chickenpie65 Players 21 posts 2,590 battles Report post #1 Posted August 12, 2019 Moderator edit: Images in this were taken from www.shipbucket.com under the licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ) After the battleship ranking list, now here is the cruiser ranking list. The cruisers will be rated by the most important traits according to real hisotical data (not WoWsh statistics). Keep in mind that this list is not related to World of Warships data, it is actually meant to represent the real ships from WW2. Meaning that there is no hit points or health bar lol :) The most important factors are: Armor: The belt/citadel armor protecting the magazines (the turret armor is not so important as any direct hit would disable the turret and guns anyway) Firepower (main guns): including rate of fire (reload time), rounds per minute for all guns, number of gun turrets, gun range etc. Fire-control effectivity: This is very important aspect that will influence the firepower rating, it determines which ship has the better accuracy and better chance to hit firstAnti-air defence: determines how good the anti-aircraft defence isAnti-torpedo protection: determines how good the anti-torpedo protection is Additional weapons (torpedoes): Carrying torpedoes can increase the offensive power, but it can also increase the vulnerability of the own ship, if the torpedoes get hit and explodes on the ship, it can damage or even cripple the own ship We will start with the weak ships and move on to the most powerful ones, including all light and heavy cruisers from 1940-1945. Nagara/Sendai/Tenryu/Kuma-classes light cruiser (1941 version) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Firepower: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (very powerful long range torpedos thou) Kirov heavy cruiser The turrets were so cramped that their rate of fire was much lower than designed, only two rounds per minute instead of six. Also the dispersion of the guns was very high because they were so close together that the muzzle blast from adjacent guns affected each gun. Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (very low rate of fire, only 18 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (very high dispersion of the guns) Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 (only short-range torpdos) Duca degli Abruzzi / Condottieri - light cruiser Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (very low ROF; only 24 RPM with all guns)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 5/5 Agano-class light cruiser (1942 version) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 (ROF: 36 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Trento / Zara heavy cruiser Armor: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (low ROF of only 24 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Aoba-class heavy cruiser (1941 version) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (low ROF: 12-24 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 York-class heavy cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (18-36 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Algêrie heavy cruiser (1940) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (ROF: 32-40 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Suffren heavy cruiser (1940) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (ROF: 32-40 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Königsberg light cruiser (1941) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (high ROF: 50-70 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Leipzig light cruiser (1941) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (high ROF: 50-70 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Dido-class light cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 (very high ROF: 80 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (dual-purpose guns for anti-ship and anti-air)Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 5/5 Arethusa-class light cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (rate of fire: 48 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Atlanta light cruiser (1942) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (very high ROF: 180-200 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Northampton heavy cruiser (1942) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 New Orleans heavy cruiser (1941 refit) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Wichita heavy cruiser (1939/40) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Takao-class heavy cruiser (1942 version) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Myoko-class heavy cruiser Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Mogami-class heavy cruiser Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Tone-class heavy cruiser Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Crown Colony class light cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (very high rate of fire: 72-96 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (Upgraded with radars in 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Deutschland heavy cruiser (1941) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (very powerful guns but also very low rate of fire: only 12 RPM.... Well, at least it got a radar)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Portland heavy cruiser (1942 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (Upgraded with Mk.3 radar 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 New Orleans heavy cruiser (1942 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (Upgraded with Mk.3 radar 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Wichita heavy cruiser (1942 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (Upgraded with Mk.3 radar 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Brooklyn/St. Louis light cruiser (1941) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (very high rate of fire: 120 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (Upgraded with radars in 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Admiral Hipper heavy cruiser Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 Torpedos: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Town-class light cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (high rate of fire: 72-96 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (upgraded with radars 1941)Anti-air: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5 Cleveland light cruiser (1942) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 (very high rate of fire: 100 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5 Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Devastating!)Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Brooklyn light cruiser (1944 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 4/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Upgraded with new Mk.8 radar 1944)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 St. Louis light cruiser (1944 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Upgraded with new Mk.8 radar 1944)Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Portland heavy cruiser (1944 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Upgraded with new Mk.8 radar 1944)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Cleveland light cruiser (1944 Upgrade) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (upgraded with Mk.8 radar 1943)Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Devastating!)Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 Baltimore heavy cruiser (1943) Armor (citadel): ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ 4/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Excellent!)Anti-air: ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 5/5 (Devastating!)Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 This concludes the ranking of best cruisers of WW2. I did not include the Alaska large cruiser because it would be too OP in this list. here the Top5 results: 1. Baltimore 2. Cleveland (upgraded with Mk.8 1943) 3. Portland (upgraded with Mk.8 1944) 4. Brooklyn/St. Louis (upgraded with Mk.8 1944) 5. HMS Belfast (Town-class) Any criticism and suggested improvements welcome... 4 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[P7S] Vbeest Players 450 posts Report post #2 Posted August 13, 2019 Nice comparisons. I think we really needed the point system to compare Tenryu to Baltimore... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
acelanceloet Players 2 posts 2 battles Report post #3 Posted January 17, 2020 Chickenpie65, you have posted multiple drawings from shipbucket.com, but with the names of the artists who drew them removed and the shipbucket logo removed? I mean, shipbucket works can be used according to the shipbucket licence, http://shipbucket.com/license This licence states, in short, that you can use these images and edit them for noncommercial activities AS LONG AS YOU CREDIT. The easiest way to do so, is to leave the credit on the image, the same way as they are provided on shipbucket.com chickenpie65 here literally edited these images just to hide where he got them from and who originally made them, which means it is theft of copyrighted works. Chickenpie65, could you please replace these images with properly credited ones, or remove these images? I am not certain what the intention was of removing the credits and source, but it is not acceptable in any way. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[JOLLY] UnterSeeBot Players 967 posts Report post #4 Posted January 19, 2020 On 8/12/2019 at 9:36 PM, chickenpie65 said: Moderator edit: Images in this were taken from www.shipbucket.com under the licence ( ) incorrect : http://www.shipbucket.com/license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ the authors have not been credited, for example On 8/12/2019 at 9:36 PM, chickenpie65 said: Crown Colony class light cruiser (1941/42) Armor (citadel): ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 1/5Firepower: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (very high rate of fire: 72-96 RPM)Fire-control: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆ 3/5 (Upgraded with radars in 1942)Anti-air: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5Anti-torpedo: ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆ 2/5 Torpedos: ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ 0/5 does not mention the author, when it should, in order to respect the license. in this case : Portsmouth Bill, K. W. Vestergaard, (as well as a direct link to the sourced image on Shipbucket) please update with credit to the authors of each image, at the very least. (Shipbucket is not the author, but must still be mentioned, in addition) 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
