Jump to content
MrConway

Straight from Texas - US Cruiser Line Split

76 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG-EU]
[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
2,726 posts
2,771 battles

Captains,


As you may have already seen, there were some strange images popping circulating in the past few days... 

 

As we heard overnight from Texas, it is all true! Some time in 2018 (sorry, we cannot be more precise yet) the US Navy cruiser line is going to be split.

 

DISCLAIMER: All information below is work in progress and subject to change.

 

Why?

  • We think there should be more variety in play-styles. The British cruiser tree shows that 6-inch cruisers work in game all the way to Tier X, so why not have more of them?
  • At the same time play-style variations within a branch are not necessarily that good. Splitting the line on higher tiers between a light and a heavy cruiser branch will help to define their roles - and captain setups - and to streamline the progress throughout the line.
  • This will allow us to place ships in perfect places (for them) in the tech tree. Right now for example, Cleveland is significantly inconvenienced by the need to make her viable on Tier VI - while her armament and other stats would allow her to perform more than OK on Tier VIII.

 

How?

 

03fe0e7e-c0a9-11e7-bf9e-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

  • The line will split from Omaha on Tier V. 
  • Heavy cruisers from Pensacola to Baltimore will be bumped down a Tier (after all, the Pensacola class was a direct follow-up to the Omaha class). This should make them more comfortable, though this change will also require some additional polishing.
  • Cleveland will be moved to Tier VIII and re balanced. New ships will be added to fill in the branches.
  • The split will of course mean some free stuff for the owners of US cruisers, but that is not why we get these ships, right? RIGHT? 

 

How will they play?

  • The new light cruiser branch will be focused heavily on being multi-role - mostly aimed at close-to mid range combat support and DPM.
  • They will keep Cleveland's mixed blessing - the high shell trajectory, but also respectable AP and HE shells.
  • So far we are thinking about simultaneously combining Defensive AA and Hydroacoustic Search. On higher Tiers Radar and heals might be added to round out the multi-role angle of these ships

 

Ships

Dallas

071a3c40-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will open with a really light cruiser - still with respectable guns and protection, she should find her place on the battlefield rather easily.

 

Helena

0673feb6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

Tier VII will see the second ship of her class - USS Helena. Why? Mostly because the lead ship would be the third St. Louis - and 2nd in the US tree - in game, which may lead to some confusion. In any case, Helena is a modified Brooklyn class cruiser with a powerful main battery of 15 6-inch guns and decent AA armament.

 

Cleveland

06367046-c0a9-11e7-8ab3-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

We know her from Tier VI - now she will finally assume her rightful place. Built as a follow-up to the St. Louis class, the Clevelands sported better protection and stronger AA, in exchange for one main gun turret less. Do not worry though - 12 guns is more than enough!

 

Seattle

055dd894-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

While Cleveland has good AA firepower, it is not enough... Enter one of the projects for a "Big gun" AA cruiser, based generally on the Cleveland class, but with fully dual-purpose main guns.

 

Worcester

 

048e74d2-c0a9-11e7-a089-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will end with the Worcester class light cruiser - generally comparable to Minotaur in general design (AA cruiser with twin 6" guns), though contrary to Minotaur she will be less stealthy (no smoke, more visible). According to SubOctavian this will be the "manly Minotaur" :cap_like:

Likely consumable combo: Damage Control Party + Repair Party + Defensive AA + Hydroacoustic Search + Radar

Note: This is pronounced Wooster - learn it!

 

Buffalo

 

04f67db6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

If we move everything from Pensacola to Baltimore a Tier down, we need a new Tier IX, right? As it happens, we had an 8-inch heavy cruiser design in storage for quite some time - one of the preliminary studies leading to the Des Moines class will now pick up the slack in the tech tree!

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,038 posts
9,379 battles
On 3/11/2017 at 3:17 PM, MrConway said:

Captains,


As you may have already seen, there were some strange images popping circulating in the past few days... 

 

As we heard overnight from Texas, it is all true! Some time in 2018 (sorry, we cannot be more precise yet) the US Navy cruiser line is going to be split.

 

DISCLAIMER: All information below is work in progress and subject to change.

 

Why?

