 11:44 PM, creamgravy said:

There's a really good RN CL split in the community section somewhere. All small/sneaky with DP guns, something like Coventry > Carlisle > Delhi > Scylla > Dido (RP10 Mark II) > Hawke > Design Z2 > Minotaur. 

There are some late 1950s/1960s designs for gun cruisers which would also work well. UK shipyards were offering them out to South American navies who were still interested in that type of vessel. The RN looked at them but were more interested in missile cruisers at that point...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles
5 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Well, perhaps. If I was feeling malicious towards Tier X CVs I would equip Tiger (should be Blake, I suppose) with a baked in Target Acquisition Mod which would increase the detection of surface ships and aircraft (blindfire being a vital part of the 1950s Tiger class requirement) and let her have AA stealth fire capability. This should be the ship which parks behind an island close to a cap and screens destroyers from the attentions of enemy CVs. Minotaur and Worcester have ludicrous numbers of AA and DP main guns so there is no way they can be balanced for this role, but Tiger's 3 x 2 3 inch batteries are much fairer.... especially if they only achieve their maximum 90 RPM through the use of DFAA consumables. Is this unfair? No more so than radar cruisers, which do the same "Gotcha!" on DDs all the time. CV players would just have to adapt.

 

She's a similar size to Fiji so its possible to get sub 10k surface detection,  add enhanced detection of other ships + torpedoes, as above, and rapid firing DP secondaries with increased range, and this would be a ship DDs might think twice about charging. We have battleships with absurd numbers of secondary guns firing out to 10k from Tier VIII onwards, why not a cruiser with a balanced number going out to 8k? I would, however, make it so that they can only do one job at once.... you'd have to turn off AA batteries for the 3 inch guns to work on the surface.

 

She is a size of the Fiji but also with similar displacement. This mean she would have the lowest HP of all T10 cruisers. Sure this mean that her concealment would be good. But because of her gun power this concealment is very situational.

  • Ships with better concealment, like Haragumo, Daring or Gearing have better gun DPM and torpedoes and could outDPM Tiger. Yes Tiger would have more health but also would have a citadel which means that, unlike DDs, he have to care how much side he is showing. Also as those DDs have better concealment they are the one which dictate engagement not a Tiger.
  • Ships with worse concealment have better DPM than Tiger and some of them have radar which would negate only advantage Tiger have. And considering Tiger gun power and health, any ship could simply push into it with huge chance to end that engagement in their favour. Tiger simply don't have DPM to deal with BBs or any CA/CL smart enough to not show a broadside. 

This show that Tiger would be a horrible ship which could not deal effectively with none of the surface ship class.

 

3inch guns are below threshold for secondaries, that is why Mino, DM or Wooster 3inch guns are not counted as secondaries. But even if WG make exception for Tiger, 3inch guns with 1/6 rule can't pen a single thing at T10. Not even DD superstructure. Even if WG make another exception and give it 1/4 pen rule she still can't pen anything but DD superstructure. DD hull or superstructure of any other ships is untouchable for them. And even tho it have only 3x2 3inch guns, only two turrets can be used at the same time. This is just pathetic.

 

Sorry but T10 Tiger is totally impossible option. Even more it is just ridicules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,502 posts
8,375 battles
On 4/14/2019 at 4:18 PM, fumtu said:

3inch guns are below threshold for secondaries, that is why Mino, DM or Wooster 3inch guns are not counted as secondaries. But even if WG make exception for Tiger, 3inch guns with 1/6 rule can't pen a single thing at T10. Not even DD superstructure. Even if WG make another exception and give it 1/4 pen rule she still can't pen anything but DD superstructure. DD hull or superstructure of any other ships is untouchable for them. And even tho it have only 3x2 3inch guns, only two turrets can be used at the same time. This is just pathetic.

Well, if they can't count as secondary surface weapons then that's that - and for most of the RN post 1945 cruiser designs, given that almost all of them used the 3in/70 as their secondary weapon (ditto USN post war DD design, too). Bit of a shame as WG have clearly decided that small calibre AA cruisers are viable at higher tiers (Colbert and Smolensk having been announced since we started this discussion). I think there is an "export cruiser" Vickers design based on Belfast which might work... will have to dig it out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,572 posts
18,714 battles
1 hour ago, invicta2012 said:

Well, if they can't count as secondary surface weapons then that's that - and for most of the RN post 1945 cruiser designs, given that almost all of them used the 3in/70 as their secondary weapon (ditto USN post war DD design, too). Bit of a shame as WG have clearly decided that small calibre AA cruisers are viable at higher tiers (Colbert and Smolensk having been announced since we started this discussion).

 

Smolensk and Colbert main weapon are 130mm and 127mm respectively. DDs are already using those guns as the main weapon so I don't see any problem with those two cruisers. They are basically a same concept as Atlanta. On the other hand 3inch or 76mm is too small for secondaries simply because it is not effective against anything as it don't have enough pen.

 

Quote

I think there is an "export cruiser" Vickers design based on Belfast which might work... will have to dig it out.

 

I expect that those designs which were proposals for South American Nations end as ships of Pan American tree. If I remember correctly there were several proposals, two of which, one with 3x3 and one with 4x2 152mm guns, could be used as T8 or T9 and T9 or T10 Pan Am cruisers respectively. I think that even without those ships RN have enough RL and paper design for more premiums. For exmaple one of the plans for the '1960 Cruiser' could be used as premium T9

 

The_1960_Cruiser.thumb.png.94d5841962e3de54ad0d20a65ccedc4c.png

 

With 4x2 152mm guns, 2x4 torpedo tubes per side it could be nice T9 premium as some kind of mini Minotaur. If WG go "full retard" it could be even made T10 even tho I think that would be a little overstretched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×