/wowsg/ - World of Warships Admiral

FRENCH CARRIERS WHEN!?!?

What other tech trees could get a CL/CA split other than AMERICA?

After italian carriers

One of life's pleasures is chasing T10 BBs in a Bismarck at 32kn and then managing to successfully ram a GK or Yamato.

There should really be a medal for that.

KM
t. wehraboo

Britbong

>Dallas
>Seattle
Are those US paper boat? I can't find info about them (except for one DM class intended to be named Dallas).

Yes they are. Buffalo too.

Basically we're only getting two new historical classes, Helena and Worcester.
Buffalo's like a Baltimore with 4x3 setup and torps, the Dallas and Seattle no idea.

What is WG's obsession with paper botes when the US has plenty of real botes

Show us your tree suggestion then.

What will everyone do after CWs?

Die.

>I drive a Montana

qt

If they get a made up tier 10, then yes they could, maybe even going all the way down starting at tier 2 or 3. There are a few 9.2" and 12" heavy cruiser designs from 1938 and 1939 that could be used.

Jake is a girl?

"""girl"""

just a very convincing voice changer or trap

Jake is a qt would-be milf, but she gave up her family life to become a doctor

Nah, he just stole the identity of one.

There are more doctors with a family than doctors without a family.

I want to make Jake a happy working mother with a loving stay at home husband!!!!!

Occasionally /wowsg/ is innocent.

DELETE ALL IJN SHIPS

I dunno what to do with some of these teams any more

Should've bought Belfast(((((((((((((((((((

>Study 2 (8in/9.2in 21,750t): DNC next asked what could be done with nine 8in guns (Design A), or with nine 9.2in (Design B). Speed was set at 33kts and endurance at 10,000nm at 15kts. Other armament was six twin 4.5in, four octuple and two single pompoms, and twelve torpedo tubes. Armour should defeat the ship’s own guns at 90 ° inclination (worst case) between 8,000 and 25,000yds (with an inch less over machinery). The deck over the magazines should defeat a 500lb SAP bomb dropped from 10,000ft (over machinery, a 500lb dive bomb); and underwater protection should, as before, defeat a 750lb charge. For the 9.2in gun, this was more than had been asked for before: 10 ½ in C over magazines and 9 ½ in over machinery, with a 3 ½ in deck over magazines and 2 ½ in over machinery. 42 For 8in shellfire it was quite heavy, too: 9in (8in) belt and 3 ½ in (2 ½ in deck). Deck armour was the same in both cases because it was determined by the bombs, not the shells. This was the sort of protection the US Navy later provided in the Alaska class, not even approached in any conventional cruiser. A sketch showed a ship with a waterline beam of 84ft, bulged underwater to 88ft, so that the battleship-style underwater (side) protective system could be 10ft deep. DNC received the report of this pair of designs on 28 February and in turn reported to Controller on 4 March. The ship with nine 8in guns was expected to displace 21,750 tons and to cost £ 5.5 million.

>naming a ship after that war profiteer
Disgusting to be honest.

That's just what the artist called it because Churchill favoured it over smaller designs. They probably would have retained standard Royal Navy names if ever built. Technically its just "1938 Programme Design Study 2B" or something

It looks kind of like the love child of a New Orleans and Leander

More like New Orleans and KGV

I say Leander because of the dual stacks that look just like Leanders

The Board decided to reintroduce 8in cruisers because the US Navy was doing so, because radar made long gun range more usable, and because it was willing to accept the compromise 6in protection (‘ 8in guns on a 6in hull’) to hold down size. Ships would have cruiser speed (32.5kts, corresponding to 29kts in half-oil condition when six months out of dock in the tropics) and the most up-to-date scale of anti-aircraft firepower. Endurance would be 8,000nm ‘deep and dirty’ (six months out of dock) at 16kts or 12,000nm at 16kts in trial condition... Thus the 1941 programme included four 8in cruisers, to be laid down as soon as possible. They would have been given ‘Admiral’ names.
Controller’s instructions in March 1941 led to preparation of four alternative designs, all armed with three triple 8in guns. 15 All had a 4 ½ in belt and 2in deck (4in over magazines), as well as the same speed, aircraft arrangements, close-range armament and torpedo armament.
They differed in long-range anti-aircraft armament:
(i) four 4.5in BD mountings,
(ii) eight 4in twin,
(iii) six 4in twin, and
(iv) four 4in twin (forward pair omitted).