  • We think there should be more variety in play-styles. The British cruiser tree shows that 6-inch cruisers work in game all the way to Tier X, so why not have more of them?
  • At the same time play-style variations within a branch are not necessarily that good. Splitting the line on higher tiers between a light and a heavy cruiser branch will help to define their roles - and captain setups - and to streamline the progress throughout the line.
  • This will allow us to place ships in perfect places (for them) in the tech tree. Right now for example, Cleveland is significantly inconvenienced by the need to make her viable on Tier VI - while her armament and other stats would allow her to perform more than OK on Tier VIII.

 

How?

 

03fe0e7e-c0a9-11e7-bf9e-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

  • The line will split from Omaha on Tier V. 
  • Heavy cruisers from Pensacola to Baltimore will be bumped down a Tier (after all, the Pensacola class was a direct follow-up to the Omaha class). This should make them more comfortable, though this change will also require some additional polishing.
  • Cleveland will be moved to Tier VIII and re balanced. New ships will be added to fill in the branches.
  • The split will of course mean some free stuff for the owners of US cruisers, but that is not why we get these ships, right? RIGHT? 

 

How will they play?

  • The new light cruiser branch will be focused heavily on being multi-role - mostly aimed at close-to mid range combat support and DPM.
  • They will keep Cleveland's mixed blessing - the high shell trajectory, but also respectable AP and HE shells.
  • So far we are thinking about simultaneously combining Defensive AA and Hydroacoustic Search. On higher Tiers Radar and heals might be added to round out the multi-role angle of these ships

 

Ships

Dallas

071a3c40-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will open with a really light cruiser - still with respectable guns and protection, she should find her place on the battlefield rather easily.

 

Helena

0673feb6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

Tier VII will see the second ship of her class - USS Helena. Why? Mostly because the lead ship would be the third St. Louis - and 2nd in the US tree - in game, which may lead to some confusion. In any case, Helena is a modified Brooklyn class cruiser with a powerful main battery of 15 6-inch guns and decent AA armament.

 

Cleveland

06367046-c0a9-11e7-8ab3-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

We know her from Tier VI - now she will finally assume her rightful place. Built as a follow-up to the St. Louis class, the Clevelands sported better protection and stronger AA, in exchange for one main gun turret less. Do not worry though - 12 guns is more than enough!

 

Seattle

055dd894-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

While Cleveland has good AA firepower, it is not enough... Enter one of the projects for a "Big gun" AA cruiser, based generally on the Cleveland class, but with fully dual-purpose main guns.

 

Worcester

 

048e74d2-c0a9-11e7-a089-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will end with the Worcester class light cruiser - generally comparable to Minotaur in general design (AA cruiser with twin 6" guns), though contrary to Minotaur she will be less stealthy (no smoke, more visible). According to SubOctavian this will be the "manly Minotaur" :cap_like:

Likely consumable combo: Damage Control Party + Repair Party + Defensive AA + Hydroacoustic Search + Radar

Note: This is pronounced Wooster - learn it!

 

Buffalo

 

04f67db6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

If we move everything from Pensacola to Baltimore a Tier down, we need a new Tier IX, right? As it happens, we had an 8-inch heavy cruiser design in storage for quite some time - one of the preliminary studies leading to the Des Moines class will now pick up the slack in the tech tree!

Why not use the Oregon City class CA as the tier IX instead of the dated paper ship Buffalo?

Due to its improved AA layout compared to the Baltimore class its AA power would be higher than the Buffalo and as an actual serving class of ship it would make more sense to have that instead of design predating the Buffalo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
175 posts
1,712 battles

Buffalo = CA-B --> http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-25c.htm

That was expected.

 

Dallas seems inspired by http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-18c.htm and http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-22c.htm

A bit weird as they are supposed to be better than the Cleveland

 

Seattle : http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-38c.htm

A pre-Worcester design with unusually for US projects the absence of front turret with twin-5"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
11,568 posts
16,702 battles
4 hours ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

Why not use the Oregon City class CA as the tier IX instead of the dated paper ship Buffalo?

 

Because the Oregon City class would be literally no different than the Baltimore class in terms of gameplay, only in aesthetics would they differ. It would literally be a straight up copy.

And if you haven't noticed, number of guns decide what AA values you get, not the AA layout. Oregon City has the same number of AA guns as Balti, so nothing changes there either.

 

Paper ships should be used when nothing else fits, as is clearly the case here.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,616 posts
9,343 battles

Primary question - will Worcester get proposed/speculated 3 gun turrets as researchable upgrade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
582 posts
9,881 battles
50 minutes ago, Admiral_Alfred_Tirpitz said:

As a New Englander, I thank you.

