Ship Class Design (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design



Message

Curtis Lemay -> Ship Class Design (3/7/2007 8:04:55 PM)

Now that we have an equipment editor, we don't have to restrict ourselves to the generic ship classes that come with TOAW. We can create our own. Those of you that read my "How To..." article on the BioEd may have noticed that I've created a suite of ship classes for my coming update to my Okinawa 1945 scenario. (I've also detailed ship classes for updates to CFNA, France 1944, and Soviet Union 1941, as well).

I thought I would share my method for this (not that it is necessarily the optimum method - that can be a discussion issue here). I've attached the spreadsheet I used to calculate the various parameters.

Note that the data (whenever possible) came from WitP. If you've got WitP, just open the editor and search the classes therein. In some cases, I had to find data on the web.

The formulas I used were as follow:

AP_main = (Relative rate of fire X # main guns X Effect) for the main armament.
AP_secondary = (Relative rate of fire X # secondary guns X Effect) for the secondary armament.
AP_tertiary = (Relative rate of fire X # teritary guns X Effect) for the tertiary armament.

AP_total = (AP_main + (range of secondary)**2/(range of main)**2 X AP_secondary + (range of tertiary)**2/(range of main)**2 X AP_tertiary)/22.67.

Note that secondary and tertiary batteries were only counted if they were not pure AAA guns. Also note the 22.67 scale factor. That was used to make the AP of the Warspite match the generic battleship AP - I arbitrarily set the Warspite as the base standard.

The AP*8 value is necessary for BioEd.

DF = 1.53*(2XDurability + (0.25XDeck Armor + 0.5XBelt Armor + 0.1XTower Armor + 0.15XTurret Armor))

Note that the 1.53 scale factor was again selected to make the Warspite DF match the genereic battleship.

Additonally, DF is also multiplied by an additional factor for ship size/agility.
For BBs/BCs/Monitors, it's 1.
For CAs it's 1.25.
For CLs/CLAAs it's 1.5.
For DDs/DEs it's 3.0

AAA factors are just the sum of AAA ratings (from TOAW) of the AAA or DP guns.

Shell(weight) is derived from Effect (pounds to Kgs).

Km (Range) is a conversion of the WitP "Range" parameter from thousands of yards to km.

Relative rate of fire is relative to the rate of fire of the Warspite. Note that for naval guns, the WitP Accuracy parameter actually is rate of fire.

Note that, since these values will primarily be used for shore bombardment rather than ship to ship combat, I didn't include AP values for torpedos, just guns.

Edit: deleted the attachment to avoid confusion with a subsequent version posted below.



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/8/2007 10:12:13 AM)

Thanks for sharing!

Erik



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:26:52 PM)

For those of you that don't have Excel, or just don't want to download the attachment, I'll post a couple of screenshots of the results:

Embeded here is the shot of the BBs, BCs, & CAs.

[image]local://upfiles/14086/78CE5FB1BA88497AB8E1737D11A3D67B.gif[/image]



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:29:01 PM)

And here's the shot of the CLs, CLAAs, DDs, & DEs:

[image]local://upfiles/14086/57CA8EF2D9F547378C031C1B89F0F881.gif[/image]



Veers -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:31:23 PM)

Awesome. Now, if we can get an improved naval system, these stats will really be able to shine. [:D]



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:31:36 PM)

One thing to note from these results is how badly Norm was off with the ranges of most of his generic ships below the BB category.



Veers -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:33:32 PM)

Yeah, he was pretty short on range.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/11/2007 7:36:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers

Awesome. Now, if we can get an improved naval system, these stats will really be able to shine. [:D]


The ultimate improvement to the naval system would allow us to actually model the ships the way WitP does - in detail. Then we could finally treat ships like they were ships instead of artillery units that move on deep water hexes.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/15/2007 10:53:45 PM)

Here's a screenshot of Aircraft Carrier classes I've just added:

Note that the Independence Class are CVLs and the Casablanca Class are CVEs.

