Royal Navy Tech Tree Proposal

[Trainspite]

Alright, I finally got around to putting this thread back, after the old one died. Hopefully this one won't get locked or buried so easily. Maybe to avoid it getting locked people can ask me to review one of the ships in the tree for them, and how I would expect it to play. Throw out a few stats or so. Maybe introduce my feelings on other nations. Though I would leave Italy alone, since there is already a very good thread on Italian ships here. (Heads up Deamon!)

 

Either way, here be the tech tree, in it's latest form. 

 

 

Last updated: 27-5-2017

 

 

 

Basically, excluding 2nd CV line, Slow BB line, Second CL line, 2nd CA line, and 3rd DD line.

 

Last updated: 27-5-2017

 

 

CVs, CVLs, CVEs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last updated: 27-5-2017

 

Reviews:

- 'Magnificent' BC Design J3

Regular Tier 8 Fast Battleship/Battlecruiser

- 'Surrey' Design Y

Regular Tier 8 Heavy Cruiser

- Worcester

Premium Tier 4 Destroyer

- Kent

Regular Tier 7 Cruiser

 

 

[Deamon93]

Don't you worry about that, you can introduce your feelings(after my cut of course ).

 

Joking aside you should update the cruiser lines considering the one WG made(or you can just post the image of the line here without editing, that should be much faster).

[piritskenyer]

Why didn't you tell me you put it up again

 

Yeah, I just came to say that I still admire the work you put into this. Daemon is right in that you should adjust the CA/CL line in accordance with what's about to be introduced (supposing they don't scrap it entirely and start working from scratch, which... err), and adjust the possible CA line to that.

 

Otherwise, amazing as before

[Webley_Mark]

Great work, great work.

 

[Trainspite]

Don't you worry about that, you can introduce your feelings(after my cut of course ).

 

Joking aside you should update the cruiser lines considering the one WG made(or you can just post the image of the line here without editing, that should be much faster).

 

It's more that I probably couldn't find anything else to say about the Italian ships and your line, except that Das ist gut.

I'll probably put another version in, with the cruisers re-arranged, though it is a little awkward, WG have used a tier 10 candidate at tier 9 :/

 

Why didn't you tell me you put it up again

 

Yeah, I just came to say that I still admire the work you put into this. Daemon is right in that you should adjust the CA/CL line in accordance with what's about to be introduced (supposing they don't scrap it entirely and start working from scratch, which... err), and adjust the possible CA line to that.

 

Otherwise, amazing as before

 

Late night tech tree workings! Plus, there are certain things I'm not... Talkative and informing people is one .

 

[Hanszeehock]

What would be nice, would be a tech tree that tries to predict what the main lines will look like, rather than all the possible candidates 

[Blitzkrieguk]

Give me the HMS Worcester! Sod the Vansittart!

[Trainspite]

What would be nice, would be a tech tree that tries to predict what the main lines will look like, rather than all the possible candidates 

 

That is the main tree .

 

The rest of the candidates get bundled into the premium section. It is just how many trees can be made in total, realistically without resorting to a majority of design ships. Eventually, after many many years, the tree could end up looking like the above. I can create a cropped down tree for your viewing though (Cutting out Slow BBs, 2nd & 3rd DD lines, 2nd CL line, 2nd CA line, and the unarmoured carrier line).

 

Give me the HMS Worcester! Sod the Vansittart!

 

Worcester wouldn't be a bad premium actually, a possible tier 3 in her 1940-42 form, with 3 120mm guns and only 1 triple torpedo launcher. She would make Campbeltown a little obsolete though, but I can't see Worcester at tier 4 that well. 

 

Vansittart gets the tech tree spot because she is the lead of (sort of) the modified W class. Though I think Volunteer and a few others are older than the Vansittart, so I probably should change it to them.

[Snowyskies]

Nice work.

 

I've looked at your proposal before and thought it looks good, at least nothing seems that out of place. Not that I know the stats of all of these classes on top of my head and especially some of the designs are beyond me. However now as you posted it again one area that I'm questioning somewhat is the destroyer leaders. Swift is probably alright despite the high tonnage at tier 2 due to its guns, bur both Parker and Marksman seems to have the tools to be rather oppressive at their tires. What is your view on these, how is Simoom or Matchless supposed to fight Marksman at tier 3?

 

As a general though not strictly related to this tree, but oh how tier 9 and 10 is bereft of real ships. It seems only destroyers can keep up through laid down and launched ships all the way to tier 10. Apart from them it is just paper all over the place no matter the nation and no matter the line.

[Blitzkrieguk]

Vansittart gets the tech tree spot because she is the lead of (sort of) the modified W class. Though I think Volunteer and a few others are older than the Vansittart, so I probably should change it to them.

 

However the Worcester has a hell of a combat history, the stories from my Grandfather were pretty amazing from his days upon the Worcester. 

[Trainspite]

 

However the Worcester has a hell of a combat history, the stories from my Grandfather were pretty amazing from his days upon the Worcester. 

 

WG use the lead ship of a class in the tech tree, if that class is in the tech tree.