 

Damn Yanks can't even pronounce their own place names correctly...

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,038 posts
9,379 battles
1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Because the Oregon City class would be literally no different than the Baltimore class in terms of gameplay, only in aesthetics would they differ. It would literally be a straight up copy.

And if you haven't noticed, number of guns decide what AA values you get, not the AA layout. Oregon City has the same number of AA guns as Balti, so nothing changes there either.

 

Paper ships should be used when nothing else fits, as is clearly the case here.

And why should it differ in gameplay from the tier IX Baltimore? It makes no sense to replace the Baltimore with a stronger ship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
11,568 posts
16,702 battles
9 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

And why should it differ in gameplay from the tier IX Baltimore? It makes no sense to replace the Baltimore with a stronger ship...

 

Balti isn't exactly bad but she's hard to play. Replacing her with something more forgiving is well within acceptable limits.

And again, Oregon City would be literally no different than Baltimore. There is no progression to be had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,038 posts
9,379 battles
1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Balti isn't exactly bad but she's hard to play. Replacing her with something more forgiving is well within acceptable limits.

And again, Oregon City would be literally no different than Baltimore. There is no progression to be had.

And continuing going into circles, why should the Baltimore replacement differ in gameplay when there is no need to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
11,568 posts
16,702 battles
3 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

why should the Baltimore replacement differ in gameplay when there is no need to?

 

1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

There is no progression to be had.

 

Whether you'd need to replace Balti is debatable, but once you make a decision to do so you must obviously replace her with something better to ensure tier progression. Oregon City is a straight up copy with no changes at all, as such she simply doesn't fit.

Imagine if you'd put a renamed NO at T9 with literally no changes right now, ensuring that you'd have to grind through the same ship across two tiers. That'd be Oregon City. Sure, some may see fun or a challenge in it, but the great majority would ask themselves why they would want to keep playing a ship when the exact same one is a tier lower and thus gets better MM. Too few would be motivated to complete the grind and another good chunk will likely end up detesting it.

Whether Buffalo is the best design to replace Balti though remains to be seen.

 

You know, purists like you piss me off the most. You make the most ridiculous claims with no regards to gameplay nor game design only to satisfy your selfish desire of seeing "omg reeel ships!!111".

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SINT]
[SINT]
Players
392 posts
16,252 battles
3 hours ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

And continuing going into circles, why should the Baltimore replacement differ in gameplay when there is no need to?

Honestly i always liked both Balti and NO. Kept both ships with premium camo. The recent reload buff and increase of concealment was just to sweeten the deal (ok they needed it to be more competitive). But I like there playstyle esp. after you get your captain concealment skill. Never played the buffed Pensacola but she packed a good punch.

 

For me the downgrade of the old CA cruisers is kind of meh..Leaves a mess behind (what to do with tier VII Indianapolis?) IMO would have been better to make Dallas the tier VI cruiser as a sensible upgrade from the Omaha in in the combined line and only at tier VII make a split: the old unchanged CA line and the new CL cruiser line.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
175 posts
1,712 battles
6 hours ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

And why should it differ in gameplay from the tier IX Baltimore? It makes no sense to replace the Baltimore with a stronger ship...

Because if the Baltimore is tier 8, then the Oregon City should also be a tier 8 as the only differences are the arrangement of the funnel (the Boston below is a Baltimore-class cruiser) and the 4 less AA of the Oregon City (because it has improved arcs of fire of its AA guns). Ingame, the Oregon City-class can nearly be the hull (B) of the Baltimore.

See:

 

ca2-4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,038 posts
9,379 battles
13 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

 

You know, purists like you piss me off the most. You make the most ridiculous claims with no regards to gameplay nor game design only to satisfy your selfish desire of seeing "omg reeel ships!!111".

LOL whut?

I'm glad that I am not you if you truly become pissed off by "purists" talking about a computer game - must be hard for you not to be offended or triggered constantly when using this or other forums.

Life is hard for the easily offended.:cap_popcorn:

 

Also Wargaming will f*** this up just like they did with the carriers, RN BBs and have done so overally with this game, they simply can't make games without dumbed down and retardo mechanics that makes balancing the game impossible and the game experience frustrating. And it has all to do with the fact that good gameplay and a great game experience is not the main goal of their games but that tier progression to tier X while enticing and motivating the players to spend money on tier progression, especially on new OP tech tree lines, is - the Monqueror being the latest example of this strategy.

