Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

C.O.R.E. HOI - Naval Mod

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
renwor said:
Also in 1936 UK OOB you can notice Home Fleet contains Rodney and Nelson battleships of KING GEORGE V class. I couldn't live with that. So I created Rodney class (so as not to have mingle with Nelson class which is s predreadnought or what). Rodney class is now UK treaty battleship. KING GEORGE V is fast treaty battleship, one that still has to be researched by UK in 1936.
Not ideal but better IMHO
Click to expand...

The HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney where NOT of the King George V class! The King George V's where built 20 years AFTER the Nelson class battleships where even laid down! On the topic of battleship models, I'd rather just leave that to MateDow but after reviewing the ships I'm pretty happy the ways things are right now. I'm not sure what exactly you mean by 'KING GEORGE V is fast treaty battleship, one that still has to be researched by UK in 1936', the King George V class is already the UK's fast treaty battleship and none of the ships of her class where laid down before or even during 1936. The first of her class to be laid down was the HMS Prince of Wales on January 1st 1937 (although the HMS King George V was the first to be commissioned)
 
renwor said:
First of all, I think naval mod is great and spared me a lot, lot, lot work.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the compliment.


Also in 1936 UK OOB you can notice Home Fleet contains Rodney and Nelson battleships of KING GEORGE V class. I couldn't live with that. So I created Rodney class (so as not to have mingle with Nelson class which is s predreadnought or what). Rodney class is now UK treaty battleship. KING GEORGE V is fast treaty battleship, one that still has to be researched by UK in 1936.
Not ideal but better IMHO
Click to expand...

Here is the rationale behind listing Rodney and Nelson...

Both the King George V and the Nelson were treaty battleships under the definitions of the Washington Naval Treaty. They were both 35000 standard tons, and both had main battery guns of 16" or smaller. The Nelson had a slower top speed partially because of inexperience with light weight construction. Other than her lower top speed she compares to the other treaty battleships.

Unfortunately, we are only allowed one name for treaty battleships. When I was making the decision originally of what name to use, I decided that the later class would be the better choice. Is it a little frustrating to to have Nelson as a King George V-class, but that is a small trade off. It is almost nearly as annoying as all of the US battleships being known as Colorado-class. ;) MDow
 
MateDow said:
Is it a little frustrating to to have Nelson as a King George V-class, but that is a small trade off. ;) MDow
Click to expand...

True, but when you study the effectiveness of the main battery MDOWs choice is a good one. The 16 inch, 45 Caliber Mark 1 rifles on the Nelson class had a really light, high velocity armor piercing shell, which was mistakenly thought to have better armor penetrating characteristics for plunging fire at long range. However, the shells used in the 14 inch, 45 Caliber Mark VII rifles on the King George V class had virtually the same penetration in plunging fire between 20,000 yards and 30,000 yards.

If you scour the whole envelope, you can find an edge for the Nelsons at extreme range and very close range, but in the most typical engagement ranges for capital ships during WW2, they pretty much end up falling within 10% of one another.
 
Battleships for 0.8

Here are the battleships that changed for 0.8. As you will notice, the attack ratings for both of these models have been lowered to bring them into line with their historical abilities. MDow

Code: 
# 0 - Coast Defense Battleship
model = {
	cost				= 7
	buildtime 			= 620
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 2
	maxspeed			= 14
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 1
	airdetectioncapability		= 1
	subdetectioncapability		= 1
	visibility			= 75
	seadefence			= 10
	airdefence			= 1
	seaattack			= 7
	airattack			= 1
	subattack			= 1
	shorebombardment		= 2
	transportcapability		= 0
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 2500
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 2
}
# 1 - Pre-Dreadnaught Battleship
model = {
	cost				= 8
	buildtime 			= 600
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 2
	maxspeed			= 16
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 1
	airdetectioncapability		= 1
	subdetectioncapability		= 1
	visibility			= 80
	seadefence			= 12
	airdefence			= 2
	seaattack			= 10
	airattack			= 1
	subattack			= 1
	shorebombardment		= 3
	transportcapability		= 0
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 8000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 2
}
 
Cruisers for 0.8

Here are the stats for cruisers that were changed for 0.8. As you will notice, the attack ratings have been lowered for the Pocket Battleship and the Armored Cruiser. The defense rating for the armored cruiser was also lowered. Not as much as some would have liked, but I kept the cost higher. MDow

Code: 
# 2 - Armored Cruiser
model = {
	cost				= 7
	buildtime 			= 400
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 2
	maxspeed			= 22
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 1
	airdetectioncapability		= 1
	subdetectioncapability		= 1
	visibility			= 80
	seadefence			= 8
	airdefence			= 1
	seaattack			= 8
	subattack			= 0
	airattack			= 1
	shorebombardment		= 2
	transportcapability		= 0
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 6000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 2
}
# 4 - Pocket Battleship
model = {
	cost				= 8
	buildtime 			= 425
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 3
	maxspeed			= 28
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 2
	airdetectioncapability		= 1
	subdetectioncapability		= 1
	visibility			= 80
	seadefence			= 6
	airdefence			= 2
	seaattack			= 9
	subattack			= 0
	airattack			= 1
	shorebombardment		= 2
	transportcapability		= 0
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 12000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 0.8
}
 
