Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Shouldn't the durability be a little higher? Otherwise, small machine guns will sink her quickly. (not to mention one small bomb) I just assume that a drydock is pretty durable.

I'm really not too sure - one bomb could really mess up one of these things. But then again the one at Pearl survived the near destruction of the Shaw (I think!).

In fact - I am having some second thoughts about adding floating dry docks at all. Well, maybe Dewey Dry Dock as she was so famous.

There was the floating dry dock at Pearl and the US build 6 or 8 very large ones for use at undevoped advanced bases. They were built in sections which were towed where needed and assembled. But in the game they are just ARs and the special value of a dry dock has no meaning. And there's no way to simulated towing of "pieces" and assembly.

As always - ideas??

Wasn't sure on the 25s, but I new Matrix OOB guy (Ron? [:D]) accidentally put them as twins instead of singles.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Wasn't sure on the 25s, but I new Matrix OOB guy (Ron? [:D]) accidentally put them as twins instead of singles.

Yup - he has been given a stern talking to - and Lex is fixed in our scenario.

Early 1942 - 8" removed, not yet replaced:

And a few months later with 5/38 in twins and singles:

Awsome.

I got to thinking, about the Barracuda class subs. Ron's argument for not letting them in is because they patroled the Canal area.... but since we now have the Canal, any chance at adding them? I already have all the data and graphics.

Don,

The 5/38 single mounts had half the traverse speed as the twin mounts, i still feel these should be listed as 5/25s or a new class of 5/38 with half of the accuracy.

Mike

Data for the Barracudas (arrival dates).

USS Barracuda was actually in the Pacific when war broke out, and was transferred to the Atlantic on 15 December when she was transferred to the Canal. From 15 December to 7 September, she made 6 War Patrols in the back areas of the Pacific. She should be included at the very least.

USS Bass was stationed at Coco Solo throughout 1942, and on 17 August was sent to the Canal Zone. In October she was transferred back to the Atlantic.

USS Bonita was at Panama when the war broke out, and remained their conducting war patrols until October, when she was rebuilt into an unsuccesful transport submarine.

So, even though yes they were used for training, the fact remains Barracuda and Bonita were in the now current map when war broke out. And if we can have tugboats and converted yachts, two more submarines should be included aswell.

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Awsome.

I got to thinking, about the Barracuda class subs. Ron's argument for not letting them in is because they patroled the Canal area.... but since we now have the Canal, any chance at adding them? I already have all the data and graphics.

Sure - send them along. One question though - were they on the Atlantic side or the Pacific. The main submarine base was on the Atlantic Side at Coco Solo and the squadron of "S" boats in the canal zone was stationed there.

Don

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

The 5/38 single mounts had half the traverse speed as the twin mounts, i still feel these should be listed as 5/25s or a new class of 5/38 with half of the accuracy.

Mike

Agreed. Since we don't have anymore device slots, 5"/25s should do.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Awsome.

I got to thinking, about the Barracuda class subs. Ron's argument for not letting them in is because they patroled the Canal area.... but since we now have the Canal, any chance at adding them? I already have all the data and graphics.

Sure - send them along. One question though - were they on the Atlantic side or the Pacific. The main submarine base was on the Atlantic Side at Coco Solo and the squadron of "S" boats in the canal zone was stationed there.

Don

Bass was at Coco Solo, but Bonita and Barracuda were on the Pacific side.

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

The 5/38 single mounts had half the traverse speed as the twin mounts, i still feel these should be listed as 5/25s or a new class of 5/38 with half of the accuracy.

Mike

We do not have any remaining slots for ship's gun type devices but we can make them 5/25s. Opinions??

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

The 5/38 single mounts had half the traverse speed as the twin mounts, i still feel these should be listed as 5/25s or a new class of 5/38 with half of the accuracy.

Mike

Agreed. Since we don't have anymore device slots, 5"/25s should do.

OK - how are you doing this? Twice you've posted an answer when I was still writing the question.