There is no purpose of this game other than tier progression and in order to make the players want to progress to the next tier the game has to be frustrating enough to play so that the players become so sick and tired of being low tier for the majority of their battles that they will spend money on free xp or credits, premium time, premium ships etc. etc. to progress to the next tier, but not so frustrating that the players simply stop playing the game.

Consequently the game has to be unbalanced for that strategy to work, thus all talk from the player base about how to balance the game is pointless and a complete waste of time as Wargaming has no objective interest in making a balanced game, as a perfectly balanced game will be counterproductive to their business model. The major problem with Wargaming is that they adhere to that negative business model of theirs with religious fervour instead of making a positive one where the players spend money on their games because they enjoy the games so much they never want to stop playing them.

 

Honestly I haven't exeperienced or encountered anything challenging in this game that makes me want to keep playing for the challenge or good game experience alone, rather the game mechanics are so dumbed down and the game experience so frustrating that there is no challenging or exicting at all that makes it worth the effort to spend time on. That some play in order to enlarge their ePeen I can understand as that at least provide some purpose, albeit hollow, shallow and ultimately pointless.   

 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG-EU]
[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
2,726 posts
2,771 battles

If you have questions about these changes, we'll be happy to answer them during our weekly warships stream, simply drop them in this thread:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
746 posts
14,336 battles

@MrConway

1. When WHen WHen when when when when when when when(do it before all stupid BBs thing french-italian scrap give us cruisers)

2. WIll they feel "tanki" as Cleveland or more like Omaha :Smile_trollface: after there will be no smoke some tankines will be needed (question is about T9 and 10)

3. Planed T8 premium USN CA/L?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG-EU]
[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Community, Alpha Tester
3,457 posts
7,515 battles
17 minutes ago, _VAMPA_ said:

@MrConway

1. When WHen WHen when when when when when when when(do it before all stupid BBs thing french-italian scrap give us cruisers)

2. WIll they feel "tanki" as Cleveland or more like Omaha :Smile_trollface: after there will be no smoke some tankines will be needed (question is about T9 and 10)

3. Planed T8 premium USN CA/L?

1. some time in the future. For now the PADD are in the pipeline, afterwards them French.

2. They should definitely be tankier than Brits, less tanky than Germans probably (and less armor than the heavies, though we shall see how tall the citadel will be ;))

3. No comment. You just got a load of info on what's coming for US line, do not fish for more :P

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
746 posts
14,336 battles
1 hour ago, Tuccy said:

1. some time in the future. For now the PADD are in the pipeline, afterwards them French.

2. They should definitely be tankier than Brits, less tanky than Germans probably (and less armor than the heavies, though we shall see how tall the citadel will be ;))

3. No comment. You just got a load of info on what's coming for US line, do not fish for more :P

at 2. well citadel like current Baltimore will be great (small sections under barbetts like NO, and "standard" boilerroom(aft sectiong of current baltimore)) ofc lower values to armor like 106~~115 side and and 27mm bow/partofthebow section would be.....:Smile_smile:  and let the force be with us xD

at 3and1.  emmh this is not just VMF KM or some other CAs when u(WG) announce USN or IJN CAs should be given exact month day hour minute second when the patch will be released and servers will be up :Smile_trollface:    oh for premium im asking here and there long time ago :Smile_trollface: there was very nice looking one in proposals i think :Smile_child:

 

one more question/proposal same as RN CLs speed maintaining when turning  at least for hitier ones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,769 posts
4,457 battles
On 03/11/2017 at 2:17 PM, MrConway said:

In any case, Helena is a modified Brooklyn class cruiser with a powerful main battery of 15 6-inch guns and decent AA armament.

Yowza.

I think RN CL's just got comprehensively destroyed, balance-wise.

