Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
piritskenyer

USS Wichita - T8 ship proposal

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Hi gents!

 

As you may have guessed it from the title, today's proposed/discussed ship is going to be *drumroll* the USS Wichita. This ship review and Game Implementation Proposal (gonna coin the term as GIMP) is brought to you by Trainspite and myself. Again a lot of research and knowledge credit goes to him. 

 

The way we'll do things is this: we're going to review the ship's historical background and then we'll look at the possibility of her implementation into the game in two ways: as a reg and as a prem ship.

Let us begin.

 

IxMl4fE.jpg

Wichita firing her guns in 1945. Here you can also see the unique secondary battery layout. - Picture credit: navsource.com

 

 

USS Wichita was a single ship in the US Navy. Ordered in 1934 and laid down in October 1935, she was the successor to the New Orleans class of heavy cruisers and the eventual basis for the Baltimore class. The US had an allowance of one heavy cruiser laid in 1934, and one in 1935, but the Navy wasn't completely satisfied with the New Orleans class.

The New Orleans class of heavy cruisers were descendants of the "OG heavy cruiser", the USS Pensacola. The Pensacola design was modified at first to recieve 3 triple mounts instead of two twins and two triples, an arrangement that would become standard on all heavy cruisers of the US navy, and a hangar amidships which made the handling of aircraft easier and more comfortable. That class was the Northampton class. The class succeeding to the Northampton was Portland, which were nothing but slightly modified Northamptons. Five Portlands were ordered, however three of those would be converted after being laid into New Orleans class ships. Another four New Orleans class ships were ordered, the last one being laid in 1934, CA-44 Vincennes. The three classes had the same general arrangement: 2 gunmounts/turrets (mounts for the N'hampton and Portland, turrets for the NO) front, bridge structure, aviation facilities and hangar amidships, and last mount/turret aft.

In 1933 a new threat started rising in the form of the Mogami class light cruisers that were being built in Japan. The US decided that it too needed a heavily armed light cruiser, so they ordered the design of the Brooklyn class. The design was finalised in 1934 and four ships were ordered (CL-40, 41, 42, 43), the first one being laid in 1935 (another three were ordered later, CL-46-48)

At this time the US also realised that it had allowance for a new heavy cruiser and so ordered a New Orleans class cruiser under the hull number of CA-45, but the Navy had taken issue with the New Orleans design. The lines of the New Orleans were worse than that of Brooklyn, the midships-mounted hangar represented a firedanger greater than the of the Brooklyns' stern-mounted hangar, so the decision was made to try and build a heavy cruiser on the basis of the Brooklyn class. That ended up to be the USS Wichita.

 

The 3 forward three-gun 6" turrets were replaced by two three-gun 8" turrets, as were the two after 6" turrets replaced by an 8" turret. These turrets were designated "three-gun" instead of "triple", because the guns were individually sleeved, and so could elevate separately. The guns were the new Mk 12's instead of the Mk 14's used on the previous classes. These guns would go on to become the basis for the Mk 15, which would arm the Baltimore class (and that's not the only commonality between Wichita and B-more).

The secondary armament was reworked: instead of having four 5"/25 gun on each side, the Navy introduced the new and soon-to-be ubiquitous 5"/38 gun in four open pedestal mounts (two on each side) and four in enclosed base ring mounts (one on each side of the bridge structure, one aft of the forward main turrets, superfiring it, and one forward of the rear main turret). Wichita was the first ship to mount 5"/38 secondary armament. She could fire five 5" guns to one side.

The ship was also very well armoured with a maximum thickness of 6.4" (160mm) of armour on the belt which gradually thinned out to 4.5" (114mm) on the ends. The conning tower was 6" (152mm), the deck was on the thickest parts was 2.25" (57mm), the barbettes were 7" (178mm), the turrets had 8" (203mm) front, 3.75" (95mm) side and rear and 2.75" (70mm). The armour was also Class A, which had better protection-to-thickness ratio than the Class B previously used on the New Orleans class.

