Wrong and Missing Ships: How to correct them ALL

[Axe99]

Aye, Ketchup, that'd work

Don't know if it was mentioned yet, but there is also a typo in French submarine "L'Espoire"; it should be "L'Espoir", no final e. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'Espoir_(Q167)

Well spotted - Conways and Navypedia (probably from Conways) have the spelling you've got there, but Bagnasco has the spelling on the French Wikipedia, and I'd expect both the Wikipedia (given it's a normal French word, and not a name that can be mis-spelled, and it's a well-sourced page - always important to be careful when using Wikipedia) and Bagnasco to be more accurate.

 

[Tonaris]

Well, the pentuple centerline launcher can be considered T3 tech with T4 reseved for a sextuple launcher (planned for Super-Akizuki class).

Which current torpedoes would you drop for this?

The 533mm torpedo tubes were used by the Tenryuu and Kuma-class cruisers (in Triples and Twins, respectively) as well as the Momi, Minekaze, Wakatake and Kamikaze-class DDs (2 or 3 Twins, depending on the class).

The 610mm Triples were used on the Mutsuki, Fubuki and Hatsuharu-class DDs and on some CAs.
Edit 2: It appears the Triples on the Fubuki and Hatsuharu-classes were also able to quickly reload in combat.

The 610mm Quads, used on most modern Japanese DDs, were also capable of reloading torpedoes under combat conditions (taking around 23 seconds according to a sourced claim on the wikipedia page for the Shiratsuyu-class). Relatedly, I would argue that this gives the classes mounting these torpedo launchers a far heavier torpedo armament than what the number of torpedo tubes would indicated, since they could effectively fire 16 torpedoes. Afaik, every other torpedo launcher used by DDs had to be reloaded manually outside of combat with torpedoes provided by supply ships. Edit: Additionally, since the Shiratsuyu-class, being built at game start (folded into the Fubuki-class), carried these historically the T3 torpedo technology should be unlocked for Japan in the 1936 bookmark.

Lastly, the 610mm Quints were used Shimakaze. The Super Akizuki design also called for either Quints or, as you mentioned, for Sextuples. Personally, I don't think that dropping a real torpedo launcher in favour for a "paper" one (that didn't even have a working prototype, afaik) is a good idea.

 

[Axe99]

The 610mm Triples were used on the Mutsuki, Fubuki and Hatsuharu-class DDs and on some CAs.
Edit 2: It appears the Triples on the Fubuki and Hatsuharu-classes were also able to quickly reload in combat.

The 610mm Quads, used on most modern Japanese DDs, were also capable of reloading torpedoes under combat conditions (taking around 23 seconds according to a sourced claim on the wikipedia page for the Shiratsuyu-class).

I don't have Warship 2007, and if it's been sourced correctly, and there are no typos, then Hans Lengerer's one of the best people writing on Japanese warships in the English language to be listening to, but the impression I've got (going from my shaky memory, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have confused 23 seconds with the following) from my reading (I'd need to look up where) is that the "action reload time" in a normal combat conditions was closer to half an hour, requiring withdrawing from a situation of being under fire, reloading, and going back in again. I'd need to find it though. 23 seconds seems very fast (the Type XXI submarine fully automatic mechanical reload system took 15 minutes to reload all of its tubes).

 

[Axe99]

Not content to rely on my memory, I've hit the books. While the 23 seconds is definitely (and not surprisingly) off, I think @Tonaris has a very reasonable point.

