Combined Historical Scenario - Ship Data

[CobraAus]

2 questions

1 are any ships classes set in concrete yet if so is possible to get a list of them and what ships they relate to.
2 as you are doing a lot of the art work for the ships - had any thoughts to adding camouflage to some of them as historicaly a lot were

Cobra Aus

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: CobraAus

2 questions

1 are any ships classes set in concrete yet if so is possible to get a list of them and what ships they relate to.
2 as you are doing a lot of the art work for the ships - had any thoughts to adding camouflage to some of them as historicaly a lot were

Cobra Aus

Justin has added various camo measures to the Allied ships already...very nice!

Basically assume all the classes you can think of are in. It's easier that way.[;)]

[CobraAus]

Justin has added various camo measures to the Allied ships already...very nice!

If Justins done them I'am sure they will be great

Cobra Aus

[Tankerace]

Thanks guys.

Actually though, all I have done is the pre war Measure 1 for some battleships, and late war Measure 22 for all ships in there final fits. If I had photoshop I would do dazzle patterns.... Hell I might try my hand at them anyway.

If I did do a dazzle pattern, it would probably be Measure 32 or 32a, those were most common.

[Don Bowen]

Based on data provided by forum member marc, I will be reworking the Takao class into two subclasses - one for Takao and Atago and a second for Maya and Chokai.

The first two will follow a refit patern fairly similar to the one for the Takao class in base scenario 15 (but with reduced initial war values).

The second pair will follow an upgrade path that points to Maya's replacement of "C" turret with two twin 5in (during damage repairs). Chokai herself was historically never so modified but I'll include her with Maya. She could have been so modified and a 4-ship class is worth only so many class slots.

marc provided some sample artwork for Maya from a 1/700 model. It shows her with "C" turret removed. I have to quit messing with icons and get moving so I'm posting the artwork here in the hopes that someone might have time to create an icon from it. If not, the standard Takao will probably do fine.

[Tankerace]

You want I should do the art boss?

[;)]

[Don Bowen]

I am beginning the actual update of Japanese ship classes today. Once done, I'll be reluctant to go back and redo things so please get any suggested changes in right away.

A review of Japanese tankers shows that they all pretty much look alike. I've decided against creating any additional icons for them. However, I do have a number of tanker line drawings if anyone wants to do some icons. Needs to be done right away so I can determine what new classes to add. Otherwise, I believe the two scenario 15 types (small, large) will do. A very-large is also to be added, based on the 140,000 capacity ex-whale factory ships and a copy of the existing "tanker" classes will be made as oilers (based on data from Lemurs!).

I will also be reviewing the Japanese destroyer upgrade paths based on a long and bold post by subchaser.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

You want I should do the art boss?

[;)]

I think many of the CAs and BBs could use work. Ise and Hyuga look like trucks or something.[X(] The Atagos and Nachis look like they have stomach gas.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

You want I should do the art boss?

[;)]

I'd love it - you're art is the best. But I thought you were up to your art in War Plan Orange???

[Tankerace]

LOL, ok ok.... gimme a day or two though. I have been busy doing the Japanese a/c for WPO.... just finished 4 variants of the Mitsubish 1MF series fighter, the Sopwith Pup, the 2MR (C1M) recce plane, and the B1M torpedo bomber. I'll get to the Jap buckets today and tomorrow.

[Tankerace]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

You want I should do the art boss?

[;)]

I'd love it - you're art is the best. But I thought you were up to your art in War Plan Orange???

I was.... now all I have to do are the plane tops, and side graphics for the Sparrowhawk III, A1N, and Martin T3 and T4M, and WPO is done graphic wise. Now its mostly finishing up the scenario building.

[Ron Saueracker]

What about adding some armor rating to ships and subs? For ships, it will make APs/AKs, DDs etc less vulnerable to small arms and non penetrating HE used by LCUs. This is critical as the numberof transports pounded by shore defences and LCU artillery is extreme. Armoring DDs (5mm) seems appropriate considering Fletchers and Gearings have a rating. Nothing worse than seeing your DDs explode under MG fire! Subs I'm still testing.

[Tankerace]

I agree on the DDs.... subs give a light rating, but MG fire (20mm and up) could still be very damaging, so I'd say 5-10 max.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

What about adding some armor rating to ships and subs? For ships, it will make APs/AKs, DDs etc less vulnerable to small arms and non penetrating HE used by LCUs. This is critical as the numberof transports pounded by shore defences and LCU artillery is extreme. Armoring DDs (5mm) seems appropriate considering Fletchers and Gearings have a rating. Nothing worse than seeing your DDs explode under MG fire! Subs I'm still testing.