[image]local://upfiles/14086/E53FF957C6704CB5BA5CC3332E960004.gif[/image]



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/15/2007 10:57:38 PM)

Here's an update to the spreadsheet, since the Carriers and some DD classes have been added.

Note that my practice is to divide the CVs by three, the CVLs by two, and the CVEs remain whole. Then each CV consists of 3 of the 1/3-sized classes, each CVL consists of 2 of the 1/2-sized classes, and each CVE consists of 1 of the whole-sized class. That allows three airgroups on each CV, two on each CVL, and one on each CVE.



dryiceman -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/23/2007 11:52:45 PM)

Saludos
Perdona que no escriba en inglés, pero no domino el idioma.
Te felicito por lo que haz hecho para personalizar los grandes navíos de la 2 GM.
Veo que en tu fórmula tomas datos que no son fáciles de conseguir, como el de la rata (cadencia) de disparo.
Me gustaria saber qué números resultarían en ciertos acorazados europeos.
Si por casualidad haz hecho el cálculo que le corresponderían a alguno de los siguientes navíos: Clase Nelson, Bismark, Scharnhorst, Admiral Graff Spee, Dunkerque, Richelieu y Vittorio Veneto, y no tienes problemas en compartirlos, te lo agradeciería.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/24/2007 7:13:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dryiceman

Saludos
Perdona que no escriba en inglés, pero no domino el idioma.
Te felicito por lo que haz hecho para personalizar los grandes navíos de la 2 GM.
Veo que en tu fórmula tomas datos que no son fáciles de conseguir, como el de la rata (cadencia) de disparo.
Me gustaria saber qué números resultarían en ciertos acorazados europeos.
Si por casualidad haz hecho el cálculo que le corresponderían a alguno de los siguientes navíos: Clase Nelson, Bismark, Scharnhorst, Admiral Graff Spee, Dunkerque, Richelieu y Vittorio Veneto, y no tienes problemas en compartirlos, te lo agradeciería.


Google translated this as:

Greetings It pardons that it does not write in English, but I do not dominate the language. I congratulate to you reason why you do fact to personalize the great the 2 ships of GM. I see that in your formula takings data that are not easy to obtain, as the one of the rat (cadence) of firing. Gustaria to know to me what numbers would be in certain European battleships. If by chance you do fact the calculation that would correspond to him to some of the following ships: Class Nelson, Bismark, Scharnhorst, Admiral Graff Spee, Dunkerque, Richelieu and Vittorio Veneto, and you do not have problems in sharing them, you agradeciería.

Good enough to understand.

My answer is:

The Nelson Class is already shown in both the posts above and in the attached spreadsheet.

German and Italian classes are more difficult because none of them are in “War in the Pacific”, which was my source for all the USA, UK, Japanese, and French classes. For German and Italian classes, I had to search for data about them on the web. For rate of fire and durability values, I just made my best guess.

However, you might want to try going to Matrix’s “War in the Pacific” board, and asking about data on those ships there. You may find others have already researched them.

Which Google again translated as:

La clase de Nelson se demuestra ya en ambos los postes sobre y en la hoja de balance unida.

Alemán y las clases italianas son más difíciles porque ningunas de ellas están en “guerra en el Pacífico”, que era mi fuente para los todos los E.E.U.U., Reino Unido, japonés, y las clases francesas. Para las clases alemanas e italianas, tuve que buscar para datos sobre ellos en la tela. Para el índice de los valores del fuego y de la durabilidad, acabo de hacer mi mejor conjetura.

Sin embargo, puede ser que desees intentar ir guerra de la matriz a la “en” el tablero pacífico, y preguntar por datos en esas naves allí. Puedes encontrar otros para haber investigadolos ya.

Someone who speaks Spanish might check that for me.



dryiceman -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/25/2007 12:48:11 AM)

Muchas gracias Curtis Lemay
Tienes toda la razón. La clase Nelson ya la habías mostrado. Fui yo quien no la vio
Veré si puedo conseguir los datos necesarios para sacar los valores de los otros navíos.
Gracias por la molestia de traducir.

