TM, RA, and BTS Re-Write

[John 3rd]

They didn't act on it in RL so I am going to pass with it this time.

[John 3rd]

The real answer to your question is that each ship left was left BY NAME and that became the near tonnage number for the respective fleet.

I like building the 3x2 14" BC to accompany the Constellation. Think of it as a precursor to the Alaska-Class.

[traskott]

That sounds good....the more BCs, the merrier

[John 3rd]

I like fast, nasty wessels! Sort of like my...wife??!!

Crap. I am sure she is going to see this!

[InfiniteMonkey]

Okay, alpha version of scenario comparison tool is done. Here is a complete list of the changes between BTS 2.6 and BTSL working posted on John's site, in case you were wondering.

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I like fast, nasty wessels! Sort of like my...wife??!!

Crap. I am sure she is going to see this!

ohHH I LIKE that.

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

Okay, alpha version of scenario comparison tool is done. Here is a complete list of the changes between BTS 2.6 and BTSL working posted on John's site, in case you were wondering.

I will play with this tomorrow.
NOT something a wife wants to hear I think...

[InfiniteMonkey]

The prettier version. Note that those "Fix?" check boxes and the "Merge Checked" button will allow you to selectively merge any change to the target scenario.

EDIT: OH, and the report attached in the above post was saved using the "Save As" button pictured here.

[John 3rd]

That looks very useful. One could go back and look to see if you did this or did that. Like the looks of it.

[InfiniteMonkey]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That looks very useful. One could go back and look to see if you did this or did that. Like the looks of it.

I see it's value two fold:

1. Provides a thorough change log of the scenario between versions.
2. Allows modders that use another mod(s) as the base of their mod to incorporate changes to the base mod without exhaustive work.

So let's say you really like a mod's ground and naval OOB, but really hate the air OOB. You decide to build your own mod that overhauls the air OOB. A few months later, the base mod makes changes that are really interesting and you want to incorporate SOME of them. You can us the scenario comparison to identify changes and then selectively apply those changes to your scenario.

[traskott]

Thats an AMAZING feature!!

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: InfiniteMonkey

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

That looks very useful. One could go back and look to see if you did this or did that. Like the looks of it.

I see it's value two fold:

1. Provides a thorough change log of the scenario between versions.
2. Allows modders that use another mod(s) as the base of their mod to incorporate changes to the base mod without exhaustive work.

So let's say you really like a mod's ground and naval OOB, but really hate the air OOB. You decide to build your own mod that overhauls the air OOB. A few months later, the base mod makes changes that are really interesting and you want to incorporate SOME of them. You can us the scenario comparison to identify changes and then selectively apply those changes to your scenario.

Unless you're like me and you totally gutted the naval OoB [:D]

[decourcy2]

You were commenting on the Japanese breaking the treaty but remember into the 1970's the USA insisted the North Carolina/Washington classes were 35,000 tons.

[John 3rd]

That is a GOOD point!

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: decourcy2

You were commenting on the Japanese breaking the treaty but remember into the 1970's the USA insisted the North Carolina class were 35,000 tons.

Maybe so, but no one builds a battleship on 15,000 tons (or puts Baby in a corner).

[John 3rd]

NO ONE puts BABY in the corner.

(CANNOT believe you made me quote that movie...)[:'(]

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

NO ONE puts BABY in the corner.

(CANNOT believe you made me quote that movie...)[:'(]

It's good for you.

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Let's go through the Real Life Numbers and ships from Washington vs. the revamped Ships and Numbers for the Mod:

USA
Utah 21,825
Florida 21,825
Wyoming 26,000
Arkansas 26,000
Texas 27,000
New York 27,000
Nevada 27,500
Oklahoma 27,500
Pennsylvania 31,400
Arizona 31,400
Mississippi 32,000
New Mexico 32,000
Idaho 32,000
Tennessee 32,300
California 32,300
Maryland 32,600
West Virginia 32,600
Colorado 32,600

TOTAL: 525,850

Japan
Settsu TARGET SHIP
Kongo 27,500
Hiei 27,500
Haruna 27,500
Kirishima 27,500
Fuso 30,600
Yamashiro 30,600
Ise 31,260
Hyuga 31,260
Nagato 33,800
Mutsu 33,800

TOTAL: 301,230

525,280 x .6 = 315,510 Japan has 14,280 T available but nothing can be built to that tonnage.


NEW NUMBERS

USA
Wyoming TARGET SHIP
Arkansas 26,000
Texas 27,000
New York 27,000
Nevada 27,500
Oklahoma 27,500
Pennsylvania 31,400
Arizona 31,400
Mississippi 32,000
New Mexico 32,000
Idaho 32,000
Tennessee 32,300
California 32,300
Maryland 32,600
West Virginia 32,600
Colorado 32,600
Washington 32,600
Constellation 43,500
+1 New Capital Ship to be built 30,000 T

TOTAL: 597,300

Japan
Settsu TARGET SHIP
Kongo 27,500
Hiei 27,500
Haruna 27,500
Kirishima 27,500
Fuso 30,600
Yamashiro 30,600
Ise 31,260
Hyuga 31,260
Nagato 33,800
Mutsu 33,800
Tosa 39,900
Ishitaka 41,220

TOTAL: 382,440

567,300 x .7 = 397,110 Japan has nearly the same available tonnage (14,670 T) but nothing can be built to that tonnage.

That is the Treaty by specific math and ships.

Just for kicks and giggles, Japan does have 15,000T available. Figuring how they under-reported tonnage (and were allowed to get away with it) perhaps that number could go to 18-20,000T. Could you do anything with that available tonnage?

[John 3rd]

The files have been sent back over to Michael for some stuff he wants to do. Figure we'll release this sometime this coming week. We'll then shift over to BTSL.

[ny59giants]

Just for kicks and giggles, Japan does have 15,000T available. Figuring how they under-reported tonnage (and were allowed to get away with it) perhaps that number could go to 18-20,000T. Could you do anything with that available tonnage?

Single experimental 'pocket' BB/BC with single turrets forward and aft with either a pair of 18" or 20" guns. Or having three guns in a that large a turret of that size. Helps Japan test the feasibility of a super-BB or not.

[1EyedJacks]

Or a stronger experimental push with those light Kitikuma cruisers that sport a pair of twenty-torpedo broadsides? Wouldn't it be kind of fun to have 12 of those available early in the war? [:D]