You make a good point - let me know what you find in your testing. I checked after an earlier post and noticed the interesting values for the Fletcher and Gearing classes.

[Don Bowen]

As part of the review of classes in the new scenario, ASW weapons and their ammo will be modified as follows:

Range, Accuracy, and Effect of all ASW weapons will be halved.

ASW weapon ammo will be calculated in "patterns". A patern is a group of multiple charges dropped/thrown over a suspected submarine position. Each pattern will contain about 3 charges from each depth charge rack, 1 charge from each depth charge thrower, and one salvo from each ahead throwing weapon (Hedgehog, Mousetrap). As an example, I've just finished reworking the Fubuki class destroyers. In their original (12/41) configuration they had two depth charge racks and 18 depth charges (9 per rack). Matrix had calculated this as 2x2, ammo=9. At 3 charges per rack per pattern, 18 charges will calculate as 3 patterns (ammo = 3).

Non-ASW vessels will carry depth charges (if they did so historically). This includes cruisers and AKs.

Thanks to Ron Saueracker and Tankerace for research contributing to these settings. And, as always, comments and suggestions welcome.

Below, the large Japanese Liner Brazil Maru. One of a class of two - the other, Argentina Maru, became the escort carrier Kaiyo. In our scenario both Argentina Maru and Kaiyo will be included (and Brazil Maru, of course). A small inaccuracy but Japan really needs these big transports!

[Don Bowen]

I am in the middle of reworking Japanese Cruisers and Destroyers, based primarily on data provided by subchaser and marc.

Cruisers are also acquiring some torpedo reloads, greatly reduced endurance, and some new artwork by Tankerace (so you know it will be great).

The rework for destroyers is very interesting - they are acquring torpedo reloads (for some tubes but not all), increased AA in their original configurations, and turret armor for main guns. At this time I do not have improved data for older destroyers (pre-Fubuki).

If anyone has any information on Japanese Cruisers/Destroyers, now is the time to get it in. Comments and suggestions welcome.

[Don Bowen]

A sample Akatsuki using Subchaser's data. Note the main gun armor and torpedo reloads.

[Don Bowen]

Here's a Hatsuharu, also from Subchaser. Note extensive and detailed AA.

[bstarr]

Well, I've found a site that has a lot of merch ship data.

classes
C1-A - 5028 gt, 6440 dt, 14 k, 412 l
C1-B - 6750 gt, 8015 dt, 14 k, 417 l
C1-M (Alamosa Class, USN) - 3805 gt, 5032 dt, 11kt, 378
C2 (varies greatly) - @7200 gt, 15 k, 459 l
C3 (ditto) - @7800 gt, 16 kt, 492 l
C4&C5 - troopships; I still havent figured out how to translate their tonnage.

and these are just the civilian prewar designs!

I even have a list of what ships belong to what class. The question is, if I come up with all this info, who is the poor sucker who is going to get stuck with the tedious job of sifting through all those damn US AKs and APs in the game, checking their name against a monster list of ships, then changing them? Should we just leave them alone?

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: bstarr

Well, I've found a site that has a lot of merch ship data.

classes
C1-A - 5028 gt, 6440 dt, 14 k, 412 l
C1-B - 6750 gt, 8015 dt, 14 k, 417 l
C1-M (Alamosa Class, USN) - 3805 gt, 5032 dt, 11kt, 378
C2 (varies greatly) - @7200 gt, 15 k, 459 l
C3 (ditto) - @7800 gt, 16 kt, 492 l
C4&C5 - troopships; I still havent figured out how to translate their tonnage.

and these are just the civilian prewar designs!

I even have a list of what ships belong to what class. The question is, if I come up with all this info, who is the poor sucker who is going to get stuck with the tedious job of sifting through all those damn US AKs and APs in the game, checking their name against a monster list of ships, then changing them? Should we just leave them alone?

That would be me. Post or send me the link, I'll check it out. As far as I know the C5 was not used for troopships but the refrigerated cargo version was used for Navy AFs.

Here's what I have so far:

Standard C1 and C1-M-AV1
Standard C2 and C2-S-A1
Standard C3 and C3-P

There is a reasonable representation of a C4-P in the base icon set.