As per Lengerer's article on the Asashio class (a more modern destroyer than the Shiratsuyu) in Warship 2016, in ideal training conditions with the destroyer motionless reloading could be achieved in 87-100 seconds:

• Training of the torpedo mounting to align with the reload containers: 30-35 seconds
• Reloading from the containers: 17-20 seconds (I imagine this is where the 23 seconds comes from, as it's not implausible this time on the Shiratsuyu's or Hatsuharu's (Lengerer's article actually being on this class) was a bit slower).
• Closing the tube doors: about 10 seconds
• Re-training of the torpedo mounting to the centreline: 30-35 seconds

However, in Branfill-Cook's Torpedo (a really good and very readable book on the subject, for anyone who is interested) it notes this time under ideal conditions, but goes on to state:

"Under actual combat conditions, however, tactical considerations could require the destroyer to retire at high speed, often under fire and during a night action, in order to reload. In such circumstances, the average time to reload and return into action was between twenty and thirty minutes"​

From a HoI4 perspective, though, I'd be very happy with this meaning DDs with reloads could use their torpedoes twice in an action. However, given DDs (and ships/other subs) in HoI4 have endless torpedoes, it makes working out how to represent it in-game a bit tricky. But giving the Japanese DDs a torpedo buff seems pretty reasonable to me.

And yes, I know I need to get out more

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Which current torpedoes would you drop for this?

none, all older ships carried double, triple or quad launchers that can be represented with a combination of T1 and T2 modules.

regarding your examples (Japanese ships): here are our proposed new classes and changes that affect torpedo modules:

- Hatsuharu class DD: light ship hull II. Modules: engine II, light battery II, fire control 0, 2x torpedo I, 1x Depth charges.

- Shiratsuyu class DD: light ship hull II. Modules: engine II, light battery II, fire control 0, torpedo II AND torpedo I, 1x Depth charges.

- Chidori/Otori class TB: (light ship hull I. Modules: engine I, light battery I, fire control, torpedo I, 1x depth charges.)

- Myoko class CA: replace the 2 torpedo I modules with 1 torpedo II module.

- Split off Takao class form Myoko class (same design as the current Myoko class).

Every other class would keep the torpedo modules they have:
- Tenryu, Kuma/Nagara, Yubari and Momi (renamed Nitto Kuchikukan) classes: 1x Tier I
- Mutsuki (renamed Minekaze) class: 2x Tier I
- Aoba class: 1x Tier II
- Fubuki, Kagero and Asashio classes: 2x Tier II

Lastly, the 610mm Quints were used Shimakaze. The Super Akizuki design also called for either Quints or, as you mentioned, for Sextuples. Personally, I don't think that dropping a real torpedo launcher in favour for a "paper" one (that didn't even have a working prototype, afaik) is a good idea.

What do you mean? No country had 1944 techs in the 1939 scenario. Therefore no real launcher would be dropped. The 2x5 centerline launcher allowed a more powerful salvo than any older DD, it seems reasonable to treat them as T3.

From a HoI4 perspective, though, I'd be very happy with this meaning DDs with reloads could use their torpedoes twice in an action. However, given DDs (and ships/other subs) in HoI4 have endless torpedoes, it makes working out how to represent it in-game a bit tricky

This is important. DD didn't carry many spare tropedos, usually not more than one reload. It is therefore more important how many they could fire at once. (In the game ALL ships have endless torpedos, and ammo in general)

But giving the Japanese DDs a torpedo buff seems pretty reasonable to me.

The Long Lance spirit (obtained from the focus) is supposed to do this, but it was done with WtT and not overhauled properly for MtG.

Since we already have proposed two changes to foci (creating the Vanguard and Design 1047 ships) proposing some tweaks to the focus-created spirit would seem within the scope of the guide.
Do you have any ideas how it could be changed to represent the more powerful Japanese torpedos better?

 

[Tonaris]

What do you mean? No country had 1944 techs in the 1939 scenario. Therefore no real launcher would be dropped. The 2x5 centerline launcher allowed a more powerful salvo than any older DD, it seems reasonable to treat them as T3.

I think there is some sort of miscommunication going on here.

You mention the Sextuple 610mm launcher that was proposed to be used on the Super Akizuki-class (but never left the drawing board) in the same sentence as dropping the Quints down to T3. This implies to me that you want to drop down the Japanese 610mm Quints down to T3, with the Sextuple launcher taking the spot of the T4 tech. But then you mention a 2x5 centerline arrangement which was not used on any Japanese DD and starting with a T4 tech in the 1939 scenario. I am not saying that 533mm Quints, like they were used on the American Benson-class or the British J-class should be a T4 tech, just that the larger Japanese 610mm Quints should be.

