Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Just as some hypothetical thought (stemming from extensive WPO research), how about separating out Oklahoma and Nevada? Yes, they were the same class, but 1 fundamental difference could have affected there upgrades. Like the Pennsylvanias and up, Nevada was fitted with turbines, and was extensively modified. Oklahoma, on the other hand, used the same style vertical triple expansion engines used in the preceeding New York's. While it may not have made a difference, based on that I don't really think Oklahoma would have been modified to the same extent as Nevada.

My suggestions would be to base her refit off the Colorado, in that she would probably never receive the 5"/38 twin mounts. She would probably loose the main mast to a tower like Pennsylvania, but have the AA armament of the Colorado's '43 fit, and keep her 10 14" guns.

My suggestions, based on the upgrade paths are: (and Ill do new graphics)

12/41 No changes
4/42 No Changes
1/43 32 quad 40mm Bofors , 60 Oerlikons, SC radar added. Fuel reduced to 4080, Endurance reduced to 8500 (VTE's not as efficient), main gun ammo reduced to 7. Graphical changes: Pennsylvania style tower mast in lieu of mainmast.
1/45 4-8 More Bofors added, 4 more Orelikons. Graphical changes: Ship arrives in same blue/grey pattern as other US ships.

Thoughts? Granted I know its hypothetical, but if one of the main reasons the Okie wasn't salvaged is because of her engines, I'd think it would also play a part in refits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Actually, if you want to get into detail.....

Colorado, Maryland, and West Virginia were all rebuilt differently.

WeeVee is the current upgrade. Maryland was rebuilt with a wider beam and twin 5"/38s, but never received the tower foremast as used by my graphic and the WeeVee. Colorado made do with most of her original armament.

And to further toss a monkey wrench into things ,

On the New Mexicos, all three were rebuilt differently. Idaho received destroyer type single 5"/38s, Mississippi had most (if not all) of her 5"/51s landed for a huge battery of 5"/25s, and New Mexico finished up retaining all of her 5"/51s and original 5"/25s.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Sounds good! Is there a Midway Class graphic yet? Speaking of Allied naval graphics...what are we needing?

Griffin/Pelias AS?
Dixie Class AD?
Wright Class AV?
Tacoma/Asheville FF?
Those Gawd awful AGP/Niagra PG profiles.
Many Auxiliaries are off by a wide margin.
Variations of 4 pipers...lots.

???

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

500, actually. The game recognizes up to graphic 499, and then it craps out.

On the Colorado, I agree, I thought I'd just point that little snippet out.

One question though, could we create an extra upgrade for Maryland and West Virginia, so if the player upgrades the first time he gets the armament/look of Maryland, and the next month he can upgrade and get the armament/look of West Virginia? I'll do a graphic putting said upgrade for Maryland in the blue/grey guise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Sounds good! Is there a Midway Class graphic yet? Speaking of Allied naval graphics...what are we needing?

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

I’ve been thinking about the upgrade changes we are discussing for U.S. Battleships and I am having reservations.

Matrix did a very good job of generalizing the Battleship upgrades. They did not provide the rebuilds due to Pearl Harbor damage, but instead made reasonable upgrade paths that included mid and late war rebuilds.

Colorado Class: West Virginia has been separated out due to 12/41 Radar status but the entire class joins in a path that points to Maryland’s late war rebuild. West Virginia’s rebuild after Pearl Harbor is ignored.

Tennessee Class: California’s post-Pearl Harbor rebuild is ignored and the class follows Tennessee’s upgrade path

New Mexico: Follows a generalized upgrade path that points to an Idaho-type upgrade in 1945. I had previously broken out Idaho as a separate class but I believe this was a rather foolish mistake – all it does is give her 5in/38s a little earlier.

Pennsylvania and Nevada class: Follows historical path for these two ships as their sisters did not survive Pearl Harbor.

New York Class and Arkansas: already fully refitted when transferred from Atlantic in 1945.