¿Cómo hacen para traducir con Google del español al inglés? En mi barra de Google sólo me deja del inglés al español, y no siempre funciona.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/25/2007 7:23:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dryiceman

Muchas gracias Curtis Lemay
Tienes toda la razón. La clase Nelson ya la habías mostrado. Fui yo quien no la vio
Veré si puedo conseguir los datos necesarios para sacar los valores de los otros navíos.
Gracias por la molestia de traducir.

¿Cómo hacen para traducir con Google del español al inglés? En mi barra de Google sólo me deja del inglés al español, y no siempre funciona.


Translation:

Thank you very much Curtis Lemay You are all the right. The class Nelson already you had shown it. I was who did not see it I will see if I can obtain the data necessary to remove the values from the other ships. Thanks for the annoyance to translate. How makes to translate with Google of the Spanish the English? In my bar of Google only it leaves me to the Spanish of the English, and not always it works.

To change Google to translate from English to Spanish, just click where it says "Spanish to English" and it will popup a suite of translation choices.

Translation:

Cambiar Google para traducir inglés-español, del tecleo justo donde dice “español al inglés” y de él popup una habitación de las opciones de la traducción.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/25/2007 7:26:18 PM)

A propósito, aquí está un buen Web site sobre clases alemanas de la nave:

http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/index.html



dryiceman -> RE: Ship Class Design (3/27/2007 11:38:50 PM)

Muchas gracias Curtis



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/12/2007 2:41:56 PM)

Here's a zipped Excel-5 sheet with a bunch of additional ship classes.
I've used Bob's original with a few slight changes.
There are a lot of ship classes not classified in WITP
so I've used the various 'All the World's Fighting Ships' books published by Conway as my main source.
The WITP 'duration' classification is a subjective one, I've taken the normal displacement/280 for other ships,
this to make Warspite the default as Bob did.

edit: more ships





Telumar -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/13/2007 2:53:42 AM)

Great, thank you Erik. I'll use some of the british destroyers for an own scenario, you saved me some work..thanks.



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/13/2007 10:20:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Great, thank you Erik. I'll use some of the british destroyers for an own scenario, you saved me some work..thanks.


Your welcome.
Be aware that the generic DD values are much higher than 'my' customized DD-classes.
So you really need to either have all ships using custom values.



sapper32 -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/13/2007 7:55:55 PM)

Hi was just reading through this and noticed under battlecruisers you have UK Roberts is there a reason for this as if im correct ?? Roberts is a monitor regards Ian



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/14/2007 9:47:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sapper32

Hi was just reading through this and noticed under battlecruisers you have UK Roberts is there a reason for this as if im correct ?? Roberts is a monitor regards Ian


'Roberts' is from Robert's (Bob's) AKA Curtis' original Excel sheet.
Hope that was clear [:)]



rhinobones -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/14/2007 10:21:29 PM)

If you haven’t seen it already, there is a ship modeling site named Steelnavy.com

http://steelnavy.com/

The site is loaded with a lot of very good and knowledgeable people who eat and breathe everything to do with ships . . . especially warships. I’m sure there are people there who would gladly review your spreadsheet and offer suggestions for adjusting the relative strengths and weakness of the various ships and ship classes. Sure that they would also offer suggestions for ships you do not have on the spreadsheet.

One thing I have noticed is the lack of upgrading of AA defense for the WWII ships. There is a big difference in the capabilities of 1940 AA defense as compared to 1943 and 1945. The people at Steelnavy can help you with that.

Regards RhinoBones



larryfulkerson -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/15/2007 4:54:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

If you haven’t seen it already, there is a ship modeling site named Steelnavy.com

http://steelnavy.com/

The site is loaded with a lot of very good and knowledgeable people who eat and breathe everything to do with ships . . . especially warships. I’m sure there are people there who would gladly review your spreadsheet and offer suggestions for adjusting the relative strengths and weakness of the various ships and ship classes. Sure that they would also offer suggestions for ships you do not have on the spreadsheet.

