Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded

 
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 >> RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 1:17:54 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3060
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
I can't say much about the Japanese side. I have not played it. I was just goig on what I have read in the forum. I also don't want to start a riot. Just saying my 2 cents which due to the current inflation, I owe China 2 euros.

doc

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 31
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 1:49:27 AM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1643
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I use to think I knew a lot about WW2 until I came here that is. I quite enjoy the history lessons, now I'm more annoying to my friends. Getting to the point now could someone share there what if references with me so I can see for myself. Thanks

doc


Best general histories are:

Ronald Spector "Eagle against the Sun"

John Costello "The Pacific War"

More specific:

John Lundstrom "Black-shoe Carrier Admiral"

Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully "Shattered Sword"

Dallas Isom "Midway Inquest"

H.P. Wilmott "Empires in the Balance" and "The Barrier and the Javelin"

Eric Bergerud "Fire in the Sky"

For the Japanese decision-making process, an excellent summary of the work of Robert Morley was done in the chapter on the decision for war by Ian Kershaw in "Fateful Choices"

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 32
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 1:56:43 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3905
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal


quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I use to think I knew a lot about WW2 until I came here that is. I quite enjoy the history lessons, now I'm more annoying to my friends. Getting to the point now could someone share there what if references with me so I can see for myself. Thanks

doc


Best general histories are:

Ronald Spector "Eagle against the Sun"

John Costello "The Pacific War"

More specific:

John Lundstrom "Black-shoe Carrier Admiral"

Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully "Shattered Sword"

Dallas Isom "Midway Inquest"

H.P. Wilmott "Empires in the Balance" and "The Barrier and the Javelin"

Eric Bergerud "Fire in the Sky"

For the Japanese decision-making process, an excellent summary of the work of Robert Morley was done in the chapter on the decision for war by Ian Kershaw in "Fateful Choices"



I would like to add Bergerud's " Touched with Fire " to that list. It discusses the land war in the S. Pacific area. A great, and sad, read.

< Message edited by stuman -- 10/11/2010 2:06:27 AM >


_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Pascal_slith)
Post #: 33
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 3:44:46 AM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1643
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now
Status: offline
Also John Lundstrom's other 3 books: "First Team", "First Team at Guadalcanal", and "The First South Pacific Campaign"

Also "Guadalcanal" by Richard Frank

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 34
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 3:46:05 AM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1643
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now
Status: offline
Oh, and don't forget

Evans and Peattie's "Kaigun" and Peattie's "Sunburst"

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to Pascal_slith)
Post #: 35
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 5:35:34 AM   
stuman


Posts: 3905
Joined: 9/14/2008
From: Elvis' Hometown
Status: offline
Hmm, I see at least six books I haven't read on those above lists. I see my fall reading schedule laid out before me

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


(in reply to Pascal_slith)
Post #: 36
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 5:06:12 PM   
topeverest


Posts: 3374
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
Gary,

I agree with you, and I have done similar tinkering, mostly with the Empire. I have focused on them as the weaker side to provide more options for conversions, especially cruiser options. I view the allies in little need of more toys, especially in the last 18 months of the war. Something that could affect the allies in the first part of the war and not be overly powerful I certainly would add.



_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to stuman)
Post #: 37
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 6:02:20 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7891
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Gary,

I agree with you, and I have done similar tinkering, mostly with the Empire. I have focused on them as the weaker side to provide more options for conversions, especially cruiser options. I view the allies in little need of more toys, especially in the last 18 months of the war. Something that could affect the allies in the first part of the war and not be overly powerful I certainly would add.




There were a ton of WWI and interwar DDs that could have been retained or had been decommissioned but not quite made it to the scrapper yet. Allies are definately DD poor for the first 6 months of the war.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 38
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 6:57:16 PM   
Heeward


Posts: 343
Joined: 1/27/2003
From: Lacey Washington
Status: offline
Dallas Isom "Midway Inquest"  - does this book give significant insight over Jonathan Parshall's and Anthony Tully's "Shattered Sword?