Worcester is far from the lead ship of the modified Ws I'm afraid. However, I do know that she is one of the more well known Ws, and so I think she can appear in her 1941 appearance or so as a premium. In fact, I could put a little write up of Worcester if you want, similar to the reviews in my signature...

 

Nice work.

 

I've looked at your proposal before and thought it looks good, at least nothing seems that out of place. Not that I know the stats of all of these classes on top of my head and especially some of the designs are beyond me. However now as you posted it again one area that I'm questioning somewhat is the destroyer leaders. Swift is probably alright despite the high tonnage at tier 2 due to its guns, bur both Parker and Marksman seems to have the tools to be rather oppressive at their tires. What is your view on these, how is Simoom or Matchless supposed to fight Marksman at tier 3?

 

As a general though not strictly related to this tree, but oh how tier 9 and 10 is bereft of real ships. It seems only destroyers can keep up through laid down and launched ships all the way to tier 10. Apart from them it is just paper all over the place no matter the nation and no matter the line.

 

Well, you are comparing the Destroyer line with the M, R and S classes to the Destroyer Leader line. The Destroyer Leader is meant to be a bit more of a bully I would think, but pay for it with worse maneuverability and detection. If they prove a bit too much, then they can give them lower range torpedoes as well. Similar-ish to the Russian Destroyers. The normal M, R and S would almost certainly get better torpedoes I would think. 

 

Britain didn't exactly build anything that tier 10 worthy for the games purposes, due to the nature of Britain after the war and her finances. There isn't a lot over tier 8 as well. Lion & Malta were cancelled, Neptune & Minotaur were eventually cut due to strained finances. The RN has an awful lot at the lower tiers though (Tier 7 and below). No other navy can manage this number of ships really. 

 

 

 

 

[Snowyskies]

Well, you are comparing the Destroyer line with the M, R and S classes to the Destroyer Leader line. The Destroyer Leader is meant to be a bit more of a bully I would think, but pay for it with worse maneuverability and detection. If they prove a bit too much, then they can give them lower range torpedoes as well. Similar-ish to the Russian Destroyers. The normal M, R and S would almost certainly get better torpedoes I would think. 

 

Mm, it's probably alright but you'd probably have to allow the "normal" UK destroyer to stealth torp in order to compete. The guns aren't after all so spectacular going by their low muzzle velocity, the high rate of fire helps a bit but I'm not sure I'd want to get into a gun fight with Matchless against Wickes either due to the muzzle velocity.

 

Britain didn't exactly build anything that tier 10 worthy for the games purposes, due to the nature of Britain after the war and her finances. There isn't a lot over tier 8 as well. Lion & Malta were cancelled, Neptune & Minotaur were eventually cut due to strained finances. The RN has an awful lot at the lower tiers though (Tier 7 and below). No other navy can manage this number of ships really. 

 

No, no, don't get me wrong this isn't restricted to the UK line or a critique of it, everyone suffers from it. USA is the only one that can manage decently at tier 9 and 10 but France can't, Germany can't, Italy can't, Japan can't, Russia can't and UK can't. I simply see it a somewhat of a flaw in how the game is laid out with respect to the tiers when you have two entire tiers that's generally unreachable without going to paper designs. Of course I also understand that they wanted to include the likes of Yamato and Des Moines but it doesn't give you a good environment to work with for the other nations.

[Trainspite]

 

Mm, it's probably alright but you'd probably have to allow the "normal" UK destroyer to stealth torp in order to compete. The guns aren't after all so spectacular going by their low muzzle velocity, the high rate of fire helps a bit but I'm not sure I'd want to get into a gun fight with Matchless against Wickes either due to the muzzle velocity.

 

 

No, no, don't get me wrong this isn't restricted to the UK line or a critique of it, everyone suffers from it. USA is the only one that can manage decently at tier 9 and 10 but France can't, Germany can't, Italy can't, Japan can't, Russia can't and UK can't. I simply see it a somewhat of a flaw in how the game is laid out with respect to the tiers when you have two entire tiers that's generally unreachable without going to paper designs. Of course I also understand that they wanted to include the likes of Yamato and Des Moines but it doesn't give you a good environment to work with for the other nations.

 

Well, they can get decent torps at the lower tiers, kind of like a Wickes with a longer torpedo range, and centreline torpedo launchers. The muzzle velocity isn't too good, but I doubt the guns will be the primary weapon, when given say 7.5km torpedoes like the Campbeltown. They could probably still beat up a Wakatake due to how inflexible that ship is though.

 

Yeah, that is just one of a fair few faults in the game. Also makes the mid-tiers a little more enjoyable for me I think. But it is there, and I am working around it. 

[Blitzkrieguk]

 In fact, I could put a little write up of Worcester if you want, similar to the reviews in my signature...

 

Yes please, that would be greatly appreciated!

[Trainspite]

 

Yes, I did write this mainly aimed at the NA server. I haven't bothered to go through and edit it, so some things I have written are a little unnecessary. 

 

A detailed look at HMS Worcester (I96)

And no, in case you were thinking, it is not pronounced 'Wooster-cester-shister-shyster-schuster-shister-sister-shire...sher'.