This is important. DD didn't carry many spare tropedos, usually not more than one reload. It is therefore more important how many they could fire at once. (In the game ALL ships have endless torpedos, and ammo in general)

Now this might just me remembering things incorrectly, but the majority of DDs didn't carry reloads at all. They could only reload under calm conditions with torpedoes provided by a supply ship or in port.

You could represent the advanced reload mechanism of the Japanese launchers with a National spirit that reduces torpedo CD, similar to how the Admiral trait "Loading Skill Master" works.


Also this is unrelated, but we should really be able to refit normal cruisers into torpedo cruisers. Currently we can only build new torpedo cruisers instead of converting older cruisers like it was done IRL.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

I think there is some sort of miscommunication going on here.

You mention the Sextuple 610mm launcher that was proposed to be used on the Super Akizuki-class (but never left the drawing board) in the same sentence as dropping the Quints down to T3. This implies to me that you want to drop down the Japanese 610mm Quints down to T3, with the Sextuple launcher taking the spot of the T4 tech. But then you mention a 2x5 centerline arrangement which was not used on any Japanese DD and starting with a T4 tech in the 1939 scenario. I am not saying that 533mm Quints, like they were used on the American Benson-class or the British J-class should be a T4 tech, just that the larger Japanese 610mm Quints should be.

But we were not referring to nay Japanese DD. The 2x5 centerline was used on American DD starting with Benson class and British DD starting with J class. and they should be a T3 tech.
The first Japanese ship to use Quints was the Shimakaze.
As far as we know, in August 1939 the IJN didn't have the quint launcher yet.

Now this might just me remembering things incorrectly, but the majority of DDs didn't carry reloads at all. They could only reload under calm conditions with torpedoes provided by a supply ship or in port.

You could represent the advanced reload mechanism of the Japanese launchers with a National spirit that reduces torpedo CD, similar to how the Admiral trait "Loading Skill Master" works.

Many DD classes were designed to carry one set of reloads. Depending on time and navy, many did not actually carry these replacements. But these details are unimportant for the game mechanics anyway.
AD could resupply DD with torepdos at sea, but they (like all supply ships) are absent in the game.

Also this is unrelated, but we should really be able to refit normal cruisers into torpedo cruisers. Currently we can only build new torpedo cruisers instead of converting older cruisers like it was done IRL.

The torpedo cruiser hull represents purpose-built Torpedo cruisers. The IJN planned to eventually replce the converted ships with new ones. (just like Super Type A cruisers would have replaced the Kongo class)
Converting the Kuma class can be done without the focus by filling all custom slots with torpedo launchers.

 

[Axe99]

Do you have any ideas how it could be changed to represent the more powerful Japanese torpedos better?

A bonus to torpedo damage would be the most obvious, and easiest for the player to understand, and easiest to balance. While they were faster as well as carried a heavier warhead, trying to turn the speed into an increased hit chance, say, might do some horrible things when it comes to the balance between ship speed and torpedo hit chance.

Now this might just me remembering things incorrectly, but the majority of DDs didn't carry reloads at all. They could only reload under calm conditions with torpedoes provided by a supply ship or in port.

I think you're right - I'd need to hit the books again, but I can't recall seeing dedicated space to strike torpedos below (or in a place in the superstructure) of any except the Japanese DDs that had a dedicated reload system. However, at the back of my mind there's a faint scratching off "maybe the French did something". I think in the absence of any sensible mechanism to reload in action, though, it's not worth worry about at the HoI4 level, so no need to worry about a follow-up post on this one .

You could represent the advanced reload mechanism of the Japanese launchers with a National spirit that reduces torpedo CD, similar to how the Admiral trait "Loading Skill Master" works.

I like this idea a lot

 

[Tonaris]

But we were not referring to nay Japanese DD. The 2x5 centerline was used on American DD starting with Benson class and British DD starting with J class. and they should be a T3 tech.

Well, the pentuple centerline launcher can be considered T3 tech with T4 reseved for a sextuple launcher (planned for Super-Akizuki class).