_____________________________

The Wake

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 39
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 9:16:41 PM   
JSBoomer


Posts: 267
Joined: 11/5/2004
From: Edmonton Alberta
Status: offline
Gary and Dixie, I like both of your ideas. Gary, have you made the pics for your omaha CVL? I rather liked the Vindictive one you did previously.

_____________________________

Jordan S. Bujtas
Deas Gu Cath


(in reply to Heeward)
Post #: 40
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 9:46:53 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10332
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RUDOLF

I think it would be far more interesting to look at this "what if's" for the Japanese.
Could changed balance a bit and make the game more interesting in the long run.



Maybe, but why should Japan get all the goodies? I'm not all that familiar with Japanese shipbuilding capabilities etc, but I'm more confident on RN options. The original post asked about plausible what-ifs, whilst a rebuild of Repulse is at the far-fetched end of the scale it's a possibility.

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to RUDOLF)
Post #: 41
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 10:36:20 PM   
bigred


Posts: 3139
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
+1
quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

I use to think I knew a lot about WW2 until I came here that is.

doc


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 42
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/11/2010 11:59:11 PM   
vettim89


Posts: 3576
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline
One problem I would have with any additional US carriers would be that the airframes to fill out the CAW's did not exist. The Grumman factory at Bethpage, NY was producing as many F4F-4's as it could by mid 1942. Any additional production on that airfrmae would have delayed F6F introduction. I sincerely doubt that idea would have flown very far. I beleive the Douglas factories were having a hard time keeping up with their demands also as far as the SBD. This is reflected in game and has been the subject of more than one contentious threads.

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 43
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/12/2010 2:36:09 PM   
Capt Henry_MatrixForum

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
If we're looking for additional aircraft, and we're already into alternate history, could additional production be achieved by assuming that, in this reality, Brewster was a well managed, efficient company? It could address the quantity question. The capacity to create more airframes seems to have been there, just not the maangement to do so. If you don't like the Brewster products on carriers, they might go to land based units whose Douglas and Grumman planes could then go to the carriers.

This would certainly depend on how far into the hypothetical one wanted to go.

(in reply to vettim89)
Post #: 44
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/12/2010 2:53:14 PM   
Bliztk


Posts: 779
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Electronic City
Status: offline
A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess


_____________________________


(in reply to Capt Henry_MatrixForum)
Post #: 45
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/12/2010 3:12:55 PM   
Smeulders

 

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess



Though I do not know the code I'd think you'd be wrong. You'd have to put in a whole new piece of code allowing ships to change class before they arrive on map, something which does not happen now. I'd bet quite a bit of money that this will not make any of the upcoming patches.

Why not use the easy solution of allowing a conversion after the ship arrived ? Some issues might have to be worked out, as it is of course easier to convert a ship during building then after it is finished, but why not just a HR saying you can only convert on the day of arrival or something similar ?

(in reply to Bliztk)
Post #: 46
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 6:14:45 AM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1643
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Heeward

Dallas Isom "Midway Inquest"  - does this book give significant insight over Jonathan Parshall's and Anthony Tully's "Shattered Sword?


articles from both and Wildenberg appeared in the Naval War College Review. They are all available online; just check the NWC website. Some slightly different perspectives.

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to Heeward)
Post #: 47
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 6:16:56 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16853
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal

I'm all for following different tracks (as long as it is not 'fantasy').

Another 'what if' would be the Japanese NOT building the Musashi and scrapping it to build 2-3 new carriers (Shokaku/Zuikakau class?). Or even better, giving the Japanese a few more shipyards and shipyard points to produce quicker and earlier. Same for aircraft factories and the amount of new pilots (at albeit lower starting ratings).

Obviously these don't involve additional artwork.

One that would is the production of a Japanese 4-engine bomber, like a project based on the Ju-290E


Well, looks like the image upload system has tanked on me....






Pascal--This is EXACTLY what Reluctant Admiral does in its scenario. Yamato and Musashi are in the building stage but no Taiho or Shinano. The Japanese player gets 3 Improved Shokaku's, two Command Cruisers, and about 24 more warships over the allowed ships in AE.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 10/13/2010 6:29:14 AM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Pascal_slith)
Post #: 48
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 6:24:25 AM   
Pascal_slith


Posts: 1643
Joined: 8/20/2003
From: in New England now
Status: offline
There's a Japanese 4-Engine bomber in there? Or is it just more ships and shipyards?