We are discussing breaking Oklahoma away from Nevada and giving her a non-rebuild path due to internal arrangement. That’s OK but the additional detail for the Colorado class does not seem warranted. The “step” rebuild from unmodified to Maryland to West Virginia would probably not have occurred. A single ship would not have two major rebuilds while others remained un-modified. The exception would be repairs from major battle damage but that can not be predicted. Maryland was only rebuilt in response to damage by kamikaze. The upgrade she received had been contemplated for both un-rebuild Colorados but was not considered worth taking the ships out of service. Since the same damage to the same ships would almost certainly not occur in any given WITP game, it does not seem reasonable to craft ship-specific upgrades based on that historical damage.

I propose:
1. Remove my Idaho path and adjust the date of the New Mexico 5in/38 upgrade (class 1216) to equal Idaho’s historical upgrade date.
2. Add Oklahoma as an un-rebuild alternative to Nevada, as suggested by Tankerace.
3. Leave the rest alone and get on to Cruisers.

Comments??

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Sounds good! Is there a Midway Class graphic yet? Speaking of Allied naval graphics...what are we needing?

I don't know if there is any chance of including her, but I am having a go at making a new graphic for HMS Vanguard. I am no artist but I hoope to have it done fairly soon.

quote:

1. Remove my Idaho path and adjust the date of the New Mexico 5in/38 upgrade (class 1216) to equal Idaho’s historical upgrade date.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

quote:

1. Remove my Idaho path and adjust the date of the New Mexico 5in/38 upgrade (class 1216) to equal Idaho’s historical upgrade date.

If we are doing this, then shouldn't we remove the 5"/38s? I mean since only Idaho received them, and NOT Mississippi or New Mexico? Or do you propse that the fits before the 5"/38 upgrade be more or less equal to New Mexico and Mississippi's final form?

God, realism is such a pain when the conditions leading to it never happened.

quote:


On the Colorado upgrades (just to tie in the graphics) are you proposing that we assume that they are all refitted to the standards of Maryland, not West Virginia? If so, then we will need to replace my current graphic with a new one (gonna do em all up today) to represent a cage foremast and 5"/38s, not a similar rebuild to Tennessee.

Man this thing is really taking shape.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

Using your Tambor example with 6 tubes F and 4 tubes R, you could split the forward tubes into 2 devices of 3 tubes each instead 1 device of 6 forward tubes. You could also set up the rear tubes to be 2 devices of 2 tubes.

Now if you listed the forward tubes as 3 tubes twice, the game will fire either 1 bank of 3 forward, the other bank of 3 forward or the 4 aft bank? By setting it up this way, achieve what you are looking for instead of worrying about what the increased tubes would do?

3, 3 or 4 would give you 4 attacks with 3 torps and 3 attacks with 4 torps, for 7 attacks all together before returning home instead of 5 as current.

3, 3, 2 or 2 would give you 4 attacks with 3 torps and 6 attacks with 2 torps for 10 attacks.

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Found em.

Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Found em.

Very nice - thanks!

I will look at adding her into my scenario 115. And a question for Don, I guess - can she be added to the combined mod? From what I have read she was to be sent to the Pacific for the invasion of Japan. Presumaby she (with a few escorts?) would appear October-ish 1945.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

Help!

My primary source for U.S. Battleships (Friedman) does not give a very good description of the war-time radar upgrades of the older US Battleships (Arkansas thru Colorados). The modern battleships (North Carolina thru Iowa) was allocated 1 air search and 2 surface radars. Also his companion book on Cruisers states that the standard radar outfit for all US Cruisers was to be 1 air search and 1 surface radar.

I am about to ASSUME that the older battleships were also given two surface and 1 air radars. Does anyone have any data on this??

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Ok, here is the "hypothetical" Oklahoma refit:



Her formast is cut down a bit like Pennsylvania, and she receives a mainmast like Nevada (the PA one didn't quite look right). Also, AA is added and the catapult on turret III is removed.


The new final fit for the Colorados, based on the Maryland as she looked in 1944. The standard blue/grey scheme is applied.

And, my first attempt at a camo pattern, Maryland as she appeared 26 April 1944:

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace
Ok, here is the "hypothetical" Oklahoma refit:

Man I love your art! The best.