Royal Navy Cruiser line

[IanEglin]

Great to see that the Royal Navy line is getting developed

However, I have a couple of observations

 

1. They seem to be 1 level over tiered from Leander. It is crazy to put Leander in the same tier as Cleveland. Leander was a very light cruiser 8,000 tonnes, Cleveland nearer 14,000 tonnes. A complete mismatch.  Designed in the early 30's it should be at tier 5.  Create space at tier 5 by removing one of the lower cruisers. Caledon, Danae & Emerald are all too alike.

 

2. There are no 8" gunned RN cruisers in the line up although their a plenty of historic examples.  Exeter 6 x 8",  Kent 8 x 8" with sub-classes London & Norfolk.  These perfectly line up against Yorke and Hipper. Make space by removing a 6" gunned triple mount cruiser, which cover 5 levels, Fiji, Edinburgh Belfast, Neptune, Minotaur. Belfast & Edinburgh are the same ship and one could be lost. All of these cruisers are really at the Cleveland tier 6 level, maybe Belfast / Edinburgh could go to tier 7 because they were designed with armour against 8" gunned ships.

 

3. The addition of the Dido class, would be a great comparator for the Atlanta class.

 

 

[typhaon]

I guess that they will devide cruiser lines into heavy and light cruisers on the long run. It looks like a like cruiser tree from bottom to top, so I guess they left out any heavies intentionally.

The same has been mentioned to other cruiser lines in the past, where the Cleveland will take a spot in the light branch in the future.

[Lightbaron]

1. Please don't use Cleveland as example for misplaced tiers. She herself belongs at least to t7, if not t8 once she's unnerfed and the USN CL line is introduced. There were multiple dev replies about that topic in the past.

 

2. The RN Cruiser line is a CL line and not a CA or mixed line. Cruiser with 8" guns are commonly classified as CAs and not as CLs and therefore misplaced in a clean CL line.

Belfast is a premium ship and not part of the CL line, Minotaur has dual turrets and not tripple turrets.

And how do you want to know that all of the CLs are t6/t7 level at best and don't fit in their respective tiers if you haven't even played them?

[Combat_Hamster]

I think they look very strong  tiers 1-4,  Emerald  looks a  bit weak at 5  and  Leander  looks  very poor  for  6,  the  rest look fine

[IanEglin]

I'm quite new to WoW so haven't much experience of how cruisers lines have developed, so your comments are interesting.

 

With regard to how the ships play, that's a fair point, I'm perhaps thinking about the real world capabilities.

 

Still think Leander is over tiered.

 

 

[Combat_Hamster]

Would agree with  Leander  being  a  tier too  high.  I think Effingham as rebuilt  might perhaps  have been better,  with a  pair of T.T. either side ( she did have 4/6 fixed ).  a  bit tougher,  and  an unusual look..so a bit  different.

[xXx_Blogis_xXx]

i m disapointed by rn cruisers , with curent stats hardly worth a grind , like minotaur , with curent arc from range u hardly can hit any ship , unless bb ,and from 10km range with 100+ armor jez u can be rekt in no time

[ThePurpleSmurf]

If the common opinion about the current cruiser lines is Russian > Japanese > German > American, where does the RN will fit in?

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

Well, I had a pleasure to play alongside few of them recently, and I can only say this: they will be very very strong opponents, but they're also pretty demanding. They'll not perform in hands of weak and average players.

[Panocek]

i m disapointed by rn cruisers , with curent stats hardly worth a grind , like minotaur , with curent arc from range u hardly can hit any ship , unless bb ,and from 10km range with 100+ armor jez u can be rekt in no time

 

100mm citadel can shrug off cruiser guns just fine when angled, thinner armor also can help with citadel overpens against battleships. 16mm armor everywhere else means they will be in world of pain against destroyers, I wouldn't be surprised if hightier russian DDs would counter them nicely.

[Akula971]

If you look at WoT, they did the same with the British line, low dmg, high RoF, "high accuracy" , a line of vehicles that are not newbie/noob friendly. If you compare to a Japanese light cruiser, such as the Yubari, Kuma, etc, then that is the playstyle you need, only your gun range is crap. So play them like big US DDs, make use of cover and don't try to slug it out with other ships. We shall see........................... in time.

[IanEglin]

'If the common opinion about the current cruiser lines is Russian > Japanese > German > American, where does the RN will fit in?'

 

 

I don't think the performance of ships online, necessarily accurately reflects the actual capabilities of the real ships in battle.

 

I think the owners must give the Russian ships a bit of a leg up.

[Combat_Hamster]

'If the common opinion about the current cruiser lines is Russian > Japanese > German > American, where does the RN will fit in?'

 

 

 

I don't think the performance of ships online, necessarily accurately reflects the actual capabilities of the real ships in battle.

 

 

I think the owners must give the Russian ships a bit of a leg up.