_____________________________

So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 49
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 6:27:08 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16853
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Should note that RA also adds several Independence-Class CVLs by pulling a couple of the Clevelands out of the building line. Additionally the first Independence's arrive 3-4 months early to help combat the details of the 4th Circle Plan that would become known once the war starts.

Several of the American starting AOs are slotted for CVE conversion if the Allied player wishes as well as 'Training Squadrons' for Naval Air on the West Coast, and a number of small recon/air search detachments are also added to provide the Allied player some differing options and toys.

One should be only fair...

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 50
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 6:28:04 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16853
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pascal

There's a Japanese 4-Engine bomber in there? Or is it just more ships and shipyards?


Yes the 4EB is present. FatR did some research and put it into the possible build for aircraft.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Pascal_slith)
Post #: 51
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/13/2010 7:01:25 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7891
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
I've been doing quite a bit of research on the IJN and their building plans pre and post-Washington Treaty. This is what I have come up with for building programs. Bear in mind this was always subject to change, and accuracy can be iffy on certain items. Basically its a guide, nothing more. Also, if you have a source that can confirm or deny these, feel free to do so.

I'm still looking for info on Britain and US, so if anyone can point me to a source, please do so.

AIRCRAFT CARRIERS

-Shokaku Class: These were to be 2 ships (Shokaku and Zuikaku) that were basically an enlarged Hosho. 12,500 ton displacement.
-Ryujo Class: Additional 2 boats planned, and at a higher displacement than Ryujo was built at. 10,000+ ton displacement.
-27,000 ton Class: Not mentioned by name, and never made it past plan/requisition phase. I have no other information at this time.
-G6 Class: Follow on to Soryu that was not approved. 1934-1937 era.

I somehow doubt all of these would have been built, especially if the Shokaku and additional Ryujo's had been completed to original design. There is also mention of 1 additional Hosho, but this is probably referring to the Shokaku class that was cancelled due to the treaty. The 27,000 ton class was requisitioned for the 1923 building plan, but not approved most likely due to the Treaty.

BATTLESHIPS

-Kii Class: Four ships, ~42k tons, 5x2 16in/45 guns. Kii, Owari, No 11, No 12
-No 13 Class: Four Ships, ~48k tons, 4x2 18.1in/45. No 13, No 14, No 15, No 16

No other Battleships scheduled. The Kii's along with the No 13s would have made up the 8 BBs of the 8-8 plan. Nagato, Mutsu, Ise, Hyuga, Fuso, Yamashiro most likely to reserve or decommission.

BATTLECRUISERS

-Kaga Class: Two Ships, ~40k tons, 5x2 16in/45. Kaga, Tosa
-Amagi Class: 4 Ships, ~41 tons, 5x2 16in/45. Amagi, Akagi, Takao (Akitaka), Atago. Amagi destroyed by Earthquake 1 Sept. 1923 and scrapped.

Under the 8-8 plan, the above six ships plus 2 of the Kongo class retained, 2 Kongo class to reserve. With loss of Amagi, an additional Kongo may have been retained.

Additional Note on the BB and BC classes. The No 13 Class is often listed as both, but in truth it was larger and more heavily armed/armored than the Kii Class, which is why I rate them as BBs.

CRUISERS

-Sendai Class: 1 Ship, Kako, cancelled in the slip.
-Scout Cruisers: 12 planned, 8 Cancelled. 4 that were completed are the Takao Class from WWII.

This Category is about as clear as mud. While it is easy to see the 1 cancelled Sendai class, the 12 scout cruisers are not specified. The 4 that show completed are also in for a renaming, as they carry some of same names as the Amagi Class BCs. Complicating matters are the facts that 1) scout cruisers can mean anything from the super light Kuma, Nagara, Yubari, Sendai Classes to the 'heavy cruisers' as we know them; 2) the distinction between CA and CL did not exist, 3) the trend in building had been to very light Scout Cruisers with the heavier Protected Cruisers being more akin to mini-battleships.

