8" CL Effectiveness

[polygon]

What is the general consensus on "large protected cruisers" in the early game? Because protected cruisers can mount 8" guns in double turrets in the A and Y position, I've found these "pocket CAs" to be very cost effective and a lot more flexible than a full CA. They lack any real staying power, being a protected cruiser, but have the gunnery to see off armored cruisers when numerically superior and absolutely dominate "traditional" CLs even when outnumbered. In my current Germany game, I've experimented with eliminating CAs entirely in favor of larger 8" armed CLs, to great success. What do you guys think of this ship archetype?

[mycophobia]

I use large CLs but equip them with 6in guns instead, 8in is overkill against other CLs and isn’t effective against CA with decent Armor early. By the time that 8in became good Protected cruiser are less relevant imo

[polygon]

Jul 31, 2019 14:02:56 GMT -6 mycophobia said:

I use large CLs but equip them with 6in guns instead, 8in is overkill against other CLs and isn’t effective against CA with decent Armor early. By the time that 8in became good Protected cruiser are less relevant imo

Do you happen to know the actual disadvantages that protected cruiser layout gives, in specific terms? I understand that it leaves the superstructure and most of the ship unarmored, but what is the actual effect of this in battle?

[mycophobia]

Jul 31, 2019 14:10:08 GMT -6 polygon said:

Jul 31, 2019 14:02:56 GMT -6 mycophobia said:

I use large CLs but equip them with 6in guns instead, 8in is overkill against other CLs and isn’t effective against CA with decent Armor early. By the time that 8in became good Protected cruiser are less relevant imo

Do you happen to know the actual disadvantages that protected cruiser layout gives, in specific terms? I understand that it leaves the superstructure and most of the ship unarmored, but what is the actual effect of this in battle?

In terms of game data, no. but since the irl protected cruiser rely on the armoured deck, id imagine the in game protected cruiser be very suspectible to penetration to areas other than its machinery space. As a result, it is probably virtually unprotected in non vital areas and may take a lot of flooding penetrating hit even when its machinery space remain unbreached.

[sittingduck]

Not every game, but I do sometimes start a game using them. The intention is to beat up on the Light Cruisers in the early game. The Battle Generation seems to favor a lot of LC actions and the 8" guns vs 4, 5, and 6" LCs will beat them up handily. I also set the 7-10" Ammo Selection to AP, HE, and HE vs LCs and that seems to help. These 8" ships are a more expensive option and that means a smaller LC component in the fleet so that has to be considered too.

[polygon]

Jul 31, 2019 14:34:54 GMT -6 sittingduck said:

Not every game, but I do sometimes start a game using them. The intention is to beat up on the Light Cruisers in the early game. The Battle Generation seems to favor a lot of LC actions and the 8" guns vs 4, 5, and 6" LCs will beat them up handily. I also set the 7-10" Ammo Selection to AP, HE, and HE vs LCs and that seems to help. These 8" ships are a more expensive option and that means a smaller LC component in the fleet so that has to be considered too.

On the other hand, if your CLs are dedicated CL killers with large guns and good (for a CL) armor; do you really need CAs? If I'm going for really big CLs I'm a lot less likely to build CAs imho.

[JagdFlanker]

i don't bother with CAs, this is the only class of CL i build in the game, and i retire all CLs by 1915 at the latest

last game i decided to see what they could do against a single B and was surprised that they were this powerful - although A-H legacy Bs arn't very scary in general

[rimbecano]

I've fallen out of the habit of building any CAs between the time I'm able to lay down my first BC and 1915-ish, or of building any CLs before 1915.

[noshurviverse]

8", no. 7", yes. A 5,000-6,000t CL I've found is a fantastic legacy ship and holds it's worth even into the mid game, although once the speed becomes an issue they should be retired. I usually make the pseudo-battleship CAs also, using them to beef up the main battle line in exchange for a smaller predread force. They also make passable, if not particularly good CVL conversions.

Attachments:

[mobeer]

I prefer my CLs to have an all 6" armament, as this lets all the guns have fire control, rather than just 4 big guns with fire control and secondaries on local control.

[griffin01]

I build both 8" CLs and CLs loaded to the brim with 6" guns, and while 6" armed ones stay relevant longer, the 8" ships pack a decent early-game punch to secure the advantage in early wars.

[garrisonchisholm]

In my PLC AAR I produced a 4900 ton CL with 8" mains and they even managed to take down modern CLs with 12 6" guns into the 40's. I believe they are a great value, so long as you don't expect them to insert themselves into really dangerous use.