US ship building

[generalfdog]

Seems once the US gets ramped up say 43 or so their mm (liberty ships) and cvs (essex class carriers) should build quicker and cost less then standard carriers and mm

[AlvaroSousa]

100%. The ships on the build queue are what were being started at the time. But there are way more CVs to build for the US to ensure victory that were constructed after December 7th.

[ncc1701e]

I am now buying CVL and CV for USA. It is costing a lot so it means less infantry but at the end, more CVL/CV is helping a LOT.

[ncc1701e]

100%. The ships on the build queue are what were being started at the time. But there are way more CVs to build for the US to ensure victory that were constructed after December 7th.

Checking OOB, the job is well done for US CV/CVL. However, checking on the Japanese side, I have noticed few errors in the game for Japanese carriers:

Shoho CVL was available on December 22, 1941
Chitose CVL was available on January 1, 1944
Chiyoda CVL was re-commissioned on December 21, 1943
Shinano CV was commissioned on November 18, 1944

---

Japanese CV OOB 1.JPG (70.17 KiB) Viewed 726 times

[ncc1701e]

Also, I don't like all your generic names for CVE like South CVE Group or North CVE Sqd names. I have found the historical CVE names plus availability dates for them:

Chuyo CVE was available on November 25, 1942
Unyo CVE was available on May 31, 1942
Kaiyo CVE was available on November 23, 1943
Shinyo CVE was available on November 15, 1943

Also, Taiyo CVE was already in shipyards in December 7, 1941 so more to put in Deployment queue.

---

Japanese CV OOB 2.JPG (107.69 KiB) Viewed 723 times

[AlvaroSousa]

That's because there were several and they are grouped

[ncc1701e]

That's because there were several and they are grouped

What is your source? Because I can't find more than 5 CVE.

My source is:
The Imperial Japanese Navy in the Pacific War
by Mark E. Stille

---

Source.JPG (31.34 KiB) Viewed 703 times

[generalfdog]

100%. The ships on the build queue are what were being started at the time. But there are way more CVs to build for the US to ensure victory that were constructed after December 7th.

Interesting, so I just assumed that you made it kind of however you wanted to achieve the balance that you envisioned, are the Japanese ships ones that were already started by dec 7 41 as well? So did the Japanese historically build many more or is whats in the queue about what they built?

[ncc1701e]

100%. The ships on the build queue are what were being started at the time. But there are way more CVs to build for the US to ensure victory that were constructed after December 7th.

Interesting, so I just assumed that you made it kind of however you wanted to achieve the balance that you envisioned, are the Japanese ships ones that were already started by dec 7 41 as well? So did the Japanese historically build many more or is whats in the queue about what they built?

I have checked each of them. CV and CVL are correctly placed in the Deployment queue i.e. already in the shipyards. This is only on the CVE that I disagree.

[ncc1701e]

That's because there were several and they are grouped

I see your point now. My source is only listing the CVE that were finished BEFORE the end of the war. They were other CVE in shipyards but it was too late.

Thus one last question, why Taiyo CVE is not listed in a CVE group? Do you consider the class?

[AlvaroSousa]

Let me explain better. The CVEs have no business being in a battle group as an individual ship. So I grouped them. Much like the US CVEs.

[generalfdog]

My point of this post was i was thinking maybe starting in 43 US CVs and MM should cost less and take less time, but some other great points

[AlvaroSousa]

Technically yes but I made the adjustment on the production side of the equation to keep it simple.