Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: ladner
Considering the refits given to the Kongos and the HMS Renown and HMS Repulse, how significant uparmoring/bulging should occur for these ships?

Probably not that much. Remember that their designation in the US Navy was "CC", not "BC". They were considered very large cruisers, not "light battleships".

When comparing the displacement of the Lexington Class and the HMS Hood, it is hard for me to fathom how there is such a difference in the overall level of protection. As designed the Lexington Class have a frightful glass jaw, I realize the ship is slightly longer than HMS Hood, but considering by this stage all-or-nothing is common in US BB designs since Nevada, it is a curious question of where is all of weight allocated for such a large ship.

I'd speculate that it is, again, because of doctrine. The Lexingtons were very large cruisers, not battleships, and at that time, it was de rigeur to think that cruisers didn't need a great deal of armour, being able to protect themselves with speed only.

So all that weight is going into the powerplant...

Terminus how do you get the bitmap files to display in the WitP Editor X? I would like to take some screenshots similar to what you have done.

Easy-Peasy:

I had almost forgotten this most excellent utility!! [&o] Added a link to EditorX in the sticky.

I have downloaded some amazing artwork from Fremen's website.  So supposing I want to use these ships, do I have to rename the files to match the naming convention used by WitP?  It looks like for the Japanese JnSide007 is an open slot.  I like the EditorX, but want to make sure I don't break something while in the process of modding.

Yes, you do have to rename it exactly. And yes, JnSide0007 is empty.

For poops and giggles, here's my take on the Kaga as a battleship:

EDIT: I think I like this version better. More representative of a Kongo-esque pre-war rebuild. Also, the shipside is Dixie's Nagato-class graphic, modified by me. I can't draw worth crap, but I'm real handy with cutting and pasting...[:D]

ORIGINAL: ladner

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: ladner
Considering the refits given to the Kongos and the HMS Renown and HMS Repulse, how significant uparmoring/bulging should occur for these ships?

Probably not that much. Remember that their designation in the US Navy was "CC", not "BC". They were considered very large cruisers, not "light battleships".

When comparing the displacement of the Lexington Class and the HMS Hood, it is hard for me to fathom how there is such a difference in the overall level of protection. As designed the Lexington Class have a frightful glass jaw, I realize the ship is slightly longer than HMS Hood, but considering by this stage all-or-nothing is common in US BB designs since Nevada, it is a curious question of where is all of weight allocated for such a large ship.

See Breyer's Battleships and Battlecruisers (Schlachtshiffe und Schalftkreuzer in the original form) - either edition (1 or 2).

Breyer is a naval architect and he mainly gives line drawings which are composits taken from ships plans. He also gives fine data summaries in the section for protection for each class. Since these ships were intended to be Battlecruisers, they are in his book, and since they were completed as carriers, they also are in his book in that form. You can see for yourself how they were designed, how the design was modified, and what was done later.

After looking at your screenshots Terminus I noticed that you have added a lot of devices.  I seem to recall that you had to have a degree of caution when adding devices, is this still true in that certain slots are reserved within the database?

Er, no... Every individual ship class can have up to 20 devices added to it. There are only two hard and fast rules, one of them being where to place "Aircraft Ordnance" for CV's (ALWAYS slot#20) and the other where to put mines on dedicated minelaying subs (ALWAYS slot#2). Note that the last one represents the mines that DON'T go into torpedo tubes, but into dedicated mine-deploying chutes or racks.

Other than that, you can fill up to your heart's content. It can get a little scrunched up graphically in the game, but it'll work.

ORIGINAL: ladner

After looking at your screenshots Terminus I noticed that you have added a lot of devices. I seem to recall that you had to have a degree of caution when adding devices, is this still true in that certain slots are reserved within the database?

Hmmm, I think I misunderstood your question. You're implying that all the metric-caliber guns are IN ADDITION to the usual imperial-caliber guns. They're not; I've replaced all the Japanese imperial-caliber weapons (guns and torpedoes) with metric-caliber (check the device numbers and compare to a standard DB). That's historically correct, as the Japanese adopted metric in 1917.

If I'd just added them to the DB, then yes, there'd have been problems. The list of ship devices runs to slot# 170 (or something like that). Try to add a new gun somewhere further down the list, and you'll get in trouble.

There was a list of ranges of Device slots periodically posted that show the ranges that Allies and Japanese must have etc. I used to have it on my hard drive but had to replace it recently and now the file is sitting on a CD-R awaiting restoration. Michaelm probably has it. I'd recommend PM'ing him or doing a Search for "Device slots" on the forum.