The machinery was similar to that of Brooklyn, in alternating boiler and engine rooms as to not lose all power in a single lucky hit.

AA firepower consisted originally of only .50cal MG's a couple of 1.1" (28mm) quad cannons and the 5"/38 DP guns. This was gradually upgraded throughout the war by replacing the .50cals with 20mm Oerlikon cannons and the 1.1" guns with 40mm Bofors guns. By the end of the war she'd carry 18 20mm Oerlikons, four quad Bofors mounts and four twin Bofors mounts, giving her a rather impressive AA supplement.

 

 

"Well, Toast, this is nice and dandy, but how does that translate into the game?" - I hear you ask. Well, fret not, here's what we concocted up with Trainspite:

 

SajjM8m.png

Wichita in her Atlantic camouflage from 1942, this would be her premium camouflage wether she appears as a prem or a reg - picture credit: shipbucket.com

 

 

Class: Heavy cruiser

Tier: 8 

Battletiering: 8-10

 

Module tree:

fiR44Zj.jpg

Picture credit: Trainspite

 

A hull (as she appeared in 1940)

  • Survivability:
    • Hitpoints: 30'500
    • Armour: 16-160mm
  • Artillery: 
    • FCS:
      • Mk 8 mod 1: 15.5km
      • Mk 8 mod 2: 17 km
    • Main battery: 3x 3x 8"/55 Mk 12
      • Rate of train: 6°/s - 30 seconds for 180°
      • Rate of fire: 4 r/m/g - reload: 15 seconds
      • HE: HC Mk 24 mod 5 - 2800 dmg - 14% firechance
        • Broadside weight: 25'200 dmg
        • Max DPM: 100'800 dmg
      • AP: Mk 19 mod 1 - 4500 dmg
        • Broadside weight: 40'500 dmg
        • Max DPM: 162'000 dpm
    • Secondary battery:
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
        • Rate of train: 20°/s - 9 seconds for 180°
        • Rate of fire: 10 r/m/g
        • Maximum targetable mounts: 5
        • Ammunition: HE/HC Mk 32 - 1800 dmg - 5% firechance
          • Broadside weight: 9000 dmg
          • Max DPM: 90000 dmg
  • AA defence:
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
      • DPS: 61
      • Range: 5 km
    • 2x 4x 1.1" (28mm) autocannon
      • DPS: 14
      • Range: 3.1 km
    • 8x .5" (12.7mm) M2 HMG
      • DPS: 30
      • Range: 1.2 km
  • Maneuverability: 
    • Installed power: 100'000 SHP
    • Speed: 33 kts
    • Rudder shift time: 10.2 sec
    • turn radius: 660m
  • Concealment:
    • Surface detection range: 12.2 km
    • Air detect: 7.5 km

 

B hull (as she appeared in 1942) - changes bolded

  • Survivability:
    • Hitpoints: 34'400
    • Armour: 16-160mm
  • Artillery: 
    • FCS: 
      • Mk 8 mod 1: 15.5km
      • Mk 8 mod 2: 17 km
    • Main battery: 3x 3x 8"/55 Mk 12 (same gun on a new hull)
      • Rate of train: 6°/s - 30 seconds for 180°
      • Rate of fire: 4 r/m/g - reload: 15 seconds
      • HE: HC Mk 24 mod 5 - 2800 dmg - 14% firechance
        • Broadside weight: 25'200 dmg
        • Max DPM: 100'800 dmg
      • AP: Mk 19 mod 6 - 4600 dmg
        • Broadside weight: 41'400 dmg
        • Max DPM: 165'600 dpm
    • Secondary battery: 
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
        • Rate of train: 20°/s - 9 seconds for 180°
        • Rate of fire: 10 r/m/g
        • Maximum targetable mounts: 5
        • Ammunition: HE/HC Mk 32 - 1800 dmg - 5% firechance
          • Broadside weight: 9000 dmg
          • Max DPM: 90000 dmg
  • AA defence:
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
      • DPS: 61
      • Range: 5 km
    • 4x 4x 40mm Bofors Mk 1 (quad mount)
      • DPS: 64
      • Range: 3.5 km
    • 22x 20mm Oerlikon Mk 2 
      • DPS: 78
      • Range: 2.1 km
  • Maneuverability: 
    • Installed power: 100'000 SHP
    • Speed: 33 kts
    • Rudder shift time: 8.2 sec
    • turn radius: 660m
  • Concealment:
    • Surface detection range: 12.2 km
    • Air detect: 7.5 km

 

C hull (as she appeared in 1945) - changes bolded

  • Survivability:
    • Hitpoints: 34'400
    • Armour: 16-160mm
  • Artillery: 
    • FCS: 
      • Mk 8 mod 1: 15.5km
      • Mk 8 mod 2: 17 km
    • Main battery: 3x 3x 8"/55 Mk 12 (new guns)
      • Rate of train: 6°/s - 30 seconds for 180°
      • Rate of fire: 5 r/m/g - reload: 12 seconds
      • HE: HC Mk 24 mod 5 - 2800 dmg - 14% firechance
        • Broadside weight: 25'200 dmg
        • Max DPM: 126'000 dmg
      • AP: Mk 19 mod 6 - 4600 dmg
        • Broadside weight: 41'400 dmg
        • Max DPM: 207'000 dmg
    • Secondary battery: 
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
      • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
        • Rate of train: 20°/s - 9 seconds for 180°
        • Rate of fire: 10 r/m/g
        • Maximum targetable mounts: 5
        • Ammunition: HE/HC Mk 32 - 1800 dmg - 5% firechance
          • Broadside weight: 9000 dmg
          • Max DPM: 90000 dmg
  • AA defence:
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 24 (open pedestal mounts)
    • 4x 5"/38 Mk 30 mod 4 (single enclosed base ring mount)
      • DPS: 61
      • Range: 5 km
    • 4x 4x 40mm Bofors Mk 1 (quad mount)
      • DPS: 64
      • Range: 4.2 km
    • 4x 2x 40mm Bofors Mk 2 (twin mount)
      • DPS: 45
      • Range: 4.2 km
    • 18x Oerlikon Mk 4
      • DPS: 65
      • Range: 2.1 km
  • Maneuverability: 
    • Installed power: 100'000 SHP
    • Speed: 33 kts
    • Rudder shift time: 7.2 sec
    • turn radius: 660m
  • Concealment:
    • Surface detection range: 12.2 km
    • Air detect: 7.5 km

 

The C hull is also how we laid out the Premium version.

 

Consumable-wise she'd be pretty much the same as the New Orleans class, with the only difference that we have considered adding a HEAL consumable for the premium version.

 

 

xE386oe.jpg

Line drawing of USS Wichita of how she appeared in 1945

 

So here we are. Overall a pretty strong looking ship. I hope you like it.

At least half the credits go to Trainspite, as mentioned aready.

 

Sources:

www.world-war.co.uk

navweaps.com

navsource.com

shipbucket.com

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T_H_0_R   

I'll just quote Dropsiq here: "give it to me already!" :D

 

Nicely done. Love the mix of old pre war and later designs incorporated in the Balmer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VC381   

Nice summary, although I'm thinking she's unique enough to make her a premium (on the assumption more premiums are significantly more likely than a whole new branch). How do you justify the 17km range BTW? 1.2km more than Baltimore?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice summary, although I'm thinking she's unique enough to make her a premium (on the assumption more premiums are significantly more likely than a whole new branch). How do you justify the 17km range BTW? 1.2km more than Baltimore?!

 

How do I justify it?

Gameplay wise by the fact that the US CA line is one of, or the only CA line that is a pure gun line with no torpedoes at all over a certain point. They also got out-powercreep'd by both new lines, so I think a rangebuff over the entire US CA line would be justified. US cruisers in game are one of the slowest, so they can't even catch up easily with the ships they should be killing. TL;DR: they are handicapped in that department anyway. 

Historically the justification is that the USN had very good firecontrol over all its ships with radar-guided firecontrol that could provide target data over long distances. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I'll just quote Dropsiq here: "give it to me already!" :D

GIB!

gib.gif

 

On the side note - yeah, Wichita would make a nice premium. She's a little less known then the rest of the US cruisers, and would make a great tier VIII premium. Unfortunately, the way the US CA are implemented, tier VIII is pretty lackluster. That would mean, that Wichita would be either straight up better then New Orleans, which is not exactly fair and good idea, or it would be same/worse, which means it would occupy bottom levels of might in CA family. Both of those possibilities are not exactly what I would look forward too :D 

 

But I would buy it, that's for sure :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GIB!

gib.gif

 

On the side note - yeah, Wichita would make a nice premium. She's a little less known then the rest of the US cruisers, and would make a great tier VIII premium. Unfortunately, the way the US CA are implemented, tier VIII is pretty lackluster. That would mean, that Wichita would be either straight up better then New Orleans, which is not exactly fair and good idea, or it would be same/worse, which means it would occupy bottom levels of might in CA family. Both of those possibilities are not exactly what I would look forward too :D 

 

But I would buy it, that's for sure :D

 

 

It would be pretty hard to make her worse than NO IMO:sceptic: I'm really not impressed by the New Orleans, so Wichita would be better fo sho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VC381   

In the context of a range buff to the whole US CA line, which indeed makes historical sense, then yes 17km would be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we have Indianapolis which is just better Pensacola, so... yeah, I think we would get just better NO, or worse Balti.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎24‎-‎07‎-‎2016 at 9:08 PM, piritskenyer said:

Mogami class light cruisers that were being built in Japan. The US decided that it too needed a heavily armed light cruiser, so they ordered the design of the Brooklyn class.

 

Now, that I would like to see in my port.

 

that ship, cl-45 seems a lot better t8 than the current one.

 

Nice topic by the way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El2aZeR   

ThreadNecro.jpg

 

Also apparently Wichita is already slated to replace NO (which gets bumped down to T7) as the T8 USN CA if WoWs Blitz is any indication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Affeks   
22 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Also apparently Wichita is already slated to replace NO (which gets bumped down to T7) as the T8 USN CA if WoWs Blitz is any indication.

I hope this aint true, Wichita is such a perfect premium candidate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Affeks said:

I hope this aint true, Wichita is such a perfect premium candidate

 

And also that she would not be much different from New Orleans as to warrant replacing the latter. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2017 at 2:19 PM, El2aZeR said:

ThreadNecro.jpg

 

Also apparently Wichita is already slated to replace NO (which gets bumped down to T7) as the T8 USN CA if WoWs Blitz is any indication.

I hope this IS true, because I really cannot get to grasps with Pepsicola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El2aZeR   
15 minutes ago, gekkehenkie50 said:

I hope this IS true, because I really cannot get to grasps with Pepsicola.

 

Spoiler

FgY7LzT.png

Pensa actually got bumped down to T6. If T6 had decent MM she'd be hilariously overpowered.

 

Other trees and screenshots can be found here:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Pensa actually got bumped down to T6. If T6 had decent MM she'd be hilariously overpowered.

 

 

You must be joking right?

 

It's just not possible...well improbably.

Pensa, t6? WTF?

And what about the Cleveland?

they should remove that floating turd of the tree, not the Cleveland. Or make Pensa a premium ship, a rare one, like the Flint.

 

By the way,

 

If that materializes, what will happen to who have the Cleveland? Do they take it back from the accounts or can we still play with them? 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El2aZeR   
3 minutes ago, Butterdoll said:

If that materializes, what will happen to who have the Cleveland? Do they take it back from the accounts or can we still play with them? 

 

Not going to happen for quite some time according to WG. It's well known that a USN cruiser split between CAs and CLs will happen sometime next year. Cleve will get bumped to T8 in the new line, where she quite frankly should've always been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Not going to happen for quite some time according to WG. It's well known that a USN cruiser split between CAs and CLs will happen sometime next year. Cleve will get bumped to T8 in the new line, where she quite frankly should've always been.

 

 

Now you scared me.

I've eared about that split, I'm waiting for that.

But in the link you shared I'm not seeing that line.

 

But wait. (again)

 

If the Cleveland it's tier6 and will go up to t8, what will happen to the players that have the Cleve t6? And can we go up and down the tree?

 

P.s.- I'm not seeing Mogami either

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El2aZeR   
19 minutes ago, Butterdoll said:

But in the link you shared I'm not seeing that line.

 

It's just WoWs Blitz. Probably has some limitations regarding how much stuff you can initially put in if not enough people are working on it.

Funny how Mogami has been replaced by Takao, though.

 

20 minutes ago, Butterdoll said:

If the Cleveland it's tier6 and will go up to t8, what will happen to the players that have the Cleve t6?

 

Considering the last time such a thing happened (IJN DD split)? Players will get to keep Cleve at T8 while they also get either Pensa or the new T6 CL (if the split starts at T6).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VC381   

I know a lot of people struggle when they reach Pensacola but to put it bluntly the issue isn't with the ship, at least not in her current post-buff state. I would rate her top 3 of the Tier 7 cruiser pack. She has the potential to be hilariously OP at T6, but unfortunately that also means people will hit her sooner and hate her even more.

 

I actually like the proposed tree in Blitz in principle although I worry slightly that some of the US cruisers will lose what (for me) makes them so fun. Currently they have some of the best ergonomics of any ship, and this is what will probably be nerfed if/when they get down-tiered. Pensacola just wouldn't be Pensacola anymore with bad rudder shift for example.

 

Still, it makes sense to try to fit a real ship at T6 in preparation for the tree split, and just generally to give us more classes without resorting to premiums. Plus we now have precedent for a "pocket battleship" as a CA at T6 (Graf Spee), which is basically what Pensacola would end up being at that tier. Guess we wait and see.

 

Also Cleveland may not be T8, because then where do you put Brooklyn? Cleveland is kind of balanced at the moment so she wouldn't be OP at T7, but Brooklyn would be, and is the better T8 candidate despite having less AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, VC381 said:

I know a lot of people struggle when they reach Pensacola but to put it bluntly the issue isn't with the ship, at least not in her current post-buff state. I would rate her top 3 of the Tier 7 cruiser pack. She has the potential to be hilariously OP at T6, but unfortunately that also means people will hit her sooner and hate her even more.

 

I actually like the proposed tree in Blitz in principle although I worry slightly that some of the US cruisers will lose what (for me) makes them so fun. Currently they have some of the best ergonomics of any ship, and this is what will probably be nerfed if/when they get down-tiered. Pensacola just wouldn't be Pensacola anymore with bad rudder shift for example.

 

Still, it makes sense to try to fit a real ship at T6 in preparation for the tree split, and just generally to give us more classes without resorting to premiums. Plus we now have precedent for a "pocket battleship" as a CA at T6 (Graf Spee), which is basically what Pensacola would end up being at that tier. Guess we wait and see.

 

Also Cleveland may not be T8, because then where do you put Brooklyn? Cleveland is kind of balanced at the moment so she wouldn't be OP at T7, but Brooklyn would be, and is the better T8 candidate despite having less AA.

Thing is, if you have played myoko, its hard to see any + side in pepsicola, besides a bit more AA and situationally better AP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VC381   
43 minutes ago, gekkehenkie50 said:

Thing is, if you have played myoko, its hard to see any + side in pepsicola, besides a bit more AA and situationally better AP.

 

I've played Myoko and while I don't dislike it, I prefer Pensacola. Myoko is sluggish and has horrible turret traverse and firing angles. It's a strong ship for sure but it can be frustrating to play sometimes. Pensacola is a joy to sail, responsive like she can read your mind, and now stealthier too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×