Naval "Gun Value" for Ships

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Naval "Gun Value" for Ships

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 >> Naval "Gun Value" for Ships

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 5/22/2016 2:45:40 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

Currently when assigning ships to/from a TF, the "Gun Value" displayed is the Pen value of the highest rated gun. Should the displayed value be some sort of formula relative to the value of all the main caliber guns?

For example: A Fletcher class DD has 5x 5in/38 main battery and a Sims class has 4x 5in/38 main battery yet they both have a "Gun Value" of 62 as rated by their Pen value.

To me, it stands to reason that Fletcher should display Gun Value that is 25% higher than Sims. The question is then, how to compute the Gun Value using data that is currently available to the game.

Should it be Pen x # of main battery?
Should it be Effect x # of main battery?
Should it be some combination of the above?
Should current amount of ammo affect the value as it does ASW?

Thoughts/commentary (and trolling by Gorn) welcome.

< Message edited by Admiral DadMan -- 5/22/2016 6:08:59 PM >

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

Post #: 1

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 5/22/2016 3:33:02 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

I haven't noticed current ammo amount affect the gun rating when selecting ships from that screen.

I always assumed it was some permutation of pen, effect, and number of guns.

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 2

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 5/22/2016 3:42:30 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I haven't noticed current ammo amount affect the gun rating when selecting ships from that screen.

I always assumed it was some permutation of pen, effect, and number of guns.

You're right, ammo does not affect it. The Gun Value is the individual Pen value of the largest gun. Number of Guns, Gun Effect value, nor ammo affect the displayed Gun Value.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 3

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 5/22/2016 4:45:27 PM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

That is interesting since ASW ammo effects the ASW value shown.

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 4

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 5/22/2016 5:48:23 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Sounds to me that Gun Value is the naval equivalent of AV for LCUs - it is an indicator of hitting power but by no means tells the whole story. You need to dig deeper to assess what will work best for your purpose.
I just did two bombardments of an enemy base on subsequent days. The first day three BBs went in and did some damage to the AF but only about 10 aircraft were damaged/destroyed and something like 15 runway hits were achieved. The second day a small TF of one British CA and CL and one DD went in and achieved nearly 100 aircraft damage points (about 10 destroyed) and scored 51 hits on the runways.

Both TFs had recon aircraft up. Die rolls likely had some effect but I think it was the sheer volume of shellfire from CL Glasgow that spread the damage around.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 5

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 8:31:28 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Admiral DadMan, just wow!

I somehow missed this thread, but you are right - the Gun Value is the Pen value of the highest rated gun. I have never noticed this! All these years I was convinced it was a grand total value of all surface guns on a ship similar to the AA value. Never really bothered to check and count the number surface guns on different ships.

I have just formed a DD TF with three DDs from three different classes. They all have the gun value of 62. The two classes have 5 x 5inch guns, while the third class (Porter class) has EIGHT such guns! This totally alters ships selection process for surface combat TFs. A DD with 8000 endurance can have 4 x 5-inch guns, and the one with 7500 endurance can have, say, 8 x 5-inch guns, and when you browse them in ship selection list they both have gun value of 62.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 9/10/2016 8:44:14 PM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 6

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 8:52:18 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

I've played six or seven PBEMs and never gave a fig about that or even noticed it. Should I have? I always knew what I was dealing with. What if that stat was simply removed? Would you suffer any?

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 7

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 8:53:10 PM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

The best you can do is to know your tools - their strengths and weaknesses, and use them accordingly! Know your ships, know the classes, know the equipment!
(Using ships like HMS Hawkins/Frobisher, HMAS Adelaide or USN flush-deckers in first line SCTF in mid 1943 by the allies is quite "strange").

_____________________________

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 8

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 9:01:44 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

I mean ship AA and ASW values are a kind of an aggregate of all specialized weapons present on ships. Now imagine a DD with a single 5-inch naval gun. Its gun value is now 62 just like a DD with eight 5-inchers. If you have several DDs in the ship list you may unknowingly put the first one into a Surface Combat TF with bombardment mission, and the second one into a backwater convoy as an escort.

