tristam509 said:
It think I have the found the solution to Clevelands and Crown Colony class cruisers being built too late. It seems that the Specialized Amphibious Warfare Equipment category is really misplaced. Looking at the techs, they were "discovery after the post-treaty designs. Special naval forces, coordinated gunfire, etc. came out of the US's early troubles in the PTO, Guadalcanal and Tarawa. After the early invasions new craft and "techs" came into play. So it would make sense to move that category later in the tech tree. After Advanced naval designs. Assume all the other tech is in place this would allow the US to start the post-treaty Iowas around September of 1940, without any computers.
This might be a good solution. It will take a little bit of time to create and test for balance. I will start looking at it. It might be able to make an appearance for 0.72.
It seems the classification of ships is a little off too. Some deleted for length
Here are the stats from Conway's (the only resource I have out here)...
Bismarck
41,700 standard tonnes (50,900 full load)
8 x 380mm (15 inch)
12 x 150mm (5.9 inch)
138,000 SHP = 29 kts
Iowa
48,100 standard tonnes (57,540 full load)
9 x 406mm/50 (16 inch)
20 x 127mm (5 inch)
212,000 SHP = 33 kts
King George V
36,727 standard tonnes (42,076 full load)
10 x 356mm (14 inch)
16 x 133mm (5.25 inch)
110,000 SHP = 28 kts
South Dakota
37,970 standard tonnes (44,519 full load)
9 406mm/45 (16 inch)
20 x 127mm (5 inch)
130,000 SHP = 27.5 kts
North Carolina
37,484 standard tonnes (44,377 full load)
9 x 406mm/46 (16 inch)
20 x 127mm (5 inch)
121,000 SHP = 28 kts
So, there is a lot of information... what does it tell us? It tells us that the
King George V, North Carolina, and
South Dakota are all contemporaries. They all have fairly equal armament and comparable speed. The US heavy 406mm (16 inch) shell is an exceptional shell. No other nation had anything like it so we need to take it out of the equation for broadside weight when comparing the US ships to other nations ships.
We could put the
Iowa and
Bismarck in the same category. It would solve the problem of Germany having this powerful class of ship and none of the tech to recreate. It would take away the exception. The fast treaty battleship with the modifiers for protection superiority would closely approximate the
Bismarck.
The definition of the fast treaty battleship has a base standard displacement of 45000 tons. That fits the
Iowa and
Bismarck fairly closely.
No look at the "second generation" wartime battleships...
Original 'H'-class
55,453 standard tonnes (62,497 full load)
8 x 406mm (16 inch)
12 x 150mm (5.9 inch)
165,000 SHP = 30 kts
Montana
60,500 standard tonnes (70,500 full load)
9 x 406mm (16 inch)
20 x 127mm (5 inch)
172,000 SHP = 28 kts
These battleships are contemporaries from the look of the data. That would classify them as post-treaty battleships (assuming you agree that
Bismarck is a fast treaty). Once again don't forget the corrections that would occur as a result of the protection doctrine. The
Montana will still be a little fast, but she is close.
Yamato
67,123 standard tonnes (69,990 full load
Not sure why they are so close)
9 x 460mm (18.1 inch)
12 x 155mm (6.1 inch)
12 x 127mm (5 inch)
Super 'H'-class
I don't have stats for the H-42 battleships which were the last realistic design handy so I can't put them in here, but if I remember correctly they are along the lines of
Yamato. H-44 is just unreal.
The super battleships are in a class of their own in terms of armor and armament.
Montana isn't in that class.
It looks as though the US are the only qualifiers for post-treaty BBs because the improved 406 gun is needed. Only the US had the improved 406 gun. The Iowa's stats also show it as heavy faster and more powerful than the KGV and Bismark class. It looks like the Bismark or at least the KGV should be the fast treaty BB and the Iowa the post-treaty BB. With Yamato and Montana qualifying for Super BB.
Any nation could have built the Improved 406mm gun if they put the effort in. The reclassification of the
Iowa and
Bismarck into the same class makes sense. Both of them are superior to the
King George V but they are of different design requirements and limits.
Now for the French and Italians...
Richelieu
35,000 standard tonnes (47,548 full load)
8 x 380mm (15 inch)
9 x 152mm (6 inch)
150,000 SHP = 30 kts
Vittorio Veneto
40,724 standard tonnes (45,326 full load)
9 x 381mm (15 inch)
12 x 152mm (6 inch)
128,200 SHP = 30 kts
The
Richelieu falls right in with the treaty battleships. A little faster, but right in the correct range.
Vittorio Veneto is a little more difficult to classify. She is a little bit larger than the treaty battleships, but I don't think she has enough different to bump her up to the class of the fast treaties. I don't put her in the class as the
Bismarck and
Iowa. She has 2/3 of the armor of either of those two without any real advantages to overcome them. For that reason, I would tend to put them in there with the treaty battleships.
I hope that explains some of the thought process that I go through when I classify warships. The problem with the post-treaty and super battleships has been corrected in the 0.71 that Steel is building, so they won't be dependant on a cruiser doctrine
o. MDow
