Tier 10 Premium Cruiser "Buffalo"?

[OldschoolGaming_YouTube]

If you have the extended techtree from Aslains mod you can see a T10 Premium cruiser called Buffalo with 4 sets off torps , great AA and good guns. Anyone know anything about this? is this gonne get implemented in the game or is this just some kind off testship?

 

Thought i also saw a Sub a couple off weeks ago?!

 

And this is not a late Aprils fool....

[piritskenyer]

I think it was a T10 candidate at some point, and has been put on hold for now. If you look at it, her stats pretty much mirror that of the Zao's. It's been there for some time now, like I said, it's shelved, don't worry abt it.

[Xerkics]

I dont think they will ever sell t10 premiums and i hope they wont take the road of wot where all the cool exclusive reward tanks only go to <1% of playerbase.

[Crusherheads]

It wouldnt be suprise if that ship was given for the future to the top first team squadrons battles. Similar to m60 from WoT.

[Trainspite]

I think that the most likely prospect for Buffalo, a.k.a Design CA-B, is that she will be the tier 10 of a second US Heavy Cruiser line, which only goes from tiers 7 to 10.

[Kazomir]

There is also the tier 10 US cruiser Worcester with its 6x2 152mm guns. Pretty much a tier 10 Atlanta.

 

[Trainspite]

There is also the tier 10 US cruiser Worcester with its 6x2 152mm guns. Pretty much a tier 10 Atlanta.

 

 

Although she is listed as tier 10, I highly doubt she will top the US Light Cruiser line, (Also 7-10 Most likely). Mainly because she simply can't compete with the British tier 10 Light Cruisers, i.e.- Minotaur Designs (Which are being modeled, at least Z4A anyway). This makes me believe that Worcester herself will be tier 9, with an upgraded Worcester design (with Triple turrets) would be the tier 10 for the Light Cruiser line, which should be coming out this year. (Hopefully)

[StringWitch]

I've always assumed Buffalo would be a clan wars reward thing, whenever that gets implemeneted, since those are all tier 10s in WoT.

The submarine is an ARP thing, I-401, Iona's... ship? I don't think anyone knows what it's in the client for.

There's also USS Cimarron, a fleet oiler, used for testing potential PVE stuff (escort missions).

[Takeda92]

I've always assumed Buffalo would be a clan wars reward thing, whenever that gets implemeneted, since those are all tier 10s in WoT.

The submarine is an ARP thing, I-401, Iona's... ship? I don't think anyone knows what it's in the client for.

There's also USS Cimarron, a fleet oiler, used for testing potential PVE stuff (escort missions).

 

It's in the client so there can be an Iona captain for the missions. From what I understand, they can't make a captain without a ship.

[Panocek]

Kazomir, on 04 April 2016 - 01:31 AM, said:

There is also the tier 10 US cruiser Worcester with its 6x2 152mm guns. Pretty much a tier 10 Atlanta.

 

 

Although she is listed as tier 10, I highly doubt she will top the US Light Cruiser line, (Also 7-10 Most likely). Mainly because she simply can't compete with the British tier 10 Light Cruisers, i.e.- Minotaur Designs (Which are being modeled, at least Z4A anyway). This makes me believe that Worcester herself will be tier 9, with an upgraded Worcester design (with Triple turrets) would be the tier 10 for the Light Cruiser line, which should be coming out this year. (Hopefully)

 

Unless "Triple Worcester" gets like 20rof on her guns or she is using railgun ammo I don't see the point of CL when branch next door you have Des Moines, combining high rof with 203mm with slightly less crippled shell velocity. Old Cleveland with AFT had 17s time to impact to 17km already, so this would be pretty much Atlanta of tier 10 - least armored, short effective range, presumably stronk AA (same amount of 3in/50 as DM)

[warsinger2]

 

Unless "Triple Worcester" gets like 20rof on her guns or she is using railgun ammo I don't see the point of CL when branch next door you have Des Moines, combining high rof with 203mm with slightly less crippled shell velocity. Old Cleveland with AFT had 17s time to impact to 17km already, so this would be pretty much Atlanta of tier 10 - least armored, short effective range, presumably stronk AA (same amount of 3in/50 as DM)

 

Excellent AA due to high RoF DP 6". Designed as the top of the gun AA cruiser development.  (at least historically)  

[Panocek]

 

Excellent AA due to high RoF DP 6". Designed as the top of the gun AA cruiser development.  (at least historically)  

 

Des Moines 3in guns already are fearsome with AA boost, getting more from main battery would start entering into overkill territory.

Although seeing planes die at 10km might be sight to see.

[mrak1979]

 

Although she is listed as tier 10, I highly doubt she will top the US Light Cruiser line, (Also 7-10 Most likely). Mainly because she simply can't compete with the British tier 10 Light Cruisers, i.e.- Minotaur Designs (Which are being modeled, at least Z4A anyway). This makes me believe that Worcester herself will be tier 9, with an upgraded Worcester design (with Triple turrets) would be the tier 10 for the Light Cruiser line, which should be coming out this year. (Hopefully)

 

Minotaur class cant compete tier sex 6:-)

[mr3awsome]

Minotaur class cant compete tier sex 6:-)

10 20 RPM 6" + 16 90 RPM 3" + 16 21" torpedoes. 

Totally not enough for tier 10. 

[mrak1979]

Where did you got those numbers??? Look at attached links and  9*6inch guns RoF 6-8!!! 2*3 21inc torps

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur-class_cruiser_(1943)

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_6-50_mk23.htm

 

 

[warsinger2]

Where did you got those numbers??? Look at attached links and  9*6inch guns RoF 6-8!!! 2*3 21inc torps

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur-class_cruiser_(1943)

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_6-50_mk23.htm

 

 

 

Randomly pulled out a place where the sun never shines I guess.

Maybe some suuupersekret napkin design no one is aware off.

[Trainspite]

 

Minotaur class cant compete tier sex 6:-)

 

Probably confusing your Minotaurs. Not surprised, since there are 3. And we are talking about the one that is least well known.

 

 

Unless "Triple Worcester" gets like 20rof on her guns or she is using railgun ammo I don't see the point of CL when branch next door you have Des Moines, combining high rof with 203mm with slightly less crippled shell velocity. Old Cleveland with AFT had 17s time to impact to 17km already, so this would be pretty much Atlanta of tier 10 - least armored, short effective range, presumably stronk AA (same amount of 3in/50 as DM)

 

Triple Worcester probably wouldn't get 20RPM, but above the 12RPM that Normal Worcester would get. 20RPM is the tops of what Minotaur gets, but a super Worcester would have 2 more guns. Tier 10 Light cruisers are really for countering Destroyers, but they can just as easily burn down other ships if they are close enough. And their AP is quite vicious as well. Compared to Des Moines, they have similar AA, but are better at fighting destroyers, at the expense of being more vulnerable to your traditional heavy cruiser. Although no one would want to be on the receiving end of the firestorm that these ships can put out.

[Unintentional_submarine]

He refers to these guns.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_6-50_mkN5.htm

 

Aside from the 10 guns issue and the RoF more likely being 17 or less, it isn't wrong for the late development of the Minotaur.

[Trainspite]

Where did you got those numbers??? Look at attached links and  9*6inch guns RoF 6-8!!! 2*3 21inc torps

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur-class_cruiser_(1943)

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_6-50_mk23.htm

 

 

 

Minotaur Designs. 

You are thinking of the Minotaur/Swiftsure class. Which is only good for 6/7. (They are better than Budyonny (Projekt 94), which is considered the best tier 6 cruiser right now, if not a little OP)

Design Z4A, which have seen in the modeling is this:

 

 

 

Minotaur Design Z4A: 

Displacement: 15'080t

 

Armament: 10x6" 16x3" 4x4 Torpedo Launchers

 

Speed: 31.5 knots

 

 

The 6" guns are the Mk.XXVI - capable of 20RPM.

 

 

 

[Xerkics]

Im wondering if the reason why they not doing any Royal Navy ships before other trees because a lot of  RN ships were just flat out better and more innovative and noone would grind any other trees if they did them at the start?

[Kazomir]

Im wondering if the reason why they not doing any Royal Navy ships before other trees because a lot of  RN ships were just flat out better and more innovative and noone would grind any other trees if they did them at the start?

 

RN ships were flat-out better? Than What?

 

Well to be honest they were better than the VMF ships of the time, sure.

[Xerkics]

 

RN ships were flat-out better? Than What?

 

Well to be honest they were better than the VMF ships of the time, sure.

 

Than other navies of the period. Early dreadnoughts , carriers etc. So like i would expect RN ships would be flat out better up to like mid tier and then later tiers id expect IJN BB would get better and US carriers be better etc.

[Kazomir]

 

Than other navies of the period. Early dreadnoughts , carriers etc. So like i would expect RN ships would be flat out better up to like mid tier and then later tiers id expect IJN BB would get better and US carriers be better etc.

 

Dunno, seems to me they were better only in numbers and the fact that the italians did not dare pit their ships against them (their designs were even worse, lacking sonar or radar) . When it comes to designs they were mediocre at best, if not bad.

[Xerkics]

 

Dunno, seems to me they were better only in numbers and the fact that the italians did not dare pit their ships against them. When it comes to designs they were mediocre at best, if not bad.

 

Well last time i checked the Brits did invent the carriers and dreadnoughts didnt they? And the naval tradition meant well drilled and experienced crews .The Brits did really well against the Italians in the Mediterranean theater thats where Warspite seen a lot of Action for example. Im just speculating here im not a ship buff im just expecting nation that had the worlds strongest Navy for hundreds of Years and pioneered so many naval inventions to be head and shoulders above the competition till their Decline during WW 2 where Americans pull ahead since they didnt have the crapbombed out of them and i assume IJN didnt adhere to the treaty when they built their biggest BB?

[Trainspite]

 

Dunno, seems to me they were better only in numbers and the fact that the italians did not dare pit their ships against them. When it comes to designs they were mediocre at best, if not bad.

 

They are built with different purposes to other nations. E.g. Cruisers and the defence of the Empire. And Britain stayed within the treaty, or at least tried to great lengths. Like Japan's ships are focused on the decisive battle, and so are probably going to be better 1v1.  While British ships have an empire to deal with, and so are better seaboats, and more comfortable for the crew etc. 

 

They are not bad ships at all, unless you count every ship as being bad.