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 9

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 9:44:16 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

You have all been concentrating on the gun value figure of individual ships. The game already takes care of the sum of gun value for SC or Bombardment purposes. See the pic below - this SCTF is about to bombard Truk.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 10

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/10/2016 10:04:41 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

I would say the gun value in so many circumstances might be almost irrelevant. If you are pursuing CVs, what's the point of comparing gun values? What about torpedo values? Now, especially in the case of AA, the value of the entire TF would be something you might really want to know. With counter battery fire, there are just too many variables involved and the "gun value" is just one. If you had a true "gun value", giving it consideration might be making a complicated situation seem quite simplistic. As an example (perhaps this isn't a good one but I'm trying), I used to play "Fighting Steel" and I must've played the battle of Denmark Straits 50 times, as the Brit. Every time I would have POW hove in toward Bismark by say 10 degrees more than Hood and every single time Bismark was sunk and I never lost Hood or even sustained any sort of major damage to her and POW was always a real trooper. Now the "gun value" of POW and Hood is clearly superior to Bismark and P. Eugene, but if you use any other tactic than the one I used or running away, you'd be likely to lose Hood, just as happened historically. The developers did their best to model surface actions while recognizing the supremacy of the air aspect of the war. Compromises may have had to be made, but the overall performance of the game is more than satisfactory for legions. I'm thinking averaging "gun values" of the primary batteries on the constituent ships would be a misleading statistic at best. If you set out with a CV force that has a BB screen, it (the screen) is to engage whatever come what may. I first ran into an expression in this forum, "grip it and rip it". There are just too many variables in play, and you neither control them, or in the case of weather, can even predict them. Don't get distracted wishing for data that wouldn't be helpful if it was delivered to you on a silver platter. In CV battles, in particular, no one including you can guarantee the outcome beforehand. You have enough variables that matter to juggle as it is, more I would think would be unhelpful.

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 11

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 12:29:27 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

All this assumes you have choice, I'm playing Andy Macs Ironman III and had a TF of a DE & 4 PG's as my main anti invasion force, probably 7-8 x 4" guns between them!

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 12

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 2:02:30 AM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

All this assumes you have choice, I'm playing Andy Macs Ironman III and had a TF of a DE & 4 PG's as my main anti invasion force, probably 7-8 x 4" guns between them!

Are you telling me you failed to park any M36 tank destroyers on your decks? Why do you come here asking for advice or instruction if you've failed to even do that?

Pay no attention to that foolish gorn.

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 13

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 3:32:46 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

All this assumes you have choice, I'm playing Andy Macs Ironman III and had a TF of a DE & 4 PG's as my main anti invasion force, probably 7-8 x 4" guns between them!

Are you telling me you failed to park any M36 tank destroyers on your decks? Why do you come here asking for advice or instruction if you've failed to even do that?

Pay no attention to that foolish gorn.

Closer to the truth than you might think. I just finished reading "Juno: The Canadians at D-Day" (not sure I got the subtitle exactly right - book has been passed to my son). There is a very detailed section about the Artillery regiment that had one officer develop a very detailed fire plan for their 25 pounders to fire from the landing craft as they approached the beaches. Took something like three months to figure out LC positions and targets, then work out the ballistics to get the constantly changing gun settings required. Secrecy required that he and a couple of others drew all the maps and fire charts for hundreds of landing craft for distribution only after Eisenhower said "Go".

Having finished the week before D-Day, the unit was suddenly "upgraded" to 'Priest' SP 3" guns which had entirely different ballistics. So in one week of 18 hour days the poor guy had to re-do the entire plan! It seemed to work - other than hardened bunkers impervious to small shells the Germans did not seem to field many troops in the trenches in the Canadian sector (Juno).