No....in  the interest  of  balance,  that's  why  Kirov  has  twice  the ROF she did IRL,  Leander  was a  much better  ship IRL  than  say the German light  cruisers  which were so bad  they had  to be rebuilt  and were  used in the main as  training  ships.  It is an arcade  game  and  not an accurate  simulator

[VC381]

1. If we're talking about date of construction and tonnage, Leander is absolutely fine compared to Aoba and Nurnberg. Cleveland is the one that doesn't belong, but to be honest with all the nerfs she isn't even that strong. I imagine with fast turning turrets, good rudder and smoke a Leander could still spank a Cleveland no problem.

 

2. I'm actually glad they missed out the 8" ships. To be honest they are an anomaly, the RN felt obliged to build up to the treaty limit but their needs were more suited to the light cruisers they built afterwards. There were plenty of ships to fill the tree and the progression is more logical this way, rather than suddenly jumping to 8" armed ships for a tier or two (probably around T6-7) then back to 6" ships for the Edinburgh. Maybe we'll get them one day as their own dedicated "side line" similar to what IJN DDs have, but without paper ships it would basically be a dead-end line with e.g. York/Exeter at T6 and the County class at T7.

 

3. http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/61409-do-you-think-well-get-a-dido/ but I don't consider her a true Atlanta equivalent because her RoF is actually pretty bad considering the guns are meant to be DP. T6 premium would make me happy there.

 

On a general note, smoke on cruisers is incredibly powerful (think Kutuzov). One thing I like about how they designed the RN line is the ships are obviously meant to be played aggressive, and that really captures the spirit of the RN for me. The fact that some of the ships look up-tiered (by age of design) only adds to the David vs. Goliath feeling. It might be weird to say that for the biggest navy of the war but remember the RN usually went for more ships to cover the empire rather than trying to have the biggest/baddest ship in each category. There are many stories involving RN cruisers beating what looked like pretty steep odds on paper. It looks like the ships will be small, agile, with gun handling to match, and I just think they'll feel "right" that way

[IanEglin]

Some good points.

 

Looking forward to their launch.

[GhostRiderMax123]

1. If we're talking about date of construction and tonnage, Leander is absolutely fine compared to Aoba and Nurnberg. Cleveland is the one that doesn't belong, but to be honest with all the nerfs she isn't even that strong. I imagine with fast turning turrets, good rudder and smoke a Leander could still spank a Cleveland no problem.

 

2. I'm actually glad they missed out the 8" ships. To be honest they are an anomaly, the RN felt obliged to build up to the treaty limit but their needs were more suited to the light cruisers they built afterwards. There were plenty of ships to fill the tree and the progression is more logical this way, rather than suddenly jumping to 8" armed ships for a tier or two (probably around T6-7) then back to 6" ships for the Edinburgh. Maybe we'll get them one day as their own dedicated "side line" similar to what IJN DDs have, but without paper ships it would basically be a dead-end line with e.g. York/Exeter at T6 and the County class at T7.

 

3. http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/61409-do-you-think-well-get-a-dido/ but I don't consider her a true Atlanta equivalent because her RoF is actually pretty bad considering the guns are meant to be DP. T6 premium would make me happy there.

 

On a general note, smoke on cruisers is incredibly powerful (think Kutuzov). One thing I like about how they designed the RN line is the ships are obviously meant to be played aggressive, and that really captures the spirit of the RN for me. The fact that some of the ships look up-tiered (by age of design) only adds to the David vs. Goliath feeling. It might be weird to say that for the biggest navy of the war but remember the RN usually went for more ships to cover the empire rather than trying to have the biggest/baddest ship in each category. There are many stories involving RN cruisers beating what looked like pretty steep odds on paper. It looks like the ships will be small, agile, with gun handling to match, and I just think they'll feel "right" that way

 

Indeed there are definitely many story's about the RN and its cruisers, one of the ones I quite like is the confrontation between 3 cruisers and the Admiral Graf Spee I think it sums up the RN quite well.

[Ictogan]

I think a David vs Goliath feeling will arise a lot more for BBs fighting RN CLs than for the RN CLs themselves.

[Talheng]

Came across a few of the British cruisers while playing over the weekend , taking into account the people playing them are generally good  In all 3 cases i came across them they have scored over 100k damage and tend to sit at the top of the leader boards.

 

Yesterday on two brothers after taking the D cap and pushing on came up against a Leander  in my Scharnhorst and had to run down the middle to escape  as the HE flamethrower was just to much with the HP i had left.

 

From what i have seen these cruisers perform very well as long as your capable of dodging return fire  and using smoke or available cover to rain HE on people. So basically like the majority of cruisers in the game.

[piritskenyer]

Came across a few of the British cruisers while playing over the weekend , taking into account the people playing them are generally good  In all 3 cases i came across them they have scored over 100k damage and tend to sit at the top of the leader boards.

