RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message

witpqs -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/14/2015 10:13:06 PM)

So in searching Google images for a pic for that post, what do I see? [X(]

[image]local://upfiles/14248/D133E6A6281B47E9B6E87C4E5070C665.jpg[/image]



wdolson -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/14/2015 10:15:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Thanks John. I know it is my decision at the end of this but I too love these sorts of discussions and all the great thoughts that come from it. We have a mutual admiration society with everyone listed above.

OK. I think the BBs have to be built due to the Gun Lobby. When they are completed Yamamoto has taken control as Navy Minister. He still has to juggle the Gun Club with the Air-Minded Faction so how about a compromise similar to what you mentioned? Japan builds two BBs, Yamamoto moves into the Ministry and he gets a CV and a B-65 or a 3rd BB put in. One for each faction. What do you think?

The CV could be a 'quickie' like Hiryu or another Shokaku. Thoughts with that?

Not wedded to this--just 'tossing' it out.



I believe pre-war and early war carrier doctrine for the Japanese involved carriers operating in pairs. This way they could launch two large strikes in fairly short order. One deck would launch dive bombers and the other torpedo planes, then the second wave would do the opposite. The Hiryu + Soryu and Akagi + Kaga had islands on the opposite sides so the carriers could have clockwise and counter-clockwise landing patterns. Air currents across the deck made the port island more treacherous, so the Shokakus were designed identically with the starboard island.

I don't know what the thinking was with the Taiho. She was laid down just before the war started and she didn't have any sisters, though there were plans to build more. If there had been more resources, I think Japan would have built at least a pair of Taihos are the same time. The Taiho was essentially an improved Shokaku which shows the direction of thinking around 1940.

The Unryus were essentially improved Hiryus which were built because they were smaller and simpler to build than the Shokaku/Taiho class and Japan needed carriers ASAP. The Hiryu/Soryu only existed because of the treaties. They were built to fit withing the tonnage limits of the treaty. If there had been no restriction on carriers, I would have expected the Hiryu/Soryus to be closer in size to the Shokaku, though maybe not quite as advanced.

When Japan was gearing up for war, the Shalkaku and Taiho show where their thinking was with regards fleet CVs. Considering how long the Shokakus lasted and how many times the Shokaku was damaged and returned to the fight, it's testament to their late 30s designs.

Bill



John 3rd -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/15/2015 2:42:17 PM)

"Small ship, Big War" Wow--that does bring up memories doesn't it.

When was Taiho originally conceived? Started in 1940, could it have been started a year EARLIER?



DOCUP -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/15/2015 4:36:38 PM)

John, you could try getting two CLs for free. Etna Class CLs for the Royal Thai navy.



Symon -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 3:03:50 PM)

Hi John'

I agree with Bill in that Japanese liked to build things in terms of Sentai. Given that, I would suggest you do your BBs in pairs and if you do a CV, have another in the box ready to pull the trigger on.

My personal opinion is to do a 'Kaku Kai'. If I was going to spend budget $$ on a CAG, I would want one that could play with the big boys.

Saying that, I have no idea what a 'Kaku Kai' might be like. Taiho was purt-near a Kai - armored flight deck, hurricane bow, integrated CO2 purge, etc.. but in terms of form, fit and function, the 'Kakus were everything a carrier should be. Ok, just me now, I would build a Ryukaku, with internal improvements and maybe some light armor protection for the flight deck. The follow-on ship would look a lot like Taiho - a further incremental improvement on a damn good design.

I know you are trying to shoehorn ships into a limited environment. I'm trying, but I can only follow things to their logical conclusion. In my view, if you build a CV you will want to clear a yard, somewhere, for the next iteration. This has implications for the next couple years for anything else you may want to do. I don't know how to address that.

This really is like trying to put 10 lbs of ground venison into a 5 lb casing. The Amish do it all the time, and they add wonderful spices, too. Somehow it can be done, with some inventiveness. Anyway, that's my take and I'm sticking to it [8D]
Ciao. JWE



John 3rd -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 4:28:47 PM)

Funny you Posted this. I was just about to do something similar.