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 14

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 6:57:56 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Wait, what happens when a BB which has three turrets of 16-inch guns (penetration 742, gun value 742), has two of her turrets destroyed by bombs. Is her gun value still 742? Would be totally misleading then.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 15

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 8:02:54 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

OK, I checked the values in the game. Here is what I found so far

Ship list:
Gun value - static value (always the pen value of the biggest gun, even if only one such gun active on a given ship)
AA value - dynamic value ( changes to reflect the number of active guns. The discrepancies can be seen on Dec 8 in Pearl Harbor
ASW value - ?
Torp value - ?

TF screen:
Gun value - dynamic vlue
AA value - dynamic value
ASW value - ?
Torp value - ?

Now some thoughts.

Porter class DD has the gun value of 62 in the ship list. Once one such DD is in a surface TF, the TF value jumps to 110. Guess the value measures the weight of the full broadside salvo. Others DDs of 62-value had 68 and 55 values in single DD TFs.

Now, consider a one-on-one gunnery duel between a 110-value DD and 55-value DD with no torps involved. Both firing broadside salvoes and having identically valued leaders.

But a real surprise is the submarines. SS Narwhal has two 6-inch guns and whopping value of 140 in the ship list. However, once created as a single SS TF, its value drops to 52. Still, if you put an aggressive captain as its leader, it theoretically should win gunnery duel with a DD thanks to a greater range of its 6-inch guns.

Other subs, however, have it worse. Their value of 30-40 range get dramatically reduced to a measly 3-8 range in a TF!

So if you are hoping to shell xAKs on the surface, put your most aggressive leaders in SSs with biggest guns.

I have been playing this game for five years and haven't paid attention to these numbers. Go figure.

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 16

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/11/2016 9:05:52 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Your example of the Narwhal vs DD is flawed - the sub had no long-range gunnery rangefinders or computers to calculate ballistics and deflection. And the rate of fire for the sub would be very low given manual handling of the shells and powder/casing.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 17

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/12/2016 5:42:18 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Well, that could explain the dynamic gun value in TF screen. USS Narwhal got downgraded from 140 value to 55 value. Basically, all subs get downgraded pretty hard once created into single SS TFs.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 18

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/12/2016 9:37:48 PM

RayYoung

Posts: 49
Joined: 5/22/2015
Status: offline

Isn't this a matter of the notation being for the individual gun barrel as opposed to the number of barrel on hand?

_____________________________

525MI Saigon 67/68 TET VET

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 19

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/13/2016 1:01:38 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RayYoung

Isn't this a matter of the notation being for the individual gun barrel as opposed to the number of barrel on hand?

I think the TF Gun Value is the total weight (in pounds) of broadside - one shot from every non-AA gun.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to RayYoung)

Post #: 20

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/13/2016 9:02:03 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

The salvo may include AA guns as well. I guess creating a DD class with naval guns only and the same class with the same naval guns + 1 x 20mm Oerlikon AA gun should give us the final answer.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 21

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/13/2016 3:38:36 PM

m10bob

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

IMHO the gun value of a weapon should be determined by known accuracy...ROF...size of charge....penetration...and type of fire direction,and size and number of guns.(Some turrets did not all have the ability to fire in the same direction in a broadside, ala Omaha class). (which might improve with upgrades in game).

WITP does not take these things into consideration, but each may be researched for mods.

Many of us did the same with Steel Panthers.

_____________________________

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 22

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/13/2016 5:01:30 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

IMHO the gun value of a weapon should be determined by known accuracy...ROF...size of charge....penetration...and type of fire direction,and size and number of guns.(Some turrets did not all have the ability to fire in the same direction in a broadside, ala Omaha class). (which might improve with upgrades in game).

WITP does not take these things into consideration, but each may be researched for mods.

Many of us did the same with Steel Panthers.

