Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 2:57:11 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		I'm going to make 1 thread for all my future, 'what do you guys think?' questions so I don't fill the board up with question threads.

Here is the latest, Light Cruiser Arethusa from 1914. While it was a cruiser in WWI, it has more of the characteristics of a DD Leader by WWII. So my question is, looking at the ship, how would the rest of you class it, as a CL like I have, or as something else? Gunboat perhaps?




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Shark7 -- 6/3/2011 2:58:31 AM >

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Post #: 1
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 3:43:47 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		As a CL. 6" guns!

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 2
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 3:48:59 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Keep it a CL

_____________________________


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 3
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 4:08:55 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a CL. 6" guns!


Remember, the Porter class DD Leaders originally had 6" guns as well. This is an old CL and the armament is very light, which is why I thought possibly PG.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 4
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 4:13:17 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Well its a valid arguement, look at the coastal class ships that are listed as PG's. On the same token, I think the "D" class CL's are rather old by WWII and they are CL's

_____________________________


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 5
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 4:18:37 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Well its a valid arguement, look at the coastal class ships that are listed as PG's. On the same token, I think the "D" class CL's are rather old by WWII and they are CL's


I'm thinking more about how the AI will handle it. You and I look at it, and we see it is a CL, but it is a very poor choice for the duties a CL would normally carry out. The AI simply sees it as a CL and might try to stick it in a carrier task force...to its own detriment. For the sake of the AI, I might be better off classing these as gunboats, so the AI will use them in a way that is more appropriate to their capabilities.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 6
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 6:41:33 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a CL. 6" guns!


Remember, the Porter class DD Leaders originally had 6" guns as well. This is an old CL and the armament is very light, which is why I thought possibly PG.


I think ships are treated according to classification. Thus, a CL behaves differently than a DD. A CL can have an airplane - a DD is probably better at
ASW. To the extent these things are known, classification ought to put a ship where it will be treated more like what it is. In an ancester of this system,
you got better ASW if you classified as a DE. You got the ability to carry a plane if you classify as a CL (even though some DD and even auxiliaries carry
planes IRL, code ignored them in game terms. So an auxiliary cruiser classified as a CL could have a plane, but one classified as a PG or AK could not.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 7
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 6:51:53 PM   
Whisper

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 1/20/2008
From: LA
Status: offline 		Totally wrong. The developers put a high degree of flexibility into the system. Any ship can carry a plane, any ship can mines or DCs, or 16 inch guns. But what a ship can "do" depends on its place, and its type-flag in one of many, many type-matrix definitions. You have no clue how this game works. And I really wish you would just shut up, because you are giving false information to people.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 8
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 7:00:05 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Well I ran a quick test using AE to check this and as you can see by the screenshot, the airgroup is snuggly nestled in with the ship classed as a PG. So it does seem to work to put a float plane on any ship in AE, without limits by the class type.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 9
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 8:31:29 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		I would leave it as a CL the AI is smart enough to relaise its not a good CL for an ACTF BUT in a pinch if nothing better is available you want the AI to use it.

When dealing with the AI my normal rule of thumb is there are three classes of shgip the AI uses really well or is always short of.

1. Destroyers Destroyers Destroyers my kingdom for more destroyers - Destroyers are the number 1 reason why the Ai occasionally does not form TF's they are multipurpose can be used by most TF types as escort and are required for some types to form - these work horses are always required
2. CL's again workhorses and multi purpose ships good AA decent endurance and speed CL's can be used by a large number of AI TF's and are good ships to have in TF's
3. Ironically AMC's - they are of use in a lot of TF's as aux surface escorts and they provide welcome hitting power for small convoys as multipurpose escorts they help the AI a lot they basically substiture for CL's and DD's in a lot of transfport/cargo/tanker/amphib type TF's which makes them usefull in allowing the Ai to form TF;s- (hence in ironman the prevalant use of that class of ship)


(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 10
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/3/2011 8:39:31 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I would leave it as a CL the AI is smart enough to relaise its not a good CL for an ACTF BUT in a pinch if nothing better is available you want the AI to use it.

When dealing with the AI my normal rule of thumb is there are three classes of shgip the AI uses really well or is always short of.

1. Destroyers Destroyers Destroyers my kingdom for more destroyers - Destroyers are the number 1 reason why the Ai occasionally does not form TF's they are multipurpose can be used by most TF types as escort and are required for some types to form - these work horses are always required
2. CL's again workhorses and multi purpose ships good AA decent endurance and speed CL's can be used by a large number of AI TF's and are good ships to have in TF's
3. Ironically AMC's - they are of use in a lot of TF's as aux surface escorts and they provide welcome hitting power for small convoys as multipurpose escorts they help the AI a lot they basically substiture for CL's and DD's in a lot of transfport/cargo/tanker/amphib type TF's which makes them usefull in allowing the Ai to form TF;s- (hence in ironman the prevalant use of that class of ship)




Thank you Andy Mac, for giving me a glimpse into how the AI works. That was a nice, clear explanation of what I was needing to know. I will change these back to CLs on your suggestion.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 11
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 12:35:59 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline 		Just a matter of trivia...Something like 8 of the American Fletcher DD's were fitted out to carry Kingfisher aircraft..They were later removed..(I can provide the names of those ships)..

_____________________________




(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 12
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 12:41:37 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 13
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 4:37:18 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Speaking of ships having a capability that was later removed...

The Porter class originally was designed with 6" guns as Leader Destroyers. Given no Washington or London Naval treaties...would it be unrealistic to have them start the war with the 6" guns, or would they still have gone to 5" guns?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 6:10:35 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.



I have traded banter with you for maybe 7 years?..I will let you know when you are wrong.

_____________________________




(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 15
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 6:20:00 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.


And that only for experimentation. None were so used operationally and the aircraft handling equipment was removed.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 16
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 6:30:42 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Good thing, too. Can you imagine going into combat somewhere like the Solomons with a molotov cocktail... er, floatplane on your destroyer?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 17
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/9/2011 7:14:04 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.



I have traded banter with you for maybe 7 years?..I will let you know when you are wrong.


Pffft... Only been here for six years, Gramps...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 18
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/10/2011 8:40:39 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.



I have traded banter with you for maybe 7 years?..I will let you know when you are wrong.


Pffft... Only been here for six years, Gramps...


I didn't think it showed..

_____________________________




(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 19
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/10/2011 8:42:54 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I think only one or two of them went to sea with their aircraft embarked.


And that only for experimentation. None were so used operationally and the aircraft handling equipment was removed.



Tin Cans roll enough as it is. Obviously an idea thought up by someone who had never served on one?

_____________________________




(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 20
RE: The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread - 6/10/2011 9:34:44 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Yeah, like Musette Bags and the canopy of early-model P-47s...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> The 'Shark needs an opinion' thread Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.172