DESTROYERS

-Kamikaze Class: 20 planned, 9 Completed. The 11 cancelled had not been assigned names yet, canceled before order due to the treaty.
-Wakatake Class: 5 Canceled. Shion, Basho, Omadaka, Kaou(?), Nadeshiko(?) ? means I am unsure of actual name/possible mistranslation.

The cancelled DDs were apparently done in favor of more heavily armed designs to get the most bang for the buck.

SUBMARINES

-L2, L3, and L4 Classes: Up to 25 boats canceled. Need more details.
-'Minelaying' Submarine Class: 2 Canceled
-'Supply' Submarine Class: 4 canceled

Another clear as mud category. As noted, need more details to firm this up.

AUXILIARIES

-W1 Minesweepers: 3 Canceled.
-Yeayama Class: 16 canceled. Described as 'Netlayer' and 'Minelayer'.
-Various Classes: Netlayers, 11 Canceled.
-Various Classes: Gunboats, 6 Canceled.
-'Spy Ship': Not specified, though tonnage given as 10k.
-Erimo Class: 1 oiler canceled.
-Mamyia Class: 1 supply ship canceled.

Again, short of details.

Keep in mind these are the changes between the 1923 plan and what was completed by 1927, with the exception of the G6 Class carriers which I included as a 'bonus'. Any information that can correct errors or omissions would be greatly appreciated.


_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 52
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/15/2010 8:55:38 PM   
RevRick


Posts: 2580
Joined: 9/16/2000
From: Thomasville, GA
Status: offline
Gary..
One of my AltHist thoughts (and there have been many) was to have rebuilt/overhauled/modified the Omaha's as a decent light cruiser with 8 6"/53s in four twin mounts, a couple of 5"/25s on each beam, and some light AAA. They just seem to be entirely too light, too lightly built, and far to narrow of beam to have been anywhere near seaworthy carriers. They would have rolled like a pig in slop in any sea.

The other was to have delayed them and built the Omaha's and Pensacola's as a hybrid class of CL's with 6" guns but with a lot more ship under them - at least more than 7800 tons. Combining that tonnage, say the last 6 Omaha's and the two Pensy's would have produced at least six to seven fairly capable CL's with good range and perhaps something more than aluminum foil for armor..



_____________________________

"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 53
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/15/2010 9:26:04 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USS Henrico

The USN decides not to wait for the Essex class carriers. Instead of buildiing all the North Carolina/South Dakota BBs, they produce a couple more Yorktown class CVs similar to Hornet. These shouldn't require anymore shipbuilding capacity than was historically present and would arrive in late 1942.

possible, but unthinkable. The USN would never let their BB-force get weaker than the Jap BB-Fleet. The USN really needed those fast BBs!

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to USS Henrico)
Post #: 54
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/15/2010 9:33:20 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess



Though I do not know the code I'd think you'd be wrong. You'd have to put in a whole new piece of code allowing ships to change class before they arrive on map, something which does not happen now. I'd bet quite a bit of money that this will not make any of the upcoming patches.

Why not use the easy solution of allowing a conversion after the ship arrived ? Some issues might have to be worked out, as it is of course easier to convert a ship during building then after it is finished, but why not just a HR saying you can only convert on the day of arrival or something similar ?

this is not a problem!

You want a CL/CVL option? Do it this way:

- create a new ship class, called CL/CVL Hull. It has the same tonnage and durability as the CL, but a top speed of 1 and no armament at all.
- give it two possible conversions: 1 CL to the intended CL-Class and 1 CVL to the inteded CVL class.
- make the conversion delay accordingly. If the CL construction takes 700 days and the CVL 800, lett the CL/CVL hull arrive after 699 days and give the CL conversion no delay, the CVL conversion one of 100.

Voilá, you have the option to convert.

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Smeulders)
Post #: 55
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/15/2010 9:43:06 PM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline
In alternate history, there are tons of possible things - more or less realistic:

- more jap BBs. The US naval intelligence made studies about the BBs in construