Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Historiker

He also allowed to total conversion of the existing BBs into CVs.

While this might be an option for Japan if we could make these conversions cost shipbuilding points, it does not make sense for the USN (the standards are too slow) or the RN (more priority on convoy escort and fleet in being vs other foes).

HMS Anson, the F3 class BC, younger cousin to the Invincibles;


I darkened the Invincibles hull slightly the same way as here, it makes the look a little better.

I'm going to design my IATB-Series again.
CV-conversions will demand a certain repair shipyard and will be delayed for the correct time while the conversion is done. The HR will be, that the repair shipyard used by the conversion mustn't be used by another ship. The conversion costs will already be reflected in the building costs of the conversable ships as I simply assume they are already prepared.
One might metaphorically think about a Liner that is construced as CVE and then gets the hangar and the deck filled with additional walls, stairs, decks, etc. to make the ship useable and look like a liner. Back in repair shipyard, all the additional things can be welded off at pull linkages. Then the already prepared CV-gear is put in - et voila: a CV(E)...

This will allow the Japs to benefit from bigger repair shipyards and huge conversion programs will block most of the repair space so that battle damage can't be repaired...

(This is no way to advertise my not even existing own mods [;)])

ORIGINAL: Historiker

I'm going to design my IATB-Series again.
CV-conversions will demand a certain repair shipyard and will be delayed for the correct time while the conversion is done. The HR will be, that the repair shipyard used by the conversion mustn't be used by another ship. The conversion costs will already be reflected in the building costs of the conversable ships as I simply assume they are already prepared.
One might metaphorically think about a Liner that is construced as CVE and then gets the hangar and the deck filled with additional walls, stairs, decks, etc. to make the ship useable and look like a liner. Back in repair shipyard, all the additional things can be welded off at pull linkages. Then the already prepared CV-gear is put in - et voila: a CV(E)...

This will allow the Japs to benefit from bigger repair shipyards and huge conversion programs will block most of the repair space so that battle damage can't be repaired...

(This is no way to advertise my not even existing own mods [;)])

Fair reasoning, and it works for shadow programs and limited conversions. Unfortunately I do not believe it reflects the amount of work in a proper shipyard (which could be building another new CV) to reconstruct one of the old BBs into a proper CV capable of 28-32knots. The only class it might be remotely viable for is the Kongos (or in the CV Variant the Fuji's and Yamato's), as they already have suitable machinery. Anything else is comparable in scale to the rebuilds of the 30s which took several years. It still dosent account for the resources (HI, ect) required. I personally believe the repair yards should have used HI to begin with, to make things interesting...

The rule you suggest about requiring a Repair Yard working on a conversion to not be used for repairs is good, and could be used to replace my '2 CVL/BB and 4 CVE' conversions at a time. A more complicated variant might be a Repair Yard cannot use 'Conversion Requirement + Ship Requirement' tonnage during a conversion. So a 100 point Repair Yard could work on a 15,000t (15 points from ship) CS -> CVE conversion (30 points) and still have capacity to work on 55 (55,000t) points of other stuff. That might be overly complicated however.

IMO rebuildingthe 25kt BBs to 30kt CVs is unrealstic. This takes way too long and is way to expensive. The conversed BBs will rahter recieve something like cutting off everything above the main citadel, putting one or two (depending on stability, of course) hangars on it and live with the rather slow CV with a capacity of 60 or less. At least, it'll be well armoured, then.
Maybe it also gets 1 kt faster because of lighter weight, but that's not my profession...


The converted ships are disabled in the specific harbour. As they can't be too many, it should be quite easy to control whether or not there's free repair space left. If you want to keep it easy, do it this way:

A 15.000ts ship is converted. You think it should not just cost the 15.000ts - which might be sufficant as it takes this dockspace - but 30.000. So you let the ship convert in the following order:
CS 15.000ts --> CVL 30.000ts and requires lvl 30 shipyards and takes 6 months but has 0 speed --> CVL with 15.000ts that takes lvl 1 shipyard, takes one day and gives it its correct speed.
This way, its easy to control and the 0 speed and 0 days delay will turn it back to its real size immediately after.

(My "correct production costs" invention I'm proud of [;)])

I was under the impression that ships undergoing conversion were in 'pierside' rather than Repair yard mode for the duration of the work, so changing the tonnage should not have an effect.

Am I mistaken here?

Also - agreed on the conversion of the BBs, but they'd still be nothing than glorified CVEs, probably incapable of launching fully loaded aircraft in all weather ontop of all their other faults. And as I said, they would take up space and resources (or should) that could be used for a real CV or CVL getting built.

It doesn't matter that they aren't in the dock. They just have to be on the repair screen to keep it simple for the player. It has to be a house rule, but with the different displacement, calculations are easy.