One thing I have noticed is the lack of upgrading of AA defense for the WWII ships. There is a big difference in the capabilities of 1940 AA defense as compared to 1943 and 1945. The people at Steelnavy can help you with that.

Regards RhinoBones



Here's what Rhino said: (I think....)

Si no lo has visto ya, hay una nave que modela Steelnavy.com nombrado sitio
http://steelnavy.com/
El sitio se carga con muchos de la gente muy buena y bien informada que come y respira todo para hacer con las naves. especialmente buques de guerra. Soy seguro que hay gente allí quién repasaría alegre tu hoja de balance y ofrecería las sugerencias para ajustar las fuerzas y la debilidad relativas de las varias naves y clases de la nave. Seguro que también ofrecerían las sugerencias para las naves no tienes en la hoja de balance. Una cosa que he notado es la carencia del aumento de la defensa del AA para las naves de WWII. Hay una diferencia grande en las capacidades de la defensa 1940 del AA con respecto a 1943 y a 1945. La gente en Steelnavy puede ayudarte con eso.

but here's what Google says that translates into English:

If you have not seen it already, is a ship that Steelnavy.com models named http://steelnavy.com/ site the site load with many of well informed very good people and that it eats and it breathes everything to do with the ships. specially ships military. I am safe that there is people there who would review cheers your leaf of balance and would offer the suggestions to fit to the relative forces and the weakness of the several ships and classes of the ship. Surely that also would offer the suggestions for the ships you do not have in the balance leaf. A thing that I have noticed is the deficiency of the increase of the defense of the AA for the WWII ships. There is one differentiates great in the capacities from defense 1940 of the AA with respect to 1943 and to 1945. People in Steelnavy can ayudarte with that

Yeah....I know, I have too much free time for my own good.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/15/2007 6:40:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Nygaard

Here's a zipped Excel-5 sheet with a bunch of additional ship classes.
I've used Bob's original with a few slight changes.
There are a lot of ship classes not classified in WITP
so I've used the various 'All the World's Fighting Ships' books published by Conway as my main source.
The WITP 'duration' classification is a subjective one, I've taken the normal displacement/280 for other ships,
this to make Warspite the default as Bob did.


Great job, Erik!

By the way, it's "Durability", not "Duration". It certainly does seem subjective. And wherever I didn't have a WitP value (any German, Italian, or Soviet vessel), I just took a blind guess. If there is a systematic way to calculate it, the WitP board would be the place to find out. I may post a question there about it.

Users should note that they still might like to get both my and Erik's spreadsheets to have all the posted class designs, since his lacks several that were on mine, and even where they overlap, we've often reached slightly different results.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/15/2007 6:46:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rhinobones
One thing I have noticed is the lack of upgrading of AA defense for the WWII ships. There is a big difference in the capabilities of 1940 AA defense as compared to 1943 and 1945.


Absolutely, which is why I had dates for each class (columns M & N). I built the US & Japanese classes, especially, with their latest WitP dates, since they were for my Okinawa scenario.



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/18/2007 5:24:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
By the way, it's "Durability", not "Duration". It certainly does seem subjective. And wherever I didn't have a WitP value (any German, Italian, or Soviet vessel), I just took a blind guess. If there is a systematic way to calculate it, the WitP board would be the place to find out. I may post a question there about it.


I'm afraid that posting on the WitP board didn't help much. I'd hoped that the original designers would chip in, but all I got was more speculation from other guessers.

Best guesses were that it depends upon things like:

1. Displacement
2. Damage Control teams
3. Pumps
4. Water-tight compartments.



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/19/2007 9:49:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
....I'm afraid that posting on the WitP board didn't help much. I'd hoped that the original designers would chip in, but all I got was more speculation from other guessers.