 

On 03/11/2017 at 2:17 PM, MrConway said:

048e74d2-c0a9-11e7-a089-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will end with the Worcester class light cruiser - generally comparable to Minotaur in general design (AA cruiser with twin 6" guns), though contrary to Minotaur she will be less stealthy (no smoke, more visible). According to SubOctavian this will be the "manly Minotaur" :cap_like:

Likely consumable combo: Damage Control Party + Repair Party + Defensive AA + Hydroacoustic Search + Radar

And I think Minotaur just became obsolete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GUNUP]
Weekend Tester
568 posts
30,793 battles

Isnt that a bit "surprising" that Wargaming, digged out the Closed Beta Plans where it was already pronounced that the USN Cruiser like have to be splitted "soonTM", i remember one of the Devs Diarys of the Closed Beta, saying, in the Future we get AP Bombs for Carriers... then 2 Years later, what we have "Enterprise + Graf Zeppelin" there are even more Stuff, that i cant rly remember (because im to long in this Game) ... But there is one Thing that maybe "screws" me up the most... the trying to rebalance the USN Carrier Branches, which is already rumouring around in the back...
I dont know even if some Guys rly read, what the Players (especially the Carrier Players) want. But "what" i read, is more then... no Way.

I said ages ago, that it might be the same Story with SPGs / ARTYs in World of Tanks... you get Report after Report, you get Complaint after Complaint and on the End they nerfed the Class to the Bottom. So here we are - removing the "Flightdecks" and let them only use one. Like the "New" Essex should be 2 Fighters,1 TorpedoBomber, 2 Dive Bombs. Without the Option of Changing it...

The Heck... ye... Merry XMas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,616 posts
9,343 battles
On ‎06‎.‎11‎.‎2017 at 6:54 PM, Captain_LOZFFVII said:

Yowza.

I think RN CL's just got comprehensively destroyed, balance-wise.

 

And I think Minotaur just became obsolete.

 

Assuming historical armament of 12 barrels in 6 turrets, each firing every 5 seconds (base), we're talking about 144 shells per minute. Sounds scary, until you realize Minotaur have 187 rounds/min. Concealment, smoke, torps and lolheal are still in Mino favor. 

 

As RL Worcester was roughly the same dimensions as Des Moines, she's unlikely to have camo lower than 10km when maxed out. On still squishy cruiser, with no "oh crap" buttons, though she will have HE and fires to sling over mountains.

Some time ago leaked "uptiered" Cleveland stats, 12 barrels with 6s reload, at tier 8 might be the winner of the line, with possible exception for St. Louis/Helena. Depends how WG will "balance" her 15 barrels broadside.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster
3,334 posts
3,695 battles

Okay, so,

I would like to have a detailed account on how exactly 10x 8"/55 are gonna be balanced at T6.

 

12 hours ago, Panocek said:

 

Assuming historical armament of 12 barrels in 6 turrets, each firing every 5 seconds (base), we're talking about 144 shells per minute. Sounds scary, until you realize Minotaur have 187 rounds/min. Concealment, smoke, torps and lolheal are still in Mino favor. 

 

As RL Worcester was roughly the same dimensions as Des Moines, she's unlikely to have camo lower than 10km when maxed out. On still squishy cruiser, with no "oh crap" buttons, though she will have HE and fires to sling over mountains.

Some time ago leaked "uptiered" Cleveland stats, 12 barrels with 6s reload, at tier 8 might be the winner of the line, with possible exception for St. Louis/Helena. Depends how WG will "balance" her 15 barrels broadside.

 

Mino probably has the advantage as an anti-cruiser and anti-destroyer ship, and while chipping away may work on BB's frontally, I think Worcester is still going to be more general-purpose than Mino.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,616 posts
9,343 battles
33 minutes ago, piritskenyer said:

Okay, so,

I would like to have a detailed account on how exactly 10x 8"/55 are gonna be balanced at T6.

 

 

Mino probably has the advantage as an anti-cruiser and anti-destroyer ship, and while chipping away may work on BB's frontally, I think Worcester is still going to be more general-purpose than Mino.

 

Rough estimation of Pepsicola at tier 6, assuming American Piercing shells stay:

-hp +-25500

-range limited to 14km

-reload nerf to 16s?

-accuracy nerf, sigma to 1.7 instead typical cruiser 2.0?

-concealment nerfed to +-13.5km

 

basically glass cannon that can hit hard if ignored

 

Mino and Wor should have nearly identical ballistics - 152mm +-50kg launched at +- 770m/s. Exising Cleveland AP is already great against anything remotely broadside for penetrations, with IFHE HE also should be viable. Only problem is "he spamming fire starting nubboat" WG tried so hard to avoid when developing UK CL line, I wonder how they will solve baBBies crying. HE with no fire chance? "Incendiary" shells with no damage and only fires? Or practice rounds doing exactly nothing?:cap_book:

 

Still I kinda hope for triple turrets as an upgrade for Worcester, just for lols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
153 posts
17,579 battles
On 03/11/2017 at 3:17 PM, MrConway said:

Captains,


As you may have already seen, there were some strange images popping circulating in the past few days... 

