American CV name question.

[bradfordkay]

On VJ Day there were 19 USN Fleet CVs in commission:

* 1 Lexington class (Saratoga)
* 1 Yorktown class (Enterprise)
* 17 Essex class



Not all were on duty due to battle damage, but they were afloat.

Okay, I was mistaken... you will never end up with extra CVs, but you could end up four short.

[Svar]

OK, Mr. Frag we can dissagree about shipyard facts as different resources give different dates but we both agree on 32 essex class carriers being ordered for the war. BTW http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/ is an excellent source for historical data but doesn't have all the keel laid dates. There were 26 Essex keels laid during the war along with 3 Midway keels (not in the game) plus an Alaska and two more Iowas that were scrapped. So shipyard capacity wasn't the real issue, the needs of the war was. With that in mind it irritates me that we get a game based on the historical outcome the war. What would have US production been had Midway not happened? That is my concern, we don't get what was actually ordered and built on an as needed basis in our war but are hamstrung by the historical outcome of the actual war.

In all the years of playing Pac War I never got a Midway battle, but could get good results later in the war. So if I wanted the 4 'replacement' Essex carriers I just sacraficed all but 2 prewar carriers prior to the end of 1943. It looks like I will have to do the same thing again. That doesn't bother me as much as it may bother other people because this is after all just a game and if I have to game the system to get what I want so be it. I never played Pac War just to win but to enjoy the experience and I did.

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Tim, the days in my post are (a) the historical dates from the naval shipyards and (b) the dates in the scenerio editor.

I will not comment on the (b) dates as I do not know where they come from or what their basis in reason is. I presume they are the result of as much research could be made from various sources. I am very much *not* an expert in historical facts and fiction hence no scenario work by me apart from obvious errors.

The (a) dates are mine and mine alone, dug up spending a hell of a lot of time digging through naval yard records. They are historical fact, but the ships were built on the east coast. How long it took to get into active service off the west coast and what the quality of the crews, commanders, aircraft pilots, etc were is anyones guess.

You can debate (b) all you want but not with me [;)]

Debate (a) at your peril [:D]

If you want to believe that the Tico refits would not have happened to the 4 hulls prior to leaving the east coast had the USN had 6 operational CV's in '42, I will disagree with you. The change to the bow for the inclusion of two 40mm quad mounts was approved and started in March 1943 on all ship not yet completed. It would have impacted the arrival date of the "hasty" 4 replacements because the upgrade would have been a heck of a lot cheaper to do while still in the yard instead of having them to come back into the yards on the West Coast that were already busy upgrading existing ships.

10 Essex class and 13 Ticonderoga and 1 oddball (Oriskany - SCB-27 program) along with 2 cancelled after being started and 6 others before contruction began made up the total of 32 which was the original order.

Hi, Frag honestly its not my attempt to debate anyone. Least of all you Mr.Frag [;)]. I'm just trying to understand this whole concept.

If I understand your example correctly the "threshold" for the acceleration is over 4 CVs lossed? So the Tico refits did not happen during construction with the loss of 4 CVs but they would have happen with the loss of 2 more? Someone still has to point out what specific acceleration happend to what specific hull in May, June, Sept, Oct 1942 to make up the losses of Lex, Yorktown, Wasp and Hornet. Otherwise, If your contention is, that the arrival dates of CV-10, CV-12, CV-16 and CV-18 had anything specifically to do with the losses of 42, I categorically disagree.

This brings me to my point. There were four historic losses. So can we assume the historic build rates already have any precieved acceleration already built into them? If so shouldnt we just go with the Historic arrival dates of the historic CVs including CVs 10,12,16,and 18? UNLESS, the player losses CV's 5 and 6. In which case 2 CVs are respawned under the current rules. This at least mitagates the potential of very skewed early deployments of the Essex CVs and restrains from rewarding a player on foolishly throwing away his CVs. In that he has to go through 4 CVs before he gets any ahistoric benefit.

Also, The dates you give are historic "commision" dates, again except for Franklin which for some reason arrives on the board a few weeks after its launch date. A ship is certainly not anywhere near operational on its commission date. It took on average 3 months sometimes more for shakedown and training before a CV would be considered operational. Thats why the Essex Commisioned in Dec 42 didnt show up in the Pacific unitil May 43 and the Intrepid commisioned in Aug 42 did appear in the Pacific until Dec 43 and so on and so forth.

Regards

[Mr.Frag]

Does someone want to explain how throwing away the use of a CV for 500-600 days of game time gains one a benefit? I am still trying to understand this mystery that people keep referring to. I could understand this if the CV that came back had quad turret lasers mounted on it or some perhaps phalinx systems with a SPY-1 radar phased array, but such is not the case. The CV that comes back holds the exact same number of aircraft that the one you lost did.

10 CV's left the docks without the full set of upgrades and had them done later in life. Had the need not been so dire, the upgrades would have been done before they left the ship yards with a delay. This would have changed the arrival dates.

[Svar]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Does someone want to explain how throwing away the use of a CV for 500-600 days of game time gains one a benefit? I am still trying to understand this mystery that people keep referring to.

I guess it depends on what you are trying to do. If you are trying to win the game with the highest victory possible it makes no sense and wouldn't be done. When I used to do that I was interested in building the most powerful carrier task forces as possible late in the war and the Essex carriers had better AA that the Yorktown carriers.

I wont do anything other than play the game and enjoy the experience when I first get it. If it makes sense to sacrafice a prewar carrier other than the Wasp after I get bored than I will. What I always wanted from this game was to get the full potential of the US shipbuilding capacity within the existing historical naval build programs. From the looks of it what I'll get is some variation of the historical fielded ships irrespective of the winds of war.

[tsimmonds]

Loking at the arrival dates for the Essex class in a slightly different way. The date in the second column is the date of the ship's initial arrival in the Pacific Theater, fully trained and with its air group, ready to commence operations:

Carrier_____________________IRL @ PH___________________Game arrival
CV 9 ESSEX_________________6/1/1943____________________1/15/1943
CV 10 YORKTOWN___________7/24/1943____________________replacement only
CV 16 LEXINGTON____________8/9/1943____________________replacement only
CV 17 BUNKER HILL__________10/1/1943____________________7/15/1943
CV 12 HORNET_____________11/29/1943____________________replacement only
CV 11 INTREPID_____________1/10/1944____________________8/15/1943
CV 18 WASP_________________4/4/1944____________________replaceent only
CV 19 HANCOCK_____________10/1/1944____________________7/15/1944
CV 13 FRANKLIN_____________6/15/1944____________________11/15/1943
CV 14 TICONDEROGA _________10/1/1944____________________5/15/1944
CV 20 BENNINGTON____________1/8/1945____________________5/15/1944
CV 15 RANDOLPH______________2/1/1945____________________8/15/1944
CV 38 SHANGRI-LA____________2/15/1945____________________9/15/1944
CV 31 BON HOMME RICHARD_____4/5/1945___________________10/15/1944
CV 36 ANTIETAM______________6/19/1945___________________11/15/1944
CV 21 BOXER__________________9/1/1945____________________5/15/1945
CV 39 LAKE CHAMPLAIN_________9/9/1945____________________2/15/1945

(demonstrating the appropriate use of this smiley....)

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Does someone want to explain how throwing away the use of a CV for 500-600 days of game time gains one a benefit? I am still trying to understand this mystery that people keep referring to. I could understand this if the CV that came back had quad turret lasers mounted on it or some perhaps phalinx systems with a SPY-1 radar phased array, but such is not the case. The CV that comes back holds the exact same number of aircraft that the one you lost did.

10 CV's left the docks without the full set of upgrades and had them done later in life. Had the need not been so dire, the upgrades would have been done before they left the ship yards with a delay. This would have changed the arrival dates.

Ok I will explain. First to put into context. It now occurs to me this whole CV10,12,16,18 thing not being in the game is so much smoke and mirrors. The game makes up for it by pushing up the early arrival of the CV11 Intrepid, CV17 Franklin. Essentially replacing the arrival of CV 10 Yorktown and CV 16 Lexington. So in the game you still got the historic 4 Essex CVs in 43 (Discounting CV11 which arrived the last couple weeks of 43)

Now if I as an USN player lose just the historic 4 CVs early enough in 42 I can get up to 4 ADDITIONAL NEW CVs in 43. So for doing no better or no worse than historical I get 8 Essex in 43. That my friend is an advantage and incentive to be foolish with your CVs since there is precious little a USN player can legitamately do with his Pre-war CVs to stop Japan from running amok the first 6 months of the war. Why not use them recklessly early with the outside chance of getting some lucky outcomes, when there is such a bountiful reward waiting for you down the road?

[Mike Scholl]

TIMJOT So you are saying the idea is to "throw away" 4 CV's before May of 1942
so that you can get 4 somewhat better ones in November of 1943? What do you
fight the war with in between?

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

TIMJOT So you are saying the idea is to "throw away" 4 CV's before May of 1942
so that you can get 4 somewhat better ones in November of 1943? What do you
fight the war with in between?

LBA. And you trade real estate for time.

[Mr.Frag]

Guys, a little clarity ... it is 500 to 600 days for the replacement.

Loosing them in mid '42 is going to make for '44 arrivals, not '43.

Also, the Victory conditions are based on a 2:1 points ratio at the end of the game.

Tossing away 2,500 VP in CV losses means you need to have double that number in VP to attain the same level of victory.