 

Yesterday on two brothers after taking the D cap and pushing on came up against a Leander  in my Scharnhorst and had to run down the middle to escape  as the HE flamethrower was just to much with the HP i had left.

 

From what i have seen these cruisers perform very well as long as your capable of dodging return fire  and using smoke or available cover to rain HE on people. So basically like the majority of cruisers in the game.

 

Don't forget that RN CL's are at the moment sailed by supertesters, who are for the overwelming majority, good players. When normal (""normal"") people get them, that may not always be the case.

[Kazomir]

Well.

 

LOOK AT THOOSE CITADELS!!! I mean, Leander, Fiji and Edinburgh have fairly standart under-the-water citadels (leander's citadel is miniature even), but... all the rest of them have HUGE parts that go way above the waterline. This will be a very huge nail in the coffin for those cruisers. (or maybe the coffin itself) 

 

Compare theese citadels to the Nurnberg's citadel for example (Nurnberg being a ship famous for getting citadelled ALL THE BLOODY TIME) and you'd feel safe sailing the Nurnberg IMO.

 

Also, from what was leaked, the leter tiers get neither AA Panic consumable nor a plane. so they will be useless for AA.

 

 

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

I must say, I'm not exactly convinced about those citadels. Now, hear me out: this is "armour viewer" not "citadel viewer". It only shows the armour section of the ship, not how the modules and hit boxes are placed. I'm sure most of them are behind armour, but it might be that armour belt is one thing, and actuall citadel is second thing. I'm not 100% sure of course, since we can't see exact hit box placement, but I think it might be a possibility. Second of all, remember that showing broadside is always an invitation to get obliterated, size of the citadel is not actuall an issue here, it's how you position yourself. It's a flaw, obviously, but I think we shouldn't be too worried about it. 

As for AA. From the leaked stats - AA guns got godlike DPS (near Des Moines level). And it's perfect - it is capable of defending against a weak strike, but will suffer from a well executed airstrike while not raping planes like mad. It's perfectly balanced for CV's, since we already have 4 lines of CA with Defensive Fire, as well as one DD line. I think it's enough.

What makes me sooo hyped about those CL's (apart from my love of RN design), is that those vessels will perform at maximum capacity when you execute teamplay behaviour. Sticking to radar CA to go into caps, looming near Defensive Fire sporting ship for AA protection. I can't wait to get my paws on them!

[Poster_2015]

Well as for citadels, its like Dropsiq said - its not 100% accurate. Other things that might affect that:

 

- all kinds of slopes. The mentioned Nurnberg is actually pretty hard to citadel at SHORT range. At long range - it gets citadelled like no other ship. But then it shows you broadside at 6km while torping you and suddenty all you get is 1000 dmg overpens. 

- If they underperform they will just add some weight to them and put them deeper in the water.

 

As for AA however, they definitely have rather weak AA. I see you checked t10 Dropsiq - its the exception, it actually has good one. But tier 9 and below have excellent AA , but not excellent ENOUGH to do much without AA skill. Given low torpedo protection and AA still below the level of BBs, I can see them becoming my favorite food on my CVs. Cruisers in general are sitting ducks from a CV point of view if they dont have AA skill, but you never know... - and thats saving grace for those CA captains that decide to use sonar instead - many CVs wont risk going for them. Well with Brit CLs you WILL know they are ripe for plucking .

 

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

Yeah, as for AA I checked only tier X. I propably won't keep Neptune in port (I might, depends on how she plays), and on tier VIII 2 TB squads from Shokaku are not so deadly. Like I said, if you will want to perform in RN CL's, you will have to cooperate with team - at least in some aspects. And that's fine in my books. Like I said, I played alongside few of them, and Fiji combined with Indianapolis is pretty deadly combo. 

[creamgravy]

Citadels:

Both Neptune and Minotaur look unplayable in the games I've seen them, all those RNG overpens that make cruisers playable turn into citadels. Both get instantly deleted when spotted, BBs don't need to aim.

They need the same draught and reduced engine room hitbox as Fiji/Edinburgh asap (same design)

 

Gun arcs:

They all look great to me.

 

AA:

Neptune can join Montana in the 1k club and Minotaur has nuts 8.6km long range AA. Giving them defensive fire would be utterly OP agasint carriers and smoke is far more useful.

 

Total AA (max)	DPS
Montana	1246
Neptune	1097
Minotaur	926
Des Moines	914
Hindenburg	814
Großer Kurfürst	764
Cleveland	359

 

Long range AA (max)	DPS	Range (km)
Minotaur	833	7.2 - 8.6
Des Moines	777	7.2
Hindenburg	708	6.5 - 7.2
Großer Kurfürst	670	7.2 - 7.5
Neptune	584	7.2 - 8.6
Montana	475	7.2
Cleveland	220	7.2

[Poster_2015]

Well not sure what those tables are for. Yes their AA without the consumable is great, and if they had access to it they would be OP. But without it, they are still very viable targets.