 

As we heard overnight from Texas, it is all true! Some time in 2018 (sorry, we cannot be more precise yet) the US Navy cruiser line is going to be split.

 

DISCLAIMER: All information below is work in progress and subject to change.

 

Why?

  • We think there should be more variety in play-styles. The British cruiser tree shows that 6-inch cruisers work in game all the way to Tier X, so why not have more of them?
  • At the same time play-style variations within a branch are not necessarily that good. Splitting the line on higher tiers between a light and a heavy cruiser branch will help to define their roles - and captain setups - and to streamline the progress throughout the line.
  • This will allow us to place ships in perfect places (for them) in the tech tree. Right now for example, Cleveland is significantly inconvenienced by the need to make her viable on Tier VI - while her armament and other stats would allow her to perform more than OK on Tier VIII.

 

How?

 

03fe0e7e-c0a9-11e7-bf9e-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

  • The line will split from Omaha on Tier V. 
  • Heavy cruisers from Pensacola to Baltimore will be bumped down a Tier (after all, the Pensacola class was a direct follow-up to the Omaha class). This should make them more comfortable, though this change will also require some additional polishing.
  • Cleveland will be moved to Tier VIII and re balanced. New ships will be added to fill in the branches.
  • The split will of course mean some free stuff for the owners of US cruisers, but that is not why we get these ships, right? RIGHT? 

 

How will they play?

  • The new light cruiser branch will be focused heavily on being multi-role - mostly aimed at close-to mid range combat support and DPM.
  • They will keep Cleveland's mixed blessing - the high shell trajectory, but also respectable AP and HE shells.
  • So far we are thinking about simultaneously combining Defensive AA and Hydroacoustic Search. On higher Tiers Radar and heals might be added to round out the multi-role angle of these ships

 

Ships

Dallas

071a3c40-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will open with a really light cruiser - still with respectable guns and protection, she should find her place on the battlefield rather easily.

 

Helena

0673feb6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

Tier VII will see the second ship of her class - USS Helena. Why? Mostly because the lead ship would be the third St. Louis - and 2nd in the US tree - in game, which may lead to some confusion. In any case, Helena is a modified Brooklyn class cruiser with a powerful main battery of 15 6-inch guns and decent AA armament.

 

Cleveland

06367046-c0a9-11e7-8ab3-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

We know her from Tier VI - now she will finally assume her rightful place. Built as a follow-up to the St. Louis class, the Clevelands sported better protection and stronger AA, in exchange for one main gun turret less. Do not worry though - 12 guns is more than enough!

 

Seattle

055dd894-c0a9-11e7-91bc-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

While Cleveland has good AA firepower, it is not enough... Enter one of the projects for a "Big gun" AA cruiser, based generally on the Cleveland class, but with fully dual-purpose main guns.

 

Worcester

 

048e74d2-c0a9-11e7-a089-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

The new branch will end with the Worcester class light cruiser - generally comparable to Minotaur in general design (AA cruiser with twin 6" guns), though contrary to Minotaur she will be less stealthy (no smoke, more visible). According to SubOctavian this will be the "manly Minotaur" :cap_like:

Likely consumable combo: Damage Control Party + Repair Party + Defensive AA + Hydroacoustic Search + Radar

Note: This is pronounced Wooster - learn it!

 

Buffalo

 

04f67db6-c0a9-11e7-b3ad-ac162d8bc1e4.jpg

 

If we move everything from Pensacola to Baltimore a Tier down, we need a new Tier IX, right? As it happens, we had an 8-inch heavy cruiser design in storage for quite some time - one of the preliminary studies leading to the Des Moines class will now pick up the slack in the tech tree!

What happens if we have a camo for Clev, do you keep it and it becomes a T8 Camo, or do you get a Camo for the t6 replacement ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
481 posts
7 hours ago, Skylinex4 said:

What happens if we have a camo for Clev, do you keep it and it becomes a T8 Camo, or do you get a Camo for the t6 replacement ?

Both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×