I am referring to this sentence. You mentioned Pentuple centerline launchers and the sextuples for the Super Akizuki class in the same sentence. As far as I am aware, the USN did not have any plans for Sextuple launchers, so if you mention those two in relation I thought both launchers you were talking about were the Japanese ones.

 

[Caeric]

Perhaps a tad early historically but assuming you want to move pentuple torpedo tubes down to T3 could pentuple with guided torpedoes serve as the T4 module rather than some hypothetical sextuple tube? I know some testing started already in the late war even if it didn't really enter service until the 60's

 

[Ketchup & friends]

To Everyone: please make suggestions you think we should add.

We'll update our guide in a few days (DD torpedoes, De Ruyter Fire control, L'Espoir name, tech adjustments and perhaps stuff you propose until then).

But this will probably be the last time. Unfortunately, the devs seem to have no interest to implement this any soon.

 

[Axe99]

Perhaps a tad early historically but assuming you want to move pentuple torpedo tubes down to T3 could pentuple with guided torpedoes serve as the T4 module rather than some hypothetical sextuple tube? I know some testing started already in the late war even if it didn't really enter service until the 60's

There are separate techs for torpedoes (including early homers iirc - I'd need to open the game up to be sure), so having them covered in the TTs might be doubling-up a bit. If I've missed something, though, please let me know

 

[valisk]

To Everyone: please make suggestions you think we should add.

We'll update our guide in a few days (DD torpedoes, De Ruyter Fire control, L'Espoir name, tech adjustments and perhaps stuff you propose until then).

But this will probably be the last time. Unfortunately, the devs seem to have no interest to implement this any soon.

Oh I don't know, what we've together proposed is probably a fair bit of work to code up, and then check, and the devs are always busy hammering at bugs. The fact that @CraniumMuppet was kind enough to chime in on the thread in it's early stages shows that there is an interest to take advantage of our insane obsessiveness love of naval matters when time will allow. As there is another new Beta in play there is possibly an opening.
Maybe given the Devs are all at home self isolating and not able to spend their evenings socializing, what we need to do is 'crowdfund' some Rum, Whisky, Schnapps to be delivered to the Devs who go the extra nautical mile on our behalf

I personally would also be interested to know if the devs would be willing to consider adding or merging a handful of techs without us requiring to add more research overall, in order to produce a streamlined and more historically accurate vanilla Naval Tech tree, as I think there are enough of us taking part in this thread with a good understanding of Naval armaments and technology advances in the 1906-1946 Era that we could look at something along those lines as a sort of side project sparked by the wrong and missing ships guide (and then force you to start another new thread to decide which Destroyers need ASDIC III and If the French Battleships have a light Heavy Battery or Heavy Battery

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Oh I don't know, what we've together proposed is probably a fair bit of work to code up, and then check, and the devs are always busy hammering at bugs. The fact that @CraniumMuppet was kind enough to chime in on the thread in it's early stages shows that there is an interest to take advantage of our insane obsessiveness love of naval matters when time will allow. As there is another new Beta in play there is possibly an opening.
Maybe given the Devs are all at home self isolating and not able to spend their evenings socializing, what we need to do is 'crowdfund' some Rum, Whisky, Schnapps to be delivered to the Devs who go the extra nautical mile on our behalf

I personally would also be interested to know if the devs would be willing to consider adding or merging a handful of techs without us requiring to add more research overall, in order to produce a streamlined and more historically accurate vanilla Naval Tech tree, as I think there are enough of us taking part in this thread with a good understanding of Naval armaments and technology advances in the 1906-1946 Era that we could look at something along those lines as a sort of side project sparked by the wrong and missing ships guide (and then force you to start another new thread to decide which Destroyers need ASDIC III and If the French Battleships have a light Heavy Battery or Heavy Battery

But if anybody is working on it would help them if the list is finished.

