|
Tankerace -> RE: Admiral's Edition Naval Thread (1/30/2008 3:05:15 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dixie
quote:
ORIGINAL: JWE
We burned a good amount of little grey cells (c.f. Hercule Poirot) makin sure you Monarchist, Imperialists have something to play with.
Good show old chap! [:)]
I also like the fact that there are C & D class options as well [8D] Normal CL and CLAA variants I assume [:)]
Just dropping a note here, since I'm the one inputting all these classes. I think that John and some other people might be giving you the slightly wrong impression. All of these are available to the player, (The various C and D class ships in a multitude of fits) but while the engine would allow for it in a mod, players cannot convert to each individual option in each circumstance.
For instance, it is possible for players to convert Flush Deck destroyers to any of the myriad of options and back again, because this was done on a large scale. Add too that war needs might necessitate it (if you loose all your DMs, convert a new batch).
However, while the various cruiser classes are represented, C class cruisers cannot be converted to CLAA types, nor vice versa. In vessels larger than destroyers, conversions are only allowed for those vessels that had them or that could have received them in theater. Thus since the New Mexico class US BBs were altered, at least on one isntance, by the captain's insistance it is presented as an option in game for players. However such low level command would not apply to a massive role/strategic conversion as applied to many British cruisers.
Thus, in game, you ARE NOT able to convert a Ceres class cruiser to a Caledon style CLAA. However, modders could render this capable quite easy with 5 minutes in the scenario editor. Again, such a role/policy shift would not have been made at the SEAsia or CinCPac level.
So, in answer to this question:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Dixie
Where have you drawn the line with this, if there is a line at all. Will players be able to rebuild Devonshire, Shropshire and Sussex like London was?
The line is drawn at historical conversion, conversions that were ordered but not proceeded with, conversions applied in theater, or conversions ordered by commanders in theater. Thus, Devonshire, Shropshire, and Sussex cannot be rebuilt to the same standard London was. In fact, as the OOB stands right now, following the upgrade paths Devonshire and Sussex will end the war with one set of upgrades, Shropshire with another, and London with another. I may allow Devonshire/Shropshire to convert to one anyother (which in effect removes X turret for more AA).
Conversions exist within the Allied OOB to facilitate Historic conversions, or for allowing players to choose the final ending armament of a class when the class had a variety of armament (think US or British battleships at the end of the war. The KGVs are a prime example). They do not exist for allowing fantasy conversions that would create a role/policy shift on the intended platform, such as a British CL to a CLAA. Such decisions would be above the Allied players paygrade.
Conversions that could have or were ordered in theater are present. Thus, Allied players may convert more Gearing class destroyers to radar pickets, but other destroyer classes are not allowed to be convert as they were not done historically. US Fleet submarines can convert to Gunboats because many were historically, but other US subs predating the Gato's are not allowed to, because they did not historically.
I think what John is driving at is the engine has that ability, to let players convert at will. But the OOB while allowing for many conversions is, at least the part I'm doing, is drawing the line at a compromise at what was historically done and what could have been done.
|
|
|
|