---

 

Alright, I have been far too busy recently, and I was planning to review Minotaur Z4A/ZA, and then that was announced to be the British Tier 10 Light Cruiser while on holiday. Well, that did kind of ruin my plan, even though I knew the RN CLs were going to arrive soon-ish. But I am back, and taking requests (My EU RN Tech Tree thread, and in these threads), I do have the County class cruisers lined up after this, but no promises that I will have them out soon™, I have exams and work (and Supertest duties) taking my time up first.

But, onto the ship. Worcester was requested by ‘Blitzkrieguk’ from the EU forums on my Royal Navy tech tree thread, as his grandfather had served on her. And here is the incoming history paragraph- great wall of text.

 

A nice view of HMS Worcester, seen here anchored at a buoy on the 7th December 1942, at Harwich. The photo illustrates her size quite well, although several gulls have taken perch on her forward section, most noticeably on B gun and the Bridge. Those giant flying rats of the sea must have left a mess, they usually do. 

 

HISTORY

 

Well, I have to put the namesake for the ship in, the city of Worcester, (Pronounced more like 'Wusta' just so you know), and it's very beautiful cathedral. Also included is the ships crest, which could make a nice feature for those flags that WG seem to put into the largest bundle available. Said flag for Worcester could also include the ships motto: 'In bello in pace fedilis', or 'Faithful in War and Peace' in the more commonly used language.

 

HMS Worcester named for the city of Worcester, Worcestershire, was a Modified W class destroyer, laid down on the 20^th December 1918, and commissioned into the Royal Navy on the 20^th September 1922. She was one of the survivors after many of her sisters were scrapped on the slipway following WW1. She spent most of the interwar period in the Mediterranean, assigned with the Pennant number; D96.

On the 16^th February 1937, Worcester, along with other destroyers, were training torpedo runs, using the cruiser HMS Galatea as their target. However, the steering gear Destroyer HMS Active failed, and she collided with Worcester at speed. This caused severe damage, and both Active and Worcester were docked in Malta for repairs.

Recommissioned after a refit that started in late 1937 at Chatham Dockyard, Worcester found herself evacuating 4,350 British Soldiers during Operation Dynamo, the evacuation from Dunkirk. After this, she put into harbour again for a refit, where her pennant number was changed to I96, and saw the rest of 1940 and 1941 escorting convoys and escorting larger ships around the western approaches and North Sea.

Worcester, along with 3 other destroyers, and two destroyer leaders, were ordered to attack the German Battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, along with the Prinz Eugen as they steamed through the English Channel, during the Channel dash on the 12^th February 1942. The 6 ships raced south to launch a torpedo attack, which resulted in no hits, but Worcester was heavily damaged by the 3 large German ships, being set on fire, flooding a boiler room and demolishing the bridge. She was dead in the water, but towed back to harbour.

She was nominated to be converted to a SRE or Short Range Escort while under repair, meant to lose the Y 4.7” gun, for additional depth charges. Her after torpedo tubes had already been replaced by a 3” AA gun. She was sent to escort arctic convoys headed for the Soviet Union, and along with 6 other destroyers, established a refuelling depot at Spitsbergen on the Svalbard Islands. She returned to the UK in September/October 1942, and in December, escorted the two King George V class Battleships, King George V and Howe as well as the Light Cruiser Bermuda, as they provided cover for convoy RA51. 

Released from Arctic Convoy duty in January 1943, Worcester continued to escort convoys along the East Coast of the UK, and protect them against attacks from German MTBs/E-boats. After intercepting the German 4^th MTB flotilla on the 25^th October, Worcester along with other escorts including the Destroyer Leader Mackay defended two convoys from attack, and 4 German MTBs were lost.

However, by the end of the year, Worcester’s escort missions would be over, as she struck a mine on the 23^rd December 1943, destroying her stern, and was decommissioned the next April, as being beyond economical repair. Though recommissioned as HMS Yeoman, and being used as an accommodation ship in London past the Japanese surrender, Yeoman, ex-Worcester was sold for scrap in September 1946, and by the end of 1947, she was no more.

 

Worcester limping back into port following a series of unfortunate events. The 3 destroyers' logs make amusing reading. Reminds me of the total mess that sometimes happens during the Halloween event. 

HMS Active: - 11:18 collided with Worcester

                      - 11:19 collided with Antelope

                          - 11:21 in collision with Antelope

HMS  Antelope: - 11:21 in collision with Active

HMS Worcester: - 11:20 in collision with Active

                                   - 11:21 in collision with Antelope

 

WEIGHT – 1,140t Standard Load - 1,550t Full Load

This roughly translates itself into 10, 420 hit points for a full load. This would put her in the realms of the tier 4s, but the standard load displacement gives 8’540 HP, which is tier 3 levels, only beating Wakatake.

 

ARMOUR – Irrelevant category is irrelevant.

 

MAIN BATTERY – 4 or 3x1 120mm

Depending on what you take. I will take Worcester with all 4 of her 4.7” Mk.1 guns. We are not fighting subs or laying mines just yet in this game!

These guns’ fire 22.68kg round at a velocity of 814mps. This compares quite favourably to Isokaze which only fires a 20.3kg round at 660mps. Or the Izyaslav and Clemson, which while they fire a larger broadside of 4” (102mm) guns, at a higher velocity, the mass of the shell is less, and this should mean that Worcester gets a similar shell path, if not better than the other ships, except possibly Clemson.