Here is my thinking:

1. Build two 3x3 BBs. They are off the slipways in 1939. To appease the Gun Lobby two of the BCs are begun in those exact slipways. Hey---they just built a pair of BBs why not keep them in the big ship, big gun game??!! Perhaps some form of economy there. These BCs would come into the game in mid-to-late 42 instead of a year later (as it is in RA/BTS presently).

2. Doing this makes things interesting because the slips that I had budgeted to those BC are now open earlier then planned. OK. We add a pair of CVs to the cue. My thinking is that this would be a second pair of Shokaku with slight improvements (Kai's). Instead of getting one Sho-Kai in late-42 the Japanese get two with then a 3rd coming in pretty quickly in early-43.

3. This move slightly accelerates other due dates through the rest of the war.

Seems pretty solid. By the end of 1942 the Japanese gain that CV TF that Michael spoke about: 2 CV, 2 Fast BC, as well as the cruisers and DDs already in the pipeline...


How about that??


PS I really like the slightly armored flight deck idea John. Problem is, what kind of benefit would that result in in game terms?



ny59giants -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 4:43:25 PM)

Currently, BTS has 6 of the Shokaku-Kai Class CVs.

Kaimon due 7 Aug 42
Taikaku due 25 Feb 43
Renkaku due 2 Sept 43
Taiyo due 12 July 44
Katsuragi due 16 Nov 44
Kasigi due 19 Jan 45

I hope I'm following what JWE just posted, but build two more CVs that the slipway allows after the two BBs are done that follow an improve path that JWE described. So out of 8 CVs, how many remain as Shokaku-Kai Class and how many of the improved version along the lines that JWE speaks of?? IMO, I would go with 4 and 4.



John 3rd -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 5:11:44 PM)

Well...the real question is if you slightly armor the flightdeck, what real benefit do you see through the game. I know that 55MM of armor stops a 1,000lb bomb but I don't see 2 inches of steel covering these flightdecks. Am I wrong there? If one went with 1 inch (25MM) then what does that benefit?

As per arrivals it might (I haven't gone through my building and yard matrix) look similar to this:

Kaimon June 42
Taikaku Oct 42
Renkaku May 43
Taiyo Jan 44
Katsuragi June 44
Kasigi Oct 44

Could try to put another pair in mid-to-late 45 but that seems useless...



John 3rd -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 5:53:27 PM)

OK. Here would be a comparison of the Building Programs between REAL LIFE and RA/Between the Storms working with CLs up...

Circle Three
RL (7 Ships CL+)
2 Yamato BB
2 Shokaku CV
Nisshin as CS
2 CL (Training Cruiser)

ALTNAV (7 Ships CL+)
2 3x3 16.1" BB
2 Shokaku CV
Nisshin as CVL
2 CA (Niitaka-Class)

Circle Four
RL (10 Ships CL+)
2 Yamato BB
1 Taiho CV
7 CL (Agano--Oyodo--1 Training)

ALTNAV (13 Ships CL+) Two additional cruiser-sized slipways are added in Port Arthur in 1940.
2 B-65 BC
2 Shokaku-Kai
1 CVL (Aso-Class)
2 CA
8 CL (Tokoro)

Additional War Time Building
4 Shokaku Kai
2 CVL (Aso-Class)
2 CA



Symon -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/16/2015 6:30:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
How about that??

Sounds like you are engaged in the universe of critical thinking. All power to you. Praise God from who all Blessings flow; Praise Him all creatures here below; Presie Him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
Thomas Ken, 1637- 1711: Louis Bourgeous, 1510-1561, from the Genfer Psalter ca 16th century.

In game terms, just add some % push to the durability of the ships. Can't think of anything better. And there's nothing in the code that would make it better. Woof !! What you see is pretty much what you get. Wish it were otherwise, but ... . Ciao. JWE



John 3rd -> RE: If the Japanese did not build the Super-Battleships... (3/17/2015 9:30:34 PM)

Will be doing an RA 'Lite' and BTS 'Lite' within the next few days.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.09375