Controller had emphasised the need for a small turning circle, a difficult problem in so massive a ship. Special efforts would be made to improve seakeeping at speed in bad weather... The Staff wanted new higher-velocity close-range weapons (described as 50– 60mm twins, i.e. not Bofors guns), but DNC had no information about them. He therefore provided four quadruple pompoms. The belt would keep out 6in shells at 5,500yds (60 ° inclination) and 8in at 11,000yds (40 ° inclination). The armour deck was the upper deck, offering advantages both in structure and in protection, but heavier than decks in previous cruisers. It might prevent fires started by bombs, which had burned out some British cruisers. The deck would keep out 8in shells below 21,000yds, and 500lb SAP bombs from 2,500ft (level bombing at 200mph). The 4in over the magazines would keep out 500lb SAP bombs from 10,500ft and 1,000lb SAP bombs from 6,000ft, both for level bombing at 200mph. DNC proposed placing thick bulkheads where the 2in and 4in decks met… Legends were dated 25 March 1941.19 The design as approved was for 15,000 tons (635ft). With deck armour all on one deck, and with eight 4in guns, it would displace 15,500 tons (640ft); with eight 4.5in, 16,100 tons (650ft); with twelve 4.5in, 17,000 tons (670ft); and with sixteen 4in, 16,600 tons (670ft).
A sketch design (‘ XY’) for a 670ft ship dated 30 April 1941 showed eight twin 4in guns and four multiple pompoms, two on the hangar roofs and two on a deck forward of the bridge. There were two 4in magazines, one roughly below the bridge under four forward 4in twins, one further aft, just forward of the after boiler room, under the after group of 4in twins.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Design work continued through 1941, a new draft Staff Requirement being framed that October (the March 1941 papers had gone astray). Now the ship was expected to displace about 17,500 tons and to be 670ft long, about the size of the US Des Moines class conceived two years later, but without the latter’s automated 8in guns, and with a lighter anti-aircraft battery. By this time she was to have had five octuple pompoms (rather than four quadruples, a considerable jump, which brought displacement to 17,500 tons), as many Oerlikons as could be fitted in, and two quadruple torpedo tubes rather than triples. Protection and speed were unchanged.
Source: Friedman, Norman. British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After (Kindle Locations 7458-7462). Seaforth. Kindle Edition.

Displacement: 16,100/18,740t standard

Dimensions 670ft wl x 80ft x 24ft mean deep load

Speed: 23.25kts, four shafts

Armour: Belt 4.5in, bulkheads 4in, turrets 6in-2in, ring bulkeads 3in

Armament:

16,100 variant: 9x 8in/50 MkIX/X, 6x 21in torps, 12x4in twins, 4 quad pom-pom, 3 seaplane

18,750 variant: 9x 8in/50 MkIX/X, 6x 21in torps, 16x4in twins, 12x quad pom pom, 3 seaplane

Source: Conway's All The World's Warships

There's still one more session, right?

No ;-;

Were the tendies and tucc's worth it Dan?

forever be scarred into /wows/ history

>calle calle

Pretty disappointed we STILL don't have USS Alaska

>still no 12" cruisers

I found it! the proooffs!!! very qt italian wowsgee
"daxthetrap"

What proofs?

very cute shima(male)!

OwO
Post proofs.

He deserves it for being a faggot and constantly creeping on Linn

So how about this for British CAs?