The range of these guns is also not likely to be poor either. Worcester is by no means a small ship, and her rangefinder equipment is not likely to be bad.

What does let these guns down is that like Isokaze, their usual Rate of Fire was 5 or 6 Rounds per minute. This means that even at best, the Worcester can just pull equal with the Isokaze’s buffed 9 second reload.

 

SECONDARY BATTERY –

Ehhhh, probably not. Unless you want to get the Captain to get his pistol out or something. You never know it could happen! Especially with the crew animations around.

Yes, ‘A’ gun can be replaced by a six-pounder mounting, but I don’t think anyone wants to give up one of those 4.7” guns.

 

TORPEDO BATTERY –

Though originally built with 2 triple 21” torpedo tubes, one was removed and replaced with a 3” AA gun. To keep Worcester at tier 4, I will use her condition in WW2, minus one set of tubes.

With only 3 tubes, this is surely reminiscent of Campbeltown, except the fact that these tubes are mounted on the centreline.

This means that Worcester better have some decent torpedoes to arm those tubes. Thankfully, she is in luck. The Royal Navy is not too bad on the torpedo front, though this is dependent on what torpedo WG give her. Which can vary as seen from the Royal Navy Light Cruisers.

Aside from that detail here is a selection of torpedoes that are plausible:

• Mk.IV & Mk.IV* - 7.3km @ 56kn (Or 7.5km @ 57 a la Campbeltown)

• Mk.IV (again) – 9.2km @ 50kn or thereabouts. (Can’t see this one being popular)
• Mk.IX  - 9.6km @ 57kn.
• Mk.IX** - 10.1km @ 62kn

Or whatever values care to make up really. Just as long it as decent to compensate for those 3 tubes.

 

A painting of HMS Worcester charging at the Channel Dash force. She is already on fire fore, and has or is about to fire her 3 torpedoes. 

 

AA BATTERY –

Well, you have that 3” AA gun. That same one that Campbeltown has which is effectively useless in game and makes you wish that you had said main gun/torpedo tubes it replaced.

You also have 2 40mm pom poms amidships. Or maybe a few lighter guns like some Oerlikons scattered around. It is actually alright for a tier 4 destroyer. At least compared to her tier 4 destroyers.

 

MANEUVERABILITY –

Could be better really. Her turning circle is likely to be quite average compared to the other tier 4s, but her speed is lacking when compared to other destroyers, between 32 and 34 knots is respectable, but not fantastic. It does make Worcester quite vulnerable to fast light cruisers like Kuma and Phoenix.

 

CONCEALMENT –

HMS Worcester is not an especially stealthy ship. She is large, and fairly tall. A decent comparison would be Nicholas. But depending on which torpedoes Worcester gets, it might be tricky to use Worcester to torpedo from stealth.

 

CONCLUSION –

But how likely is Worcester to appear in the game? Although HMS Campbeltown is a Royal Navy premium DD already, Worcester ticks the boxes in terms of being unique, and with a distinguished service record, but there is one catch, and that is her name. While being a name with many battle honours with the Royal Navy, there is a Worcester which is already modeled in the game, the USN auto-loading cruiser, which as the lead of her class, is the better candidate to retain the name. This means that since the names, as of now, are not shared, HMS Worcester loses out. However, there are a few of Worcester’s sisters shared her characteristics at some point in their careers. Potential candidates are:

• HMS Wren (I88)

• HMS Venomous (I75)
• HMS Veteran (I72)
• HMS Whitshed (I77)
• HMS Wild Swan (I62)
• HMS Witch (I89)
• HMS Witherington (I67)
• HMS Wolverine (I78)

This does mean we could see a modified W class destroyer like Worcester in a partial Short Range Escort form with 4 or 3 120mm, so while Worcester may be unlikely for now, the rest may have a better shot at making it into the game. There is also the Australian quartet of Vampire, Vendetta, Voyager & Waterhen, which sport similar characteristics, and Vampire is likely to be a premium as well.

 

PROS –

- Punchy guns

- Long range on guns 

- For what is worth, AA is good for a DD.

- Long range torpedoes. Maybe. *stares at WG dev team*

 

CONS –

- Sloooooow RoF. For a DD anyway.

- Only 1 triple torpedo launcher.

- Slow. Going to have a hard time getting away from cruisers.

- Not stealthy. Even harder time getting away from cruisers!

 

And just a few more pictures, because why not. Hope ye have all enjoyed reading!

 

She's looking at you! A side profile of Worcester, with her 4.7" (120mm) and 3" AA guns pointed towards the camera.

 

A different view of the Worcester at Harwich, at the back of the line of other V&W class destroyers/ derivatives. 

/end review.

 

 

[Trainspite]

 

Blimey. The thread has fallen onto the second page already. Can't have that!

 

I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but I updated the OP and added the premiums, and more timescale friendly tech tree. Will be updating again sooner or later. 

 

[Snowyskies]

Good post Worcester, but once again the uncertainties around torpedo values strikes! Only a single launcher wouldn't be anything to recommend for someone new to the game either way.

