Matrix Games Forums

I keep mine with my CV's, but not all of the new players know a battleship from "bullship"(if ya get my drift).[:D]

But how many of those that buy WITP & AE will be new to the subject.
 
maybe there is another way of doing it, but I dont see adding ** or ## etc after the name is the way to go

Are they not designated CLAA in AE?

yes, they are designated as CLAA. The request was that an asterisk be placed next to their CLAA designation to warn the innocent that these are not "line of battle" ships but rather something else. To me, that is unnecessary.

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

yes, they are designated as CLAA. The request was that an asterisk be placed next to their CLAA designation to warn the innocent that these are not "line of battle" ships but rather something else. To me, that is unnecessary.

thats what I mean, but took 200 words to say it.[8|]

Well... I could try to look heroic and claim to be a man of few words, but with 4000+ posts you will all see through that pretty quickly! [;)]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

But how many of those that buy WITP & AE will be new to the subject.

You mean like the American commanders who stuck them into the line in the first place???[;)]

Wonder if the builders included a Must Read page in the owner's manual...

"Do not utilize this vessel in the Line of Battle, as its armour and armament are not suitable for such employment. Such utilization will render warranty invalid."

Well in defense of Callaghan, Atlanta was his flagship (I think), and the CLAA's had an awesome amount of 5" firepower available, plus torpedoes.  They should have been considered destroyer leaders or something like that rather than CLAA's, though.  Plus he didn't have but two CA's (San Francisco and Portland) that night, and if he expected to find BB's that night then he needed every hull he could get his hands on.
 
A question to the AE OOB developers; the Japanese had some huge whaling ships that they used as tankers/transports during the war.  IIRC they were 20,000+ tons and a couple were sunk by subs.  Will they be included in the OOB for Japan?

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Well in defense of Callaghan, Atlanta was his flagship (I think), and the CLAA's had an awesome amount of 5" firepower available, plus torpedoes.  They should have been considered destroyer leaders or something like that rather than CLAA's, though.  Plus he didn't have but two CA's (San Francisco and Portland) that night, and if he expected to find BB's that night then he needed every hull he could get his hands on.

A question to the AE OOB developers; the Japanese had some huge whaling ships that they used as tankers/transports during the war. IIRC they were 20,000+ tons and a couple were sunk by subs. Will they be included in the OOB for Japan?

They are in all the CHS variants so I am confident the Tonan Maru and friends will be in AE, along with every other merchant ever to ply the Pacific.

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

yes, they are designated as CLAA. The request was that an asterisk be placed next to their CLAA designation to warn the innocent that these are not "line of battle" ships but rather something else. To me, that is unnecessary.

Have to agree with you. I am not sure how many people would play this game without at least some knowledge of the subject. Or at least some study.

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

yes, they are designated as CLAA. The request was that an asterisk be placed next to their CLAA designation to warn the innocent that these are not "line of battle" ships but rather something else. To me, that is unnecessary.

Have to agree with you. I am not sure how many people would play this game without at least some knowledge of the subject. Or at least some study.

Perhaps it would be good to have a master list of the designation meanings in the manual or in game etc...

The designation Cruiser Light Anti-Aircraft basically tells you it wasn't designed to fight other ships, but to provide air defence. Cruiser Armored tells you it is a ship of the line etc. So perhaps listing that would be a start, for example:

DD- Destroyer, designed for fleet escort and anti-submarine operations
CA- Heavy (armored) cruiser, designed for scouting and surface combat operations
CLAA- Anti-Aircraft cruiser, designed to escort high value ships and provide defence against air attack.

and so forth.

Once you can read the intended mission of the different ship designations, then even people new ot the game should have the knowledge they need to properly utilize them.

ORIGINAL: Shark7


Perhaps it would be good to have a master list of the designation meanings

We posted the master list already (earlier in this thread) ... it will be in manual.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1645620

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: JeffK

But how many of those that buy WITP & AE will be new to the subject.

You mean like the American commanders who stuck them into the line in the first place???[;)]

Wonder if the builders included a Must Read page in the owner's manual...

"Do not utilize this vessel in the Line of Battle, as its armour and armament are not suitable for such employment. Such utilization will render warranty invalid."

What does Friedman say?

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Shark7


Perhaps it would be good to have a master list of the designation meanings

We posted the master list already (earlier in this thread) ... it will be in manual.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1645620

Hi Joe, I notice that BC is shaded on the list to indicate a new ship designation coming with AE. I think you probably mean't to shade the entry under it CB. CB is not in WITP but BC already is. [:)]

One more typo I think:

LSIL is stated to be the designation for both Landing Ship Infantry Small AND Landing Ship Infantry Large. Shouldn't it be LSIS for the Landing Ship Infantry Small? [&:]

Oh yes! And BTW the list of ship types looks awesome!! It looks like AE has everything included but the kitchen sink (KS?)!! [:D]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

Oh yes! And BTW the list of ship types looks awesome!! It looks like AE has everything included but the kitchen sink (KS?)!! [:D]

It's also a bit old. There have been several additions since.

The old AK and AP designations have radically changed. AK (AKA) and AP (APA) are now limited and restricted to those classes that were commissioned Naval vessels. These, and ONLY these, will have load/unload bonuses based upon their integral lighterage. The VAST majority of other ships are now designated as xAKs, xAKLs, xAPs, indicating ordinary general cargo/passenger ships, with absolutely no amphibious assault value whatsoever.

BTW, even though there's over 70 types of ships, many of the types are in there for fun, historical reasons. There is no functional difference between a US AP(A) and a Brit LSI(L), but it's fun to name them correctly. Similarly, there's no difference between a patrol boat (PB) and a patrol craft (PC), except that Japan called it one thing, and maybe the Dutch called it another. The difference between a US DE and an Japanese escort (E), is a matter of national nomenclature. All that matters is function.

Function is as function does. You need to pay attention to the function, not the name.

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Shark7


Perhaps it would be good to have a master list of the designation meanings

We posted the master list already (earlier in this thread) ... it will be in manual.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1645620

Hmm, must have forgotten about that list. That should be comprehensive enough that anyone should be able to print it out, look at the designations and descriptions, and be able to utilize the ships correctly.

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson

ORIGINAL: Shark7


Perhaps it would be good to have a master list of the designation meanings

We posted the master list already (earlier in this thread) ... it will be in manual.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1645620

Hmm, must have forgotten about that list. That should be comprehensive enough that anyone should be able to print it out, look at the designations and descriptions, and be able to utilize the ships correctly.

Yeah, well it's a loooong thread, eh?

I agree with your assessment, but also a reminder that Callaghan was new to his command and was limited to what he could scrape together on short notice. I'm also pretty sure that it was Callaghan in San Francisco and Scott was in Atlanta.

Again I get to learn more about history. Didn't know about whaling conversions and honestly never thought about them. I am constantly pleased with all new info provided.

Thanks again to the AE team for all their hard work and patience in dealing with a bunch of historical nuts.[:)]