You can allow the BB to CV conversions, then the player has the choice whether to block repair space or not. They can also be converted step by step, first 1/3 flightdeck, then 2/3 and the two front turrets left until finally a full CV.

Hi Juan,

I recommend you this sketch drawn from official documents that surfaced just recently:

F2 and F3

And the thread for it: F3 discussion, last few comments

I used these images from the Warship Projects thread posted by Smurf as my reference material.



I did not realise there was an updated one available...back to the drawing board...

I suppose I like the battery arrangement on these better, but I'll miss the twin stacks.


And here we are...better?


I really think my RN art is by far the worst of the 3 nations...

Hi ,
are you also working on that scenario 49 ?
Or do you first want to finish  40 and 41?

Version 5 release due within a week of the patch release will have the following scenarios;

40) 'Lite' Adapted Stock AE (naval changes only)
41) Full Adapted Stock AE (all changes)
42) Alternate WNT - BB Variant

48) Full Adapted Coral Sea (all changes)
49) Full Adapted Guadalcanal (all changes)


Following that, I will release;
44) Alternate WNT - CV Variant

43) Alternate WNT - Enhanced BB Variant

45) Alternate WNT - Enhanced CV Variant

most likely in that order.

I may also release 'AI-friendly' versions of 42 and 44 if there is sufficient demand.


PS - Does anyone have any naming suggestions for the first (and only completed) Dutch 1047 BC for the BB Variant?

de Zeven Provinzien

This of course presupposes that the light cruiser of that name isn't built, but it would be a proper name for the battlecruiser.

[quote]ORIGINAL: Terminus


DE zeven prov

What do you mean?

PS - Does anyone have any naming suggestions for the first (and only completed) Dutch 1047 BC for the BB Variant?

You have to be carefull if you put the Dutch BC in. They calculated with the Scharnhorst battleships and wanted to adopt them somewhat. They asked for the plans but didn't recieve them... for good reasons! The Scharnhorst class was bigger and better than officially announced, so you have to consider that the Dutch BC didn't want to copy the historc Scharnhorst but a kind of Scharnhorst light.

If you need some informations about the Dutch Naval expansion plan, I can give you the Article from Warship Internatinoal

ORIGINAL: Historiker

PS - Does anyone have any naming suggestions for the first (and only completed) Dutch 1047 BC for the BB Variant?

You have to be carefull if you put the Dutch BC in. They calculated with the Scharnhorst battleships and wanted to adopt them somewhat. They asked for the plans but didn't recieve them... for good reasons! The Scharnhorst class was bigger and better than officially announced, so you have to consider that the Dutch BC didn't want to copy the historc Scharnhorst but a kind of Scharnhorst light.

If you need some informations about the Dutch Naval expansion plan, I can give you the Article from Warship Internatinoal

Yeah, I realise this. Really they fall somewhere closer to the Alaskas than the Scharnhorsts as I understand.

One also has to consider that if the first is to have arried in the DEI in say, late '41, plans would have to have been finalised in 1936-1937.

So if youve got anything on it early in the design phase that would be great.

ORIGINAL: JuanG

ORIGINAL: Historiker

PS - Does anyone have any naming suggestions for the first (and only completed) Dutch 1047 BC for the BB Variant?

You have to be carefull if you put the Dutch BC in. They calculated with the Scharnhorst battleships and wanted to adopt them somewhat. They asked for the plans but didn't recieve them... for good reasons! The Scharnhorst class was bigger and better than officially announced, so you have to consider that the Dutch BC didn't want to copy the historc Scharnhorst but a kind of Scharnhorst light.

If you need some informations about the Dutch Naval expansion plan, I can give you the Article from Warship Internatinoal

Yeah, I realise this. Really they fall somewhere closer to the Alaskas than the Scharnhorsts as I understand.

One also has to consider that if the first is to have arried in the DEI in say, late '41, plans would have to have been finalised in 1936-1937.

So if youve got anything on it early in the design phase that would be great.

Hey if i would create the Zeven prov BC i would mix it .
Like the CL De Ruyter (yes i know for some it is CA Deruyter) with a "spy mix of scharnhoerst ore even better de Graf Spee.
I really love thoose German BB and BC Had an uncle how served on the scharnhorst .

One more question. What will the deployment for the new ships look like? I mean surely you don't want to put both Lex CCs into Pearl and risk that both will be lost on the very first turn. Also what about the Japanese BBs?

Thanks,

Why wouldn't he? The US had no way of knowing that the eight battleships that were there historically were in danger, and Pearl was the main PacFleet base outside CONUS.

You're 100% right, I'm just hoping he does not want to crash the fun factor [:D]

At least one of the CCs would be nice to retain. I'd say let's put'em to escort their CV half sisters [&o]

True.