 

I was actually considering posting here earlier simply to bump it up, so if you want something to post about I will take up on your suggestion in the OP

Maybe introduce my feelings on other nations.

unless you don't want to derail it too much from the UK tree. I thought I bring up a single other ship at a time and compare it to the UK line to give you something to write about. if you think it detracts too much from the topic then just say so.

 

So I'd really like to put together a pan-European cruiser line to complement the destroyers lines. Not exactly a lot of choices available but at the lower tiers there are actually options. Now of course I have my own ideas but if you want something to post about then how about Java vs. Emerald and/or Danae? Is Java a tier 5 - I think it might be - or a tier 4. It lacks torpedoes which is a major minus and the NavWeaps rate of fire figure for the gun isn't spectacular. I will point out that I put little trust in the rate of fire value given as NavWeaps is quite lacking in details when dealing with the minor nations, let's assume a higher rate of fire (7?).

75 mm belt + 50 mm slope so Emerald should be toast in a straight gunfight. In close quarter on the other hand Emerald would be more dangerous against other ships thanks to its torpedoes. On the balance about equal... maybe, but then people aren't exactly singing praises to Emerald. At tier 4 on the other hand Java seems a bit too much compared to the likes of Danae and Karlsruhe even without the torpedoes, at least with my suggested RoF. Thoughts?

[FionnMacC]

Alright, I finally got around to putting this thread back, after the old one died. Hopefully this one won't get locked or buried so easily. Maybe to avoid it getting locked people can ask me to review one of the ships in the tree for them, and how I would expect it to play. Throw out a few stats or so. Maybe introduce my feelings on other nations. Though I would leave Italy alone, since there is already a very good thread on Italian ships here. (Heads up Deamon!)

 

Either way, here be the tech tree, in it's latest form. 

 

 

 

 

Basically, excluding 2nd CV line, Slow BB line, Second CL line, 2nd CA line, and 3rd DD line.

 

 

CVs, CVLs, CVEs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'Once more unto the breach, dear friends...'

I'm glad to see the return of this thread.

On the whole a magnificent job, Trainspite. It's the technical knowledge of Historical Naval Architecture that makes your proposals so hard to argue with... but I'm going to try! 

I approve of the BC & BB's, the DD & DL lines, my only observation swapping Unicorn for Furious in the Fleet/Escort CV lines. Then we have the CA line...

Tier II  - Topaze. She's the last of the protected cruisers, which to be honest lead us towards the light cruisers we have already. I would instead suggest Monmouth, as her 6" guns won't seem OP but she has plenty of them & heavier armour. 

III - Birmingham. After Weymouth as Tier II in the CL tree, I feel she's a downgrade instead of an advancement. Personally I'd choose Devonshire, with four 7.5" main guns & a decent amount of secondaries. 6" secondaries, but what the hey... ;)

IV - Belleisle... This was a very good design, & a much tougher call - in case Google has broken down, here's a precis of the proposed B3 Atlantic Cruiser of 1913.

7,400 tons (deep); 540ft long; 30,000shp for 26kts, oil fired boilers; 8x1 7.5in and 4x1 12pdr, 4x 21in Torpedo Tubes (underwater); armour 4in main belt tapering to 3in aft and to 3/1.5in forward, upper belt 3in.

My alternative suggestion is Duke of Edinburgh, as her speed is acceptable, her armour is better & she has those wonderful 6 x 1 9.2" guns... her handling probably isn't as good though.

Tier V (Hawkins) & onwards are all excellent suggestions.

[Trainspite]

Good post Worcester, but once again the uncertainties around torpedo values strikes! Only a single launcher wouldn't be anything to recommend for someone new to the game either way.

 

I was actually considering posting here earlier simply to bump it up, so if you want something to post about I will take up on your suggestion in the OP

unless you don't want to derail it too much from the UK tree. I thought I bring up a single other ship at a time and compare it to the UK line to give you something to write about. if you think it detracts too much from the topic then just say so.

 

So I'd really like to put together a pan-European cruiser line to complement the destroyers lines. Not exactly a lot of choices available but at the lower tiers there are actually options. Now of course I have my own ideas but if you want something to post about then how about Java vs. Emerald and/or Danae? Is Java a tier 5 - I think it might be - or a tier 4. It lacks torpedoes which is a major minus and the NavWeaps rate of fire figure for the gun isn't spectacular. I will point out that I put little trust in the rate of fire value given as NavWeaps is quite lacking in details when dealing with the minor nations, let's assume a higher rate of fire (7?).

75 mm belt + 50 mm slope so Emerald should be toast in a straight gunfight. In close quarter on the other hand Emerald would be more dangerous against other ships thanks to its torpedoes. On the balance about equal... maybe, but then people aren't exactly singing praises to Emerald. At tier 4 on the other hand Java seems a bit too much compared to the likes of Danae and Karlsruhe even without the torpedoes, at least with my suggested RoF. Thoughts?

 

Thank you, at least I know the thread isn't exactly forgotten! I know, there are plenty of destroyers at the low tiers that can act as a noob-friendly premium, ships like the variants of the M, R and Ss. Worcester or a modified W class premium with only one torpedo launcher mount, but very good guns is more of a ship for experienced players who want a fun low tier boat, that doesn't require as much work to play as Campbeltown. 