Best guesses were that it depends upon things like:

1. Displacement
2. Damage Control teams
3. Pumps
4. Water-tight compartments.


At least I wasn't too far off using displacement. The other info is a bit harder to find...



Curtis Lemay -> RE: Ship Class Design (6/19/2007 10:48:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Nygaard


quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
....I'm afraid that posting on the WitP board didn't help much. I'd hoped that the original designers would chip in, but all I got was more speculation from other guessers.

Best guesses were that it depends upon things like:

1. Displacement
2. Damage Control teams
3. Pumps
4. Water-tight compartments.


At least I wasn't too far off using displacement. The other info is a bit harder to find...


Yes, most of the other factors would tend to be proportional to displacement, after all. There are exceptions, though, so, when I had a WitP durability figure, I prefered that over any displacement-based value.



Erik2 -> RE: Ship Class Design (8/19/2007 7:58:20 PM)

Some more ships, mainly Italian and French.



akdreemer -> RE: Ship Class Design (9/24/2007 2:07:19 AM)

Just some observations and possible corrections

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

Now that we have an equipment editor, we don't have to restrict ourselves to the generic ship classes that come with TOAW. We can create our own. Those of you that read my "How
To..." article on the BioEd may have noticed that I've created a suite of ship classes for my coming update to my Okinawa 1945 scenario. (I've also detailed ship classes for updates to CFNA, France 1944, and Soviet Union 1941, as well).

I thought I would share my method for this (not that it is necessarily the optimum method - that can be a discussion issue here). I've attached the spreadsheet I used to calculate the various parameters.

Note that the data (whenever possible) came from WitP. If you've got WitP, just open the editor and search the classes therein. In some cases, I had to find data on the web.

The formulas I used were as follow:

AP_main = (Relative rate of fire X # main guns X Effect) for the main armament.
AP_secondary = (Relative rate of fire X # secondary guns X Effect) for the secondary armament.
AP_tertiary = (Relative rate of fire X # teritary guns X Effect) for the tertiary armament.

AP_total = (AP_main + (range of secondary)**2/(range of main)**2 X AP_secondary + (range of tertiary)**2/(range of main)**2 X AP_tertiary)/22.67.

Note that secondary and tertiary batteries were only counted if they were not pure AAA guns. Also note the 22.67 scale factor. That was used to make the AP of the Warspite match the generic battleship AP - I arbitrarily set the Warspite as the base standard.

The AP*8 value is necessary for BioEd.

DF = 1.53*(2XDurability + (0.25XDeck Armor + 0.5XBelt Armor + 0.1XTower Armor + 0.15XTurret Armor))

Note that the 1.53 scale factor was again selected to make the Warspite DF match the genereic battleship.

Additonally, DF is also multiplied by an additional factor for ship size/agility.
For BBs/BCs/Monitors, it's 1.
For CAs it's 1.25.
For CLs/CLAAs it's 1.5.
For DDs/DEs it's 3.0

AAA factors are just the sum of AAA ratings (from TOAW) of the AAA or DP guns.

Shell(weight) is derived from Effect (pounds to Kgs).

Km (Range) is a conversion of the WitP "Range" parameter from thousands of yards to km.

Relative rate of fire is relative to the rate of fire of the Warspite. Note that for naval guns, the WitP Accuracy parameter actually is rate of fire.

Note that, since these values will primarily be used for shore bombardment rather than ship to ship combat, I didn't include AP values for torpedos, just guns.

Edit: deleted the attachment to avoid confusion with a subsequent version posted below.

For Gun ranges simply multiply by .91 to convert yards to meters (36in/39.4in).

For final range value for TOAW data multiply primary fun range x 2 then divide x 3. Ensure that extended range is enabled. This change will attenuate the effects of the secondary/tertiary AP values by halving the AP value at longer ranges (last 1/3 range) where these guns cannot fire, thus their AP factors should not be counted at these reanges.





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.125