5,000 VP worth of strategic bombing is an awful lot of bombs to be dropped on target. I for one have no interests in taking that kind of risk. [;)]

It just might make the difference between a Allied win and a Japanese win. All that because you think 90 aircraft flying from an Essex class look better then the same 90 aircraft flying off a Yorktown class? To each their own.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Loking at the arrival dates for the Essex class in a slightly different way. The date in the second column is the date of the ship's initial arrival in the Pacific Theater, fully trained and with its air group, ready to commence operations:

Carrier_____________________IRL @ PH___________________Game arrival
CV 9 ESSEX_________________6/1/1943____________________1/15/1943
CV 10 YORKTOWN___________7/24/1943____________________replacement only
CV 16 LEXINGTON____________8/9/1943____________________replacement only
CV 17 BUNKER HILL__________10/1/1943____________________7/15/1943
CV 12 HORNET_____________11/29/1943____________________replacement only
CV 11 INTREPID_____________1/10/1944____________________8/15/1943
CV 18 WASP_________________4/4/1944____________________replaceent only
CV 19 HANCOCK_____________10/1/1944____________________7/15/1944
CV 13 FRANKLIN_____________6/15/1944____________________11/15/1943
CV 14 TICONDEROGA _________10/1/1944____________________5/15/1944
CV 20 BENNINGTON____________1/8/1945____________________5/15/1944
CV 15 RANDOLPH______________2/1/1945____________________8/15/1944
CV 38 SHANGRI-LA____________2/15/1945____________________9/15/1944
CV 31 BON HOMME RICHARD_____4/5/1945___________________10/15/1944
CV 36 ANTIETAM______________6/19/1945___________________11/15/1944
CV 21 BOXER__________________9/1/1945____________________5/15/1945
CV 39 LAKE CHAMPLAIN_________9/9/1945____________________2/15/1945

(demonstrating the appropriate use of this smiley....)

Where did you get the info on the historic arrival at PH?

[Svar]

Mr. Frag, this is a slightly different question. There are two shorter scenarios that modify the respawing issue. The first is the 1 Aug 42 start that goes to the end of the war 30 June 46 and the other is the 1 June start that goes to 30 June 46. In the first two of the prewar carriers have been lost, in the second four prewar carriers have been lost. In those cases does the US player get the replacement carriers on their historical entry date or the arbitrary respawn 500 to 600 days from their actual sinking?

[Pascal_slith]

Can you use the editor to change arrival dates?

[tsimmonds]

Where did you get the info on the historic arrival at PH?

The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, commonly known as DANFS. Individual ship histories on the Haze Gray site:

http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Svar

Mr. Frag, this is a slightly different question. There are two shorter scenarios that modify the respawing issue. The first is the 1 Aug 42 start that goes to the end of the war 30 June 46 and the other is the 1 June start that goes to 30 June 46. In the first two of the prewar carriers have been lost, in the second four prewar carriers have been lost. In those cases does the US player get the replacement carriers on their historical entry date or the arbitrary respawn 500 to 600 days from their actual sinking?

I think you mean the 4 June 42 start and the 28 Jun 43 start. I can say that in a later war scenarios the ship is accounted for as what its class was, i.e. Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, and Hornet arrive as Essex Class. No "re-spawning".

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Pascal

Can you use the editor to change arrival dates?

You betcha.

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

Where did you get the info on the historic arrival at PH?

The Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, commonly known as DANFS. Individual ship histories on the Haze Gray site:

http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/

Thanks!

[TIMJOT]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

TIMJOT So you are saying the idea is to "throw away" 4 CV's before May of 1942
so that you can get 4 somewhat better ones in November of 1943? What do you
fight the war with in between?

Not neccessarily throw away but you can be reckless or even foolish and get compensated for it. Putting it simply. Historically Admiral Nimitz lost 4 CVs in 1942 and only got 4 Essex in return in 1943. In the GAME, Admiral Scholl can lose 4 CVs in 42 and get 8 Essex in return in 1943. Does something about that not seem right?

[Pascal_slith]

ORIGINAL: TIMJOT

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

TIMJOT So you are saying the idea is to "throw away" 4 CV's before May of 1942
so that you can get 4 somewhat better ones in November of 1943? What do you
fight the war with in between?

Not neccessarily throw away but you can be reckless or even foolish and get compensated for it. Putting it simply. Historically Admiral Nimitz lost 4 CVs in 1942 and only got 4 Essex in return in 1943. In the GAME, Admiral Scholl can lose 4 CVs in 42 and get 8 Essex in return in 1943. Does something about that not seem right?

Well, Admiral Scholl seems to have more clout with the War Production Board! What's wrong with that?

[Zeta16]

So in this game any US ship that the US used in late 45 or early 46 is not in the data base for use?