 

Yeah, I was considering writing something about the L Klasse Cruiser earlier, then compare it to a equivalent ship like Leander. It shouldn't get too off-topic if I keep it mostly RN.

 

Java is a tier 4 for the most part, she is similar to Karlsruhe, but is faster, has an extra gun per broadside and is faster. She would have to be fairly similar to Emerald to work at tier 5, meaning a consumable like smoke. So she can work with both by my guessing, though at tier 5 should also need a mega-RoF buff, along the lines of Karlsruhe, Omaha and Aoba. 

 

'Once more unto the breach, dear friends...'

I'm glad to see the return of this thread.

On the whole a magnificent job, Trainspite. It's the technical knowledge of Historical Naval Architecture that makes your proposals so hard to argue with... but I'm going to try! 

I approve of the BC & BB's, the DD & DL lines, my only observation swapping Unicorn for Furious in the Fleet/Escort CV lines. Then we have the CA line...

Tier II  - Topaze. She's the last of the protected cruisers, which to be honest lead us towards the light cruisers we have already. I would instead suggest Monmouth, as her 6" guns won't seem OP but she has plenty of them & heavier armour. 

III - Birmingham. After Weymouth as Tier II in the CL tree, I feel she's a downgrade instead of an advancement. Personally I'd choose Devonshire, with four 7.5" main guns & a decent amount of secondaries. 6" secondaries, but what the hey... ;)

IV - Belleisle... This was a very good design, & a much tougher call - in case Google has broken down, here's a precis of the proposed B3 Atlantic Cruiser of 1913.

7,400 tons (deep); 540ft long; 30,000shp for 26kts, oil fired boilers; 8x1 7.5in and 4x1 12pdr, 4x 21in Torpedo Tubes (underwater); armour 4in main belt tapering to 3in aft and to 3/1.5in forward, upper belt 3in.

My alternative suggestion is Duke of Edinburgh, as her speed is acceptable, her armour is better & she has those wonderful 6 x 1 9.2" guns... her handling probably isn't as good though.

Tier V (Hawkins) & onwards are all excellent suggestions.

 

Thanks ^^

I guess it is time to do a little explaining ^^. Furious and Unicorn are the only 2 tier 6 carriers in my eyes, unless Ark Royal or Courageous/Glorious get poorer aircraft to compensate for their larger hangar size. Unicorn is in the line leading to Illustrious because I believe that she is slightly tougher than the Furious is definitely more a fleet carrier than light, so it works both ways really. However, I imagine Furious to be a bit more popular than Unicorn, so Furious in the other line may help attract players to it.

 

Topaze is about a good fit for tier 2. Though for the most part she is worse than Dresden, with less HP, less armour, slower etc. - She would need better guns to compensate I would think. Monmouth on the other hand would probably work best as a tier 3 premium. She is like a Stock Bogatyr, armament and speed (well, almost), with St Louis armour, and HP. She is better than both really, so at tier 2 she would overkill. And she also doesn't exactly fit in a tech tree, since armoured cruisers are a bit iffy. 

 

Weymouth is the heavier of the tier 2 cruisers, so I would think she could get moved across to a CA line when it comes out. (Of course return her to normal with HE etc.). Birmingham may struggle, she may turn out a bit like Kolberg, which is a slight improvement over the tier 2 Dresden. Soft stat buffs like range and RoF may be in order for her. The reason for keeping the two Towns around though is that it provides a nice family progression, since the Atlantic Cruiser was developed from the Town class in part, and Hawkins was then based upon that. 

 

The Duke of Edinburgh, another armoured cruiser which is iffy for the game, would require some sort fictional modernisation, her armour and armament is up to scratch, but her AA would need to be something substantial. She can work though, so she is possible, though would be a bit more difficult to balance.

 

But either way, aside from Monmouth at tier 2, the suggestions can work, (Monmouth > Duke of Edinburgh etc.)

 

[FionnMacC]

 

Thank you, at least I know the thread isn't exactly forgotten! I know, there are plenty of destroyers at the low tiers that can act as a noob-friendly premium, ships like the variants of the M, R and Ss. Worcester or a modified W class premium with only one torpedo launcher mount, but very good guns is more of a ship for experienced players who want a fun low tier boat, that doesn't require as much work to play as Campbeltown. 

 

Yeah, I was considering writing something about the L Klasse Cruiser earlier, then compare it to a equivalent ship like Leander. It shouldn't get too off-topic if I keep it mostly RN.

 

Java is a tier 4 for the most part, she is similar to Karlsruhe, but is faster, has an extra gun per broadside and is faster. She would have to be fairly similar to Emerald to work at tier 5, meaning a consumable like smoke. So she can work with both by my guessing, though at tier 5 should also need a mega-RoF buff, along the lines of Karlsruhe, Omaha and Aoba. 