II: Devonshire
III: Warrior
IV: Atlantic Cruiser Design B3
V: Hawkins
VI: Kent
VII: London/Norfolk
VIII: 1940 Programme Design
IX: Admiral
X: Churchill Type (1938 Programme Design Study 2B)

Prems: Monmouth (III), Atlantic Cruiser Design B2 (IV), York (VII), Surrey (VIII)

>TIX Admiral
You mean the Hood?

just search the name I posted

No I mean the planned NEW Admiral heavy cruisers

This:

Also the names allocated to them were to be:
HMS Benbow
HMS Blake
HMS Effingham
HMS Hawke

Only four origamos? Not bad.

You could probably arrange the York/Exeter into tier 8 (with some kind of fantasy hull that gives it another aft turret), but then again you might as well put the Surrey (which was ALMOST laid down) at that point. But the 1940 Design I think stacks up better against the Hipper, Charles Martel and Myoko than the Surrey would which is why I put one in the tree and one as a prem

Good night /wowsg/

British up to T10, *maybe* Japanese and German up to T8.

Buffalo is "8-Inch Cruiser Study - Scheme CA-B": shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-25c.htm

Seattle appears to be "6-inch A.A. Cruiser Scheme A": shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-38c.htm

I have no idea what design Dallas is.

One of the Surrey preliminary designs had a 5th twin turret so that would be a possibility as T8 in the line. Also York/Exeter is no better than T6.

>Buffalo is "8-Inch Cruiser Study - Scheme CA-B"
I am still not getting, where exactly on this sikret project, WG saw torpedo tubes

Guarantee the torps get removed from the T9 version. WG threw those in back when they were thinking of using Buffalo as a T10 (probably some sort of reward ship).

)))))))))

The Buffalo 3D model has existed with those torps since CBT. They'll plate over those torps before the line split goes live.

>Buffalo
>classified as CL and has 6 inch guns
>into the tech tree line where Baltimore and Des Moines exist
>meanwhile can't find any USS CL Seattle in Wikipedia
???

But Buffalo has 8in guns??

It's another Monarch situation, a ship with the name existed but the one in game has nothing to do with it.

inb4 they forget to cover the hole behind and anything that passes the plating now has a direct channel to the citadel.

The 3D model doesn't have any effect on the hitbox model. It's just a skin.

>you see a flash of light from behind a close door in your house
>you open the door
>your shipfu is sitting/laying there
what do you do?

>think I died because the religion of peace brought me a literal truck of tolerance in my neighborhood
>the first of my promised 72 virgins is my waifu
>wonder who the other 71 will be
Damn I love Sweden

But i dont have shipfu.

You have my condolences

I'm sorry user

chink botes when

The Pan Asian DDs and Huang He.

Just pick some nasty rusty bitch thats popular. Like Kongou

>Slav CL main

Is there any Slav CA/CL shipfu?

Not in KC and I don't think AL either.

fight me

>Slavs can be cute
no sorry, you're most definitely out of luck

Sure, you be Kongou, I'll be some tier seven cunt smasher

I think there is Aurora in azur lane. And I am pretty sure in pixiv you can find Mighty Moskva

Kongo is fasd, accurate, and had good range. I'd rather be a Kongo than a Colorado or Gnies

While there is a better ship than Kongo and Colorado called King George the Fifth. :^)

>Bisko is good but Alsace is love because she has elegant design
>No equivalent Kan-musu or Azur Lane Girl out yet
>Really want someone like Komori Kei or Iizuki Tasuku or Misaki Kurehito to draw one but probably either of them won't give a shit
>Paper ship so whether Alsace comes out in either one of the games is questionable
I can just keep fapping to Bisko, I guess.

how do i survive under t8 mm
i love the chap because it's just shchors with radar and much better concealment but i can't win with it at all

snipe snipe snipe

Slav CA/CL should look like shonen charactor with Moskva basically a Kenshiro

>get as many radar
>Sit behind island behind center cap
>Radar, make tea (repeat)

Tell him to go be a Shimakaze else where.

Shounen chara,
Sort of want

Could point, could be a hull upgrade for it, that would definitely put it in tier 8 territory