 

[Caeric]

Other than some debate remaining regarding certain USN DDs and which tier they belong to and which modules I haven't seen a huge number of new additions. Besides at some point I think you'll have to settle for preliminarily done.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Other than some debate remaining regarding certain USN DDs and which tier they belong to and which modules I haven't seen a huge number of new additions. Besides at some point I think you'll have to settle for preliminarily done.

The community seems to be split more or less even on the DD hulls. My group agreed to change the proposal if ther's a clear majority among the community to do it.
Ultimately it's up to the devs if the follow our advice on that.

 

[sekelsenmat]

You missed a few Soviet ships:

* Series IX Sredniaja -> Should have 1 mine tube, they were mining subs
* Leningrad & Minsk Class -> Should have 2x Light Gun II instead of 1x because they were very large destroyers, Destroyer Leaders, at aprox 2500 tons. Ideally also Torpedo II instead of I, Soviets would need Ship Torpedo 2 tech too. Ideally the Destroyer 36 hull should have 1 more slot, so that these ships could have both anti-sub and mining capability, without giving up 2x Light Guns.
* Chervona Ukraina Class -> Should have armor 1, all the ships in the class were armoured. Instead of the Mining tube, I'd prefer a Seaplane I slot. Arguably it should have both, but the soviets have tons of ships with mining capability, but nothing else for spotting.
* Marti Minelayer -> Should have 3xMining tubes instead of 1x, it could carry 300 mines, clearly 3 to 5 times more than the usual

 

[Ketchup & friends]

You missed a few Soviet ships:

* Series IX Sredniaja -> Should have 1 mine tube, they were mining subs
* Leningrad & Minsk Class -> Should have 2x Light Gun II instead of 1x because they were very large destroyers, Destroyer Leaders, at aprox 2500 tons. Ideally also Torpedo II instead of I, Soviets would need Ship Torpedo 2 tech too. Ideally the Destroyer 36 hull should have 1 more slot, so that these ships could have both anti-sub and mining capability, without giving up 2x Light Guns.
* Chervona Ukraina Class -> Should have armor 1, all the ships in the class were armoured. Instead of the Mining tube, I'd prefer a Seaplane I slot. Arguably it should have both, but the soviets have tons of ships with mining capability, but nothing else for spotting.
* Marti Minelayer -> Should have 3xMining tubes instead of 1x, it could carry 300 mines, clearly 3 to 5 times more than the usual

Thank you very much! Mostly agree on the your proposals except two points
- Leningrad & Minsk Class: 2x Light Gun II would be too powerful. This should be reserved for ships with 8 guns (like Tribal, Mogador and Porter class) or especially powerful guns (like 5x6"). But these classes had 5x13cm guns, while Gnevny and Storozhevoy(in-game Soobrazitelnyi) classes had 4x13cm, just one less gun. The T2 torpedoes sound good, we'll propose that.
- Chervona Ukraina Class: actually it would be possible to give it both Seaplane catapult and minelaying rails if instead of 2xT1 light medium battery it had 1xT2 battery and perhaps some secondaries (currently none). What do you think about that?

Ideally the Destroyer 36 hull should have 1 more slot, so that these ships could have both anti-sub and mining capability, without giving up 2x Light Guns.

Completely agree on that, it would help a lot with many DD classes. But that's beyond the scope of our proosals. You should probably make a separate new suggestion, we'll add a link to the guide.

We encourage everyone to post their suggestions on minor navies!

 

[LUISVIGO]

I don´t know if someone has posted this before, but I would like to comment that the two german cruisers Brummer and Bremse were in service during the first world war, and were sunk by their crews in 1919 at Scapa Flow. They should not be in the game. I scuttle them every time I play as Germany.

 

[Paul.Ketcham]

I don´t know if someone has posted this before, but I would like to comment that the two german cruisers Brummer and Bremse were in service during the first world war, and were sunk by their crews in 1919 at Scapa Flow. They should not be in the game. I scuttle them every time I play as Germany.

I always assumed those were oversized minelayers they put together, but I'm not seeing any signs of cruiser-sized minelayers other than a captured Norwegian one (oddly enough named Brummer). Nice catch.

Edit: Apparently they existed, but sources are hard to find sometimes