 

 

Thanks ^^

I guess it is time to do a little explaining ^^. Furious and Unicorn are the only 2 tier 6 carriers in my eyes, unless Ark Royal or Courageous/Glorious get poorer aircraft to compensate for their larger hangar size. Unicorn is in the line leading to Illustrious because I believe that she is slightly tougher than the Furious is definitely more a fleet carrier than light, so it works both ways really. However, I imagine Furious to be a bit more popular than Unicorn, so Furious in the other line may help attract players to it.

 

Topaze is about a good fit for tier 2. Though for the most part she is worse than Dresden, with less HP, less armour, slower etc. - She would need better guns to compensate I would think. Monmouth on the other hand would probably work best as a tier 3 premium. She is like a Stock Bogatyr, armament and speed (well, almost), with St Louis armour, and HP. She is better than both really, so at tier 2 she would overkill. And she also doesn't exactly fit in a tech tree, since armoured cruisers are a bit iffy. 

 

Weymouth is the heavier of the tier 2 cruisers, so I would think she could get moved across to a CA line when it comes out. (Of course return her to normal with HE etc.). Birmingham may struggle, she may turn out a bit like Kolberg, which is a slight improvement over the tier 2 Dresden. Soft stat buffs like range and RoF may be in order for her. The reason for keeping the two Towns around though is that it provides a nice family progression, since the Atlantic Cruiser was developed from the Town class in part, and Hawkins was then based upon that. 

 

The Duke of Edinburgh, another armoured cruiser which is iffy for the game, would require some sort fictional modernisation, her armour and armament is up to scratch, but her AA would need to be something substantial. She can work though, so she is possible, though would be a bit more difficult to balance.

 

But either way, aside from Monmouth at tier 2, the suggestions can work, (Monmouth > Duke of Edinburgh etc.)

 

 

I agree with you about Unicorn & Furious, especially Furious perhaps attracting players to the Light CV line. However despite Unicorn's perceived durability (although she's a cut-down Ark Royal, only her deck armour is superior to Furious), her 24-knot speed along with with her lesser self-defence armament would put her in the Light CV category for me (the air complement is about the same, Unicorn 33 to Furious 36). 

I don't agree about Topaze. IF the Weymouth is shifted to the CA line (or replaced with the Birmingham - my data says that she's the heavier & better-armed ship) & replaced by Topaze, then I fear we'll be left with the Tier II underperforming Light Cruiser; she's not only slower, but under-armoured compared to the other Tier II CL's, with only more plentiful but lower-calibre guns; therefore heavier alpha but shorter range. Weymouth is, I feel, in the right place. 

As you said in a previous post about Destroyer Leaders vs Destroyers, the low Tier CA's should be bullies & play differently to the CL's; slower, less manoeuvreable but better armed & armoured. So having a Tier II CA that's roughly comparable to a Tier III CL isn't a problem; doubtless the competition it will face (once the other nations' cruiser lines are separated) will be the Japanese Asama, the Russian Rossia or Gromoboi, the US Rochester (New York Armoured Cruiser) & the German Furst Bismarck. Compared to these ships, the Weymouth/Birmingham is in real trouble & even the Monmouth is outmatched; it might be best to progress straight to the Devonshire.  

Of course the game will change once Tier V is reached, but omitting the armoured cruisers means that you're playing two lines of lights for three tiers. Why bother? You might just as well stick with the existing cruiser lines & alter the RN CL to a CL/CA. 

[creamgravy]

What do you guys think about a premium HMS Hawke? It was a scrapped Swiftsure/Minotaur/Tiger class with 3x3 mark 24 DP guns.

Does anyone have any more details on the guns? A Fiji with 3 'Neptune like' turrets would be epic (Tier 7-8)

[Blitzkrieguk]

Thank you for doing that write up that you said you would 

 

The stories that came from my grandfather from serving on the Worcester was it was just terrifying. Shame he died when I was 3. 

Alot of the guns were blown away during the engagement at Brest which he was a gunner. After that experiance he retrained as a radar opperator and went onto the HMS Phoebe.

[Perrinu]

I had a recent acquisition that could help in the naming of ships not built and not given a name or at least give ideas.

 

I also wish for a HMS Flirt Premium but she seems far too smol to be fun unless you gave her ahistorical weapon upgrade.

 

[FionnMacC]

What do you guys think about a premium HMS Hawke? It was a scrapped Swiftsure/Minotaur/Tiger class with 3x3 mark 24 DP guns.

Does anyone have any more details on the guns? A Fiji with 3 'Neptune like' turrets would be epic (Tier 7-8)

 

The Swiftsures (or Minotaurs, not to be confused with the cancelled design that's currently the RN Tier X ship) were improved versions of the Fiji/Ceylon class; early war designs, subject to the limits of the Second London Naval Treaty so therefore small & difficult to update. Hawke was the most advanced ship in the fourth design group (the first three all differed) & had greater beam to allow for a longer service life & new main guns. The BL 6" Mk XXIV guns intended for Hawke were basically the BL 6" Mk XXIII refitted with a new automatic power breech & housed in a RPC turret with elevation increased to 60 degrees to make them dual-purpose guns. The turrets were no larger than those on the Edinburgh & Fiji, so they would have been rather cramped with the additional machinery in them. The ROF would have been higher, but probably only 12 RPM instead of the 15-20 RPM intended for the all-new MkXXV guns that were intended for the Neptune & Minotaur classes. As a premium, she'd be interesting but I'd rate her as another Tier VII, maybe a VIII at most.