I disagree with the part about accuracy and rate of fire not being taken into account - those things go into the calculation of hits in the combat portion of the game. The gun value figure is just an indicator, like AV for LCUs, and that value is just a start point for calculations.

There would be no way to pre-calculate the values for gun turrets that cannot fire in a given direction and have that apply in instances where that gun turret could fire. For example, in surface combat I have seen instances where only the guns on one side or fore/aft seem to be firing and in other instances the ship has additional firing of guns shown in the animation, confirmed by ammo usage after the battle. The game does not show all the maneuvering during combat but it calculates it in the background.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 23

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 6:33:04 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Guys, now I get why CL Boise was referenced in many AARs as a "quick-firing" ship. She is a CL from the Brooklyn CL class. This class, along the Helena class, is the only CL class which has 15 (sic!) main guns! Five turrets! Other US navy classes max out at twelve or ten guns. And if she can get into 15,000 feet range in combat, she can also use her 8 x 5-inch guns, and 4 x 3-inch guns, a whopping total of 27 naval guns. Her early-war Jap CL opponents max out at seven naval guns.

When I came to this game I just memorised that she is quick-firing ship but I attributed that to her guns having higher ROF and more advanced design (the competing Omaha class has a profile of an older design with a row of slanted smokestacks). Never really saw the need to count her guns.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 24

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 8:00:19 AM

LargeSlowTarget

Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline

Yes, she is well-armed and sits right in the middle of the Japanese "Centrifugal Offensive". She can be deadly to badly escorted Japanese "shotgun" invasion forces. Therefore it is important to sink her asap and many AARs report on her successes or demise.

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 25

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 2:01:14 PM

m10bob

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

IMHO the gun value of a weapon should be determined by known accuracy...ROF...size of charge....penetration...and type of fire direction,and size and number of guns.(Some turrets did not all have the ability to fire in the same direction in a broadside, ala Omaha class). (which might improve with upgrades in game).

WITP does not take these things into consideration, but each may be researched for mods.

Many of us did the same with Steel Panthers.

I disagree with the part about accuracy and rate of fire not being taken into account - those things go into the calculation of hits in the combat portion of the game. The gun value figure is just an indicator, like AV for LCUs, and that value is just a start point for calculations.

There would be no way to pre-calculate the values for gun turrets that cannot fire in a given direction and have that apply in instances where that gun turret could fire. For example, in surface combat I have seen instances where only the guns on one side or fore/aft seem to be firing and in other instances the ship has additional firing of guns shown in the animation, confirmed by ammo usage after the battle. The game does not show all the maneuvering during combat but it calculates it in the background.

I agree with what you say because perhaps my comment was poorly written.

If you look in the editor at the % accuracy numbers, you will see what my issue is.

Some of those main guns have an accuracy rating in the single digits for first shot, (IIRC), whereas IRL some crew had the ability to hit on the first salvo!.

It's bad enough NONE of the ships in game are given historic ammo load outs but then to cripple historic accuracies to that level for "game play", etc, is dumbing down the beast just a tad much, (IMHO)...

Of course these factors apply to ALL sides and was not meant to favor one or the other...just not representative of how awesome the lowly Tin Can really was against a convoy of enemy AK's, as an example.

EDIT:Just checking some of my local ref books, it seems the current naval gun accuracies may be loosely based on info gleaned from the Battle of Jutland by the Royal navy, concerning number of rounds fired vs hits achieved?(WAG).

Further info gleaned seems to indicate that during the world wars many improvements were made in all areas of naval gun accuracy...and accuracy was increased from "approx 1-3% of WW1" to up to 10% by the beginning of WW2.

The U.S. was not the only navy playing with RADAR target acquisition assistance.

Spotter aircraft tended to add to accuracy but we also know those planes were a liability if its' parent ship had them aboard when getting hits.

Different ships also used different dye in their rounds so in daylight, spotters could discern which ships were getting good salvoes on a target.(Orange dye in the water near an enemy ship would indicate the ship using orange dye was close to its' target.)
I can find no single source giving accurate and uniform info regarding naval gun accuracy, and the original designers likely had this issue as well?

< Message edited by m10bob -- 9/14/2016 3:27:04 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 26

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 5:38:37 PM

US87891

Posts: 422
Joined: 1/2/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
IMHO the gun value of a weapon should be determined by known accuracy...ROF...size of charge....penetration...and type of fire direction,and size and number of guns.(Some turrets did not all have the ability to fire in the same direction in a broadside, ala Omaha class). (which might improve with upgrades in game).

WITP does not take these things into consideration, but each may be researched for mods.

Many of us did the same with Steel Panthers.

I disagree with the part about accuracy and rate of fire not being taken into account - those things go into the calculation of hits in the combat portion of the game. The gun value figure is just an indicator, like AV for LCUs, and that value is just a start point for calculations.

There would be no way to pre-calculate the values for gun turrets that cannot fire in a given direction and have that apply in instances where that gun turret could fire. For example, in surface combat I have seen instances where only the guns on one side or fore/aft seem to be firing and in other instances the ship has additional firing of guns shown in the animation, confirmed by ammo usage after the battle. The game does not show all the maneuvering during combat but it calculates it in the background.

Saw this thread. Thought I would comment to keep this from becoming yet another erroneous urban legend.

It is true that �Gun Value� is simply an indicator. The value is not used anywhere else, neither by any combat calculation algorithm nor any other calculation algorithm. It is simply a calculation that is posted to the TF screen so a player may eyeball the �relative� capabilities of various TFs. It is a value that is completely irrelevant to any other part of the game engine. In other words, do not worry about it and do not try to do anything to change it. Modify your data for something that has meaning in an effective algorithm, not for some quantity that is meaningless, unless you wish to corrupt your database for meaningful calculations.

Ammo has some basis in reality (at least in DBB). For as many guns as we could find (using NavWeaps), the ammo number is 1/10 of the listed �ammunition stowage per gun�. For AAA autoweaps, this was hard to find, so used what data we could find for the Bofors loadout. Turned out that 1/50 was good and that translated into a sort of standard that had ammo of 36, 24, 18, etc., (adjusted up or down depending on availability of real data), depending on ship size/style.

This is sort of what Gary Grigsby used for his original paradigm values, and has the further advantage of being centered within his calculation algorithms. In other words, it works.

Matt

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 27

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 8:46:42 PM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

What is your connection to the game if I might ask? What are your bona fides? You seem to present yourself as an authority familiar with inside info. Are you experienced in the way Bill Olson is, or like Alfred is, or somewhere in between? I don't remember running into you. That's my fault, you wouldn't sign as "Matt" unless you knew some or many forumites were familiar with you.

(in reply to US87891)

Post #: 28

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/14/2016 10:14:44 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Well, I have just created a TF with a single Brooklyn class CL. In the ship list her gun value is listed at 169, just above 140 value of the older classes. Once created it jumps to 597.

I have always used the ship list to choose combat ship based on their endurance, AA, torpedo and ASW, as these values are varied in the ship list. The gun value in the ship list is mostly the same for many ships in the same class (almost all US Navy DDs have the gun value of 62),so I didn't bother checking the guns on the ships. Yet, there is a huge difference between CL Brooklyn and DD Porter and their counterparts in their respective classes. These two ships classes are perfect for bombardment runs or pure naval surface combat, yet the ship list obscures this fact for no easily discerned reason. If the Brooklyn CL class had 597 gun value in the ship list, and the older, less armed CL classes had i.e 300 gun value, I would know at the glance who are my hard-hitters are. No need for the mundane click-fest and checking the ship individually. Just a thought.

< Message edited by Yaab -- 9/14/2016 10:16:38 PM >

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 29

RE: Naval "Gun Value" for Ships - 9/15/2016 3:57:04 AM

DOCUP