Destroyers for 0.8

Here is the new class of Escort Sloop which has been added. MDow

Code: 
# 3 - Escort Sloop
model = {
	cost				= 3
	buildtime 			= 140
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 1
	maxspeed			= 18
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 1
	airdetectioncapability		= 1
	subdetectioncapability		= 5
	visibility			= 60
	seadefence			= 4
	airdefence			= 1
	seaattack			= 2
	subattack			= 2
	airattack			= 3
	shorebombardment		= 0
	transportcapability		= 0
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 7000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 1
}
 
Transports for 0.8

Here are the liners that are in 0.8. This is the new class of the Small Liner and the Large Liner. MDow

Code: 
# 1 - Small Passenger Liner
model = {
	cost				= 3
	buildtime 			= 250
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 1
	maxspeed			= 25
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 0
	airdetectioncapability		= 0
	subdetectioncapability		= 0
	visibility			= 75
	seadefence			= 0
	airdefence			= 0
	seaattack			= 0
	subattack			= 0
	airattack			= 0
	shorebombardment		= 0
	transportcapability		= 25
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 10000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 1
}
# 2 - Large Passenger Liner
model = {
	cost				= 5
	buildtime 			= 280
	defaultorganisation 		= 30
	manpower			= 1
	maxspeed			= 30
	surfacedetectioncapability	= 0
	airdetectioncapability		= 0
	subdetectioncapability		= 0
	visibility			= 80
	seadefence			= 1
	airdefence			= 1
	seaattack			= 0
	subattack			= 0
	airattack			= 0
	shorebombardment		= 0
	transportcapability		= 40
	aircraftcapacity		= 0
	range				= 14000
	supplyconsumption		= 1
	fuelconsumption			= 3
}
 
Semi-Lobster said:
MateDow, can you give an example of a 'small passenger liner'? I can help with some of the OOB's that way
Click to expand...

I have been using the definition of a liner less than 30000 GRT (gross registered tons). That seems to be an effective line between the super liners like the Normandie and Mauritania and the smaller liners that were common in many merchant fleets. MDow
 
MateDow said:
I have been using the definition of a liner less than 30000 GRT (gross registered tons). That seems to be an effective line between the super liners like the Normandie and Mauritania and the smaller liners that were common in many merchant fleets. MDow
Click to expand...

Ok! I'll get to work on this!
 
Liners

Hi, Mdow, I'll send you a PM with a spreadsheet on the liners that I had researched back in January. I would suggest a three tier set up with small (20,000 ton and less), medium (more than 20,000 up to 30,000 tons), and large (30,000+) liners. There were a lot of liners in the first category, but they typically had speeds of 15-18 knots. Also, a lot of the medium liners were 20-22 knot vessels instead of 25. It probably wouldn't hurt to drop the large liners down to 28 knots. I think the Normandie was the only one that could actually sustain 30 knots.

Cunard-White Star (UK)
Queen Elizabeth - Large (1939)
Queen Mary - Large (1936)
Majestic - large (sold 5/36)
Aquitania - Large
Mauretania - Medium (1938)
Homeric - Large (sold and broken up 2/36)
Georgic - Medium
Britannic - Medium
Carinthia - Small
Franconia - Small
Laconia - Small
Samaria - Small
Lancastria - Small
Sycthia - Small
Laurentic - Small
Alaunia - Small
Andonia - Small
Antonia - Small
Arcania - Small
Aurania - Small
Ausonia - Small​

Union Castle (UK)
Arundel Castle - Small
Union Castle - Small​
Compagne Generale Transatlantique (France)
Ile de France - Large
Normandie - Large
Paris - Large
de Grasse - Small​
Italia Line (Italy)
Roma - Judgement call, this was a 33,000 ton liner with a 22 knot speed. I would call it medium
Augustus - A sister ship to Roma - Medium (?)
Rex - Large
Conte de Savoia - Large
Lombardia - Medium​
Canadian Pacific Railway Company (Canada)
Empress of Japan - Medium
Empress of Australia - Medium
Empress of Britain - Large
Empress of Canada - Medium​
United States Lines (USA - Atlantic routes)
Leviathan - Large (laid up on 1/1/36 but not sold for demolition until 12/37)
America - Large (1940)
Manhattan - Medium
Washington - Medium
Republic - Small
President Roosevelt - Medium​
American Republics Line (USA - Latin American routes)
Argentina - Small
Brazil - Small
Uruguay - Small
Note, these ships were just over 20,000 tons, but had 17 knot speeds so I'm demoting them to small liners based on speed.​
Matson Line (USA - Pacific Routes)
Lurline - Medium
Malolo - Medium
Mariposa - Medium
Monterey - Medium
Note, these ships were just under 20,000 tons, but had 22 knot speeds so I'm promoting them to medium liners based on speed.​
American President Lines (USA)
President Coolidge - Medium
President Hoover - Medium​
Svenska-Amerika Linien (Sweden)
Gripsholm - Small
Kungholm - Small​
Hamburg-Sud Amerika Line (Germany)
Cap Arcona - Medium
Wilhelm Gustloff - Small (?) (1938) It was a 25,000 ton ship with a 15 knot speed. She had diesels instead of turbines.​
Hamburg-Amerika Line (Germany)
Hansa - Medium
Deutschland - Medium
Hamburg - Medium
New York - Medium
Robert Ley - Small (1939) Again, this is 27,000 ton ship but about a 15 knot speed. Ditto the Wilhelm Gustloff on her engineering arrangement.​
Norddeutscher-Lloyd (Germany)
Bremen - Large
Europa - Large​