[Trainspite]

 

I agree with you about Unicorn & Furious, especially Furious perhaps attracting players to the Light CV line. However despite Unicorn's perceived durability (although she's a cut-down Ark Royal, only her deck armour is superior to Furious), her 24-knot speed along with with her lesser self-defence armament would put her in the Light CV category for me (the air complement is about the same, Unicorn 33 to Furious 36). 

I don't agree about Topaze. IF the Weymouth is shifted to the CA line (or replaced with the Birmingham - my data says that she's the heavier & better-armed ship) & replaced by Topaze, then I fear we'll be left with the Tier II underperforming Light Cruiser; she's not only slower, but under-armoured compared to the other Tier II CL's, with only more plentiful but lower-calibre guns; therefore heavier alpha but shorter range. Weymouth is, I feel, in the right place. 
As you said in a previous post about Destroyer Leaders vs Destroyers, the low Tier CA's should be bullies & play differently to the CL's; slower, less manoeuvreable but better armed & armoured. So having a Tier II CA that's roughly comparable to a Tier III CL isn't a problem; doubtless the competition it will face (once the other nations' cruiser lines are separated) will be the Japanese Asama, the Russian Rossia or Gromoboi, the US Rochester (New York Armoured Cruiser) & the German Furst Bismarck. Compared to these ships, the Weymouth/Birmingham is in real trouble & even the Monmouth is outmatched; it might be best to progress straight to the Devonshire.  
Of course the game will change once Tier V is reached, but omitting the armoured cruisers means that you're playing two lines of lights for three tiers. Why bother? You might just as well stick with the existing cruiser lines & alter the RN CL to a CL/CA. 

 

 

Birmingham is the better armed ship over Weymouth, Weymouth is tier 2 matieral, being comparable to Chikuma. Topaze is like a light-weight Dresden, slower, with less HP and armour, but a 7 gun broadside and potentially better guns. Topaze is a lot more like a conventional Light cruiser, and definitely suits a CL line better, being lightly armed but with fairly potent firepower (see Minotaur Z4/A). Weymouth on the other hand is more suited to start a CA line, being fairly tanky for tier 2, with slower firing hard hitting 6" guns. Hence, I think Weymouth is a better fit for leading a CA line at tier 2, and Topaze at tier 2. I'm not suggesting it is either one or the other, I want them both!

 

I'm not suggesting Birmingham is a heavy cruiser at this point, but it is the ship development, gradually getting bigger, through the Town class lineage. At tier 3 she is not going to be a heavy cruiser by any means, so while Weymouth may be pretty heavy for tier 2, she ultimately too is still a CL. Birmingham is still a CL as well, so I would not expect her to compete with the armoured cruisers, which would be trying to hunt her down as prey. 

 

Devonshire is iffy, because she only has a 3 gun broadside, compared to the 4 of most other nations, but these armoured cruisers are the tough ones to balance, with decent armour, lacklustre speed, and a small but large calibre armament, exception being Monmouth and alike. If you can balance the armoured cruisers well enough to work, then go ahead, but I wouldn't exactly recommend replacing the Towns and the Atlantic cruiser with them. Progression is one reason, and is one fault with a German Panzerschiffe/Armoured cruiser line, the jump between the sturdy Blucher and the comparatively squishy Deutschland. The same would happen at tier 5, going to Hawkins, if she had an armoured cruiser before her. At least with the Towns and the Atlantic Cruiser B3, you can get a sense of what comes next. It is also not likely that any of the other nations armoured cruisers would appear in a tech tree, with the possible exception of the Germans, so I don't really see trying to push them into a heavy cruiser line for the RN as a good idea. 

 

What do you guys think about a premium HMS Hawke? It was a scrapped Swiftsure/Minotaur/Tiger class with 3x3 mark 24 DP guns.

Does anyone have any more details on the guns? A Fiji with 3 'Neptune like' turrets would be epic (Tier 7-8)

 

It could work, she has more raw broadside potential than the Fiji, Belfast and Eddie, but she has considerably less armour and HP. Being slower also would not help her much. So it does depend a little on what WG would decide, nerf it a little, (like reducing the RoF to 10 or so) and tier 7, or giving her some consumables and pushing her to tier 8. Tier 8 might be ideal, considering Belfast was the ideal tier 8 premium CL, and now she is at tier 7 (and predictably OP), Hawke could be used to fill the gap of tier 8 premium CL. London would probably have tier 8 premium CA covered. 

 

I had a recent acquisition that could help in the naming of ships not built and not given a name or at least give ideas.

 ~snip~

I also wish for a HMS Flirt Premium but she seems far too smol to be fun unless you gave her ahistorical weapon upgrade.

 

 

The C-class is far too small really. Half the displacement of Tachibana, half the torpedo armament, and 1x 76mm gun. Nothing stopping the name Flirt being used for a different destroyer though, like a late 1930s design for tiers 8, 9 and 10. 

The book looks nice though, makes me a little envious, I go searching for a suitable name from previous classes usually.