This, Kelvin is now giving us a repeat of a start of war class like Nubian is going to be with the tribals and in that choice Nubian wins hands down. The start of war DD classes are now well represented and the gaps in are in the mid war flotillas. the standard fit Med L's (Lookout, Lightning) & arctic flotillas O & M (Onslow, Musketeer). The earlier inter war V & W classes and flotilla class leaders (Keppel) are also lacking. The Black Swan class is the biggest historical gap without question and a UK flower (not Peary!) comes second to that.
This is connected to whats in the Peary thread to a certain extent in case of anything altering unit types etc.
Argument is to improve upon, as the specific starter battle choices are a bit underwhelming (UK).
Opinions?
"That's right son, join the navy. Get behind a bloody big gun and knock the hell out of somebody"
"We went out, got our arses kicked, then came back again"
Hms stuart is v&w class leader also, of the flotillas, we've not a K. So for a completionist this is potentially desirable. .
Legion is a bit of funny one. So the standardised L class is fair call.
You made a point about ships not being at the prescribed battle. I would point out they are examples of classes that were. Under that criteria for secection you've got a v&w (hmas vampire noted) or a d class which hmcs ottawa represents
Yeah, not much type difference with HMAS Stuart but was thinking more for it's war record Keppel deserves consideration. With Kelvin its more about just getting another early war destroyer on the back of the tribal and those received in recent decks. More a timing thing. No doubt people would say what about Kelly in the K conversation but I'd rebuff that with it was a tabloid ship and over hyped. It's close sister leader Jervis was far superior. Kimberley was a stand out K too. The V&Ws are always overlooked for what they did. Ottawa is a fair call for adding to Canada, good record. Just a pity it's ex. Griffin as this wasn't a bad early war destroyer in RN service either(one of the better Gs).
"That's right son, join the navy. Get behind a bloody big gun and knock the hell out of somebody"
"We went out, got our arses kicked, then came back again"
I gotta go with texasarcher on this. Still a number of unrepresented destroyer classes. Like the O&P Class or Battle. I think Seas Ablaze or SWO_Daddy did card on HMS Petard.
Erwin Rommel - "Give me American supply lines, British planes, German officers and Canadian troops, and I can take over the world".
Just changing it doesn't explain how it'll be better. Kelvin as presented is an alright little destroyer. Randomly swappimg out without an actual proposal is nt how we want to work toge5her
It's a pity there isn't really anything else to go for from this battle in terms of alternate DDs. The other classes involved we pretty much already have from what I can see, although I'm not sure if I'm seeing the full lists of all the DDs from the various forces involved or not. One of the fleets on wiki just says 9 destroyers without naming them. The fact that seemingly only one K class was involved is surprising in itself but Kelvin is middle of the road in terms of Ks, some better choices, some worse. I actually think the starter has a couple of slots too many for each side in hindsight, which is forcing choices from this battle. A couple less would have freed up space for more flexibility. As it is this is more livable than the Peary option would be.
If nothing is to change regarding the starter criteria at this point I'd suggest
HMS Kelvin Remaining HMS Peary Swapped for HMS Hyacinth HMS Berwick Remaining HMS Manchester Swapped for HMS Southampton
This would give two improved units(historically & game) over originally suggested, plus all the units still took part in the battle.
A compromise and a green light to move on and develop said units.
"That's right son, join the navy. Get behind a bloody big gun and knock the hell out of somebody"
"We went out, got our arses kicked, then came back again"
Thinking about other units with carrier orientated SA's, if the carrier is kept back, generally any offensive abilities are not used much. I would say decide if it's going to be mainly a defensive carrier escort unit (as in this battle) and if so, maybe swap raider out. It is an option to have abilities for both surface attack & defense but in my experience, because it involves carriers, it's stretching trying to do both. Unless obviously your a carrier charger!
Actually forgot that raider covers auxiliaries as well, which could come more into play with a carrier guard if those disguised raiders are on the loose.
"That's right son, join the navy. Get behind a bloody big gun and knock the hell out of somebody"
"We went out, got our arses kicked, then came back again"