I don't have any data for Spain, Australia, Japan, or Russia. I think Norway had some passenger vessels, but they were pretty small. France had another passenger line that handled a lot of the colonial routes, but most of their ships were either dual passenger/cargo or pretty small in the 5,000 to 10,000 ton range.

Historically, the German government did charter some of their liners to carry troops to and from Spain during the civil war.
 
Engineer said:
(...)I don't have any data for Spain, Australia, Japan, or Russia. I think Norway had some passenger vessels, but they were pretty small. France had another passenger line that handled a lot of the colonial routes, but most of their ships were either dual passenger/cargo or pretty small in the 5,000 to 10,000 ton range.(...)
Click to expand...

If you need data for Poland:

Pilsudzki (small, 14,294 ton) - 1935
Batory (same as above) - 1936 (april)

Used on the Gdynia-NYC route, as well as Bermuda, Mediterranean and so on.
 
mhitchens1963 said:
OK, the Vanguard is probably a bit small and lightly armoured for the post-treaty type, but apart from that I think it makes for more homogenous sets.
Click to expand...
I would go so far as to flip the Montanas into the 'Super Battleship' category. After all, they were probably superior to the Yamatos in a gunfight, and even the Iowas were their equals, thanks to good American shells and excellent armor and internal subdivision and design. Thus, the Iowas would be post-treaty battleships, the South Dakotas would be Fast Treaty Battleships, and the North Carolinas would be Treaty Battleships.
 
Mitsui-OSK Lines - Osaka Shosen Kaisha (Japan) (all the ones I could displacements for and where built after 1936)

Rio de Janeiro Maru - 9,626 grt
Buenos Aires Maru - 9,626 grt
Santos Maru - 7,267 grt
Baikaru Maru - 5,243 grt
Asama Maru - 16,947 grt
Chichibu Maru - 17,498 grt
Heiyo Maru - 9,816 grt
Hikawa Maru - 11,622 grt
Terukuni Maru - 11,931 grt
Kinai Maru - 8,357 grt
Ngara Maru - 7,142 grt
Toa Maru - 10,052 grt
Kitsurin Maru - 6,783 grt
Scharnhorst - 18,184 grt
Arabia Maru - 9500 grt
Aikoku Maru - 10,437 grt
Amagisan Maru - 7,620 grt
Fujikawa Maru - 6,938 grt
Fujisan Maru - 9,524 grt
Heian Maru - 11,614 grt
 
Engineer said:
Hi, Mdow, I'll send you a PM with a spreadsheet on the liners that I had researched back in January....
Click to expand...

I still have that one. I have been using it to update the OOBs with the 30000 GRT division point. It appears to be working pretty well. With the way that the stats are set up, it would be difficult to make a third tier of liner. The only difference would be the time and cost to build. For the moment I am inclined to stay with two tiers of liners. If we start encountering difficulties, we can always go in and create the third teir for the really small liners.
 
Copper Nicus said:
If you need data for Poland:

Pilsudzki (small, 14,294 ton) - 1935
Batory (same as above) - 1936 (april)

Used on the Gdynia-NYC route, as well as Bermuda, Mediterranean and so on.
Click to expand...

What was the name of the company, and how fast did they go? MDow
 
Semi-Lobster said:
Mitsui-OSK Lines - Osaka Shosen Kaisha (Japan) (all the ones I could displacements for and where built after 1936)...
Click to expand...

Do you have maxspeeds for them?

If they are completed after 1936, what is their date in service?

Too bad we can't add in ships of a specific model :( That would make for an interesting chain of events for many countries as they complete passenger liners. Oh well, no use wishing for something that won't exist anytime soon. MDow
 
MateDow said:
Do you have maxspeeds for them?

If they are completed after 1936, what is their date in service?

Too bad we can't add in ships of a specific model :( That would make for an interesting chain of events for many countries as they complete passenger liners. Oh well, no use wishing for something that won't exist anytime soon. MDow
Click to expand...

They all ranged from 14-17 knots. I can't give you any specifics as my Japanese is very poor. I found some Thai military transports, the Cuong, Chang, Angthong, Pangan and Sichaun. These should be model 4 small tramp steamer flotilla
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back