Data

Name: Barracuda
Max Speed: 18
Cruise Speed: 9
Mnvr: 70
Dur: 20
Endurance: 10000
Fuel: 350

Wpn1: 21in Mk 10, F, Num: 4, Turrets: 4, Ammo 2
Wpn2: 21in Mk 10, R, Num:2, Turrets: 2, Ammo 2
Wpn3: 3in/50 Mk 10, F, Num: 1, Turret: 1, Ammo 18
Wpn4: .50cal MG, A, Num2: Turret: 1, Ammo 36

For a 1942/43 refit,

Delete 3in/50 and .50 cal MGs, add:
Wpn4 20mm Oerlikon, F, Num 1, Turret 1, Ammo 36
Wpn5 20mm Oerlikon, R, Num 1, Turret 1, Ammo 36

Correction: Replace the 5in/51 with a 3in/50 Mk 10. I forgot that was changed in the 1930s. Im also doing a late war graphic now.

Here are teh graphics for the '42/43 refit. Also note that for that, also delete the deck gun. It was removed so the 20s could be added.

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

12) Corrected class (0117) spelling from Tomodzuru to Tomozuru
13) Corrected class (0113) spelling from Ootori to Otori

This is my fault. My reference (Watts - Japanese Warships of World War II) uses the spelling Tomodzuru and Ootori and I changed them to this spelling. More than that, it's what I am used to. If you-all are sure it should be t'other way, I will change them back.

Both Ootori and Otori (and Ohtori as well) are acceptable spellings depending on which English characters you use for the Japanese kana, often it's just a matter a preference which you use.

Similarly with Tomodzuru and Tomozuru.

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Don,

The 5/38 single mounts had half the traverse speed as the twin mounts, i still feel these should be listed as 5/25s or a new class of 5/38 with half of the accuracy.

Mike

For some reason I am having problems changing guns that I know were 5in/38 to 5in/25. So, I ran michaelm's WITPCHK to find any possible alternatives and found:
Device ID: 40 (6.1in/55 M1920 Gun) - defined but not referenced
Device ID: 117 (Mousetrap Mk 22) - defined but not referenced
Device ID: 123 (Mk 6 Mine) - defined but not referenced
Device ID: 130 (Mk 13 Mine) - defined but not referenced

Device 40 was used only on the French cruisers (classes defined but no ships assigned). Note that the other three are an ASW device and two mines!

I can make Device 40 into a 5in/38 Single and thus assuage my difficulty with the single mounts on US carriers. Questions for Lemurs:
What would be a good name for this gun
What specs - Accuracy/2, others same
Or, I could respond to an outpouring of criticism and make the guns 5in/25.

What about the ASW and Mines - any ideas for use of them??

Don

In 1963, the floating drydock, Oak Ridge, was towed from Norfolk to Rota, Spain in 22 days which averages to 6.2 knots (a distance of 3274.504111 nautical miles).

Why not set the speed to be 7 knots with a fuel capacity of 200? This may force the task force to refuel often enough to average 6 knots (I didn't test it ... let me know if you want me to).

http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/auxil/ard19.txt

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

In fact - I am having some second thoughts about adding floating dry docks at all. Well, maybe Dewey Dry Dock as she was so famous.

There was the floating dry dock at Pearl and the US build 6 or 8 very large ones for use at undevoped advanced bases. They were built in sections which were towed where needed and assembled. But in the game they are just ARs and the special value of a dry dock has no meaning. And there's no way to simulated towing of "pieces" and assembly.

As always - ideas??

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Awsome.

I got to thinking, about the Barracuda class subs. Ron's argument for not letting them in is because they patroled the Canal area.... but since we now have the Canal, any chance at adding them? I already have all the data and graphics.

The Barracudas also sucked. The were training boats mainly and their inclusion will lead to Allied players using them operationally. I think it is bad enough that we have no way to withdraw the older S Class, Dolphin, Cuttlefish and Cachalot, The P Boats and Salmon/ Sargos when they historically were for training duties without YET ANOTHER HOUSE RULE, a real need which is not modelled.

While we are at it, lets add all the R boats. Maybe the V class British boats.[&:][8|] Don't mean to sound like a dink but we should draw the line somewhere. Japan has it bad enough.

Hey, TA! Notice the new refits for the US subs? Guns get resighted in some. Maybe some refit fraphics for subs showing new camo, resighted guns, cut down bridge and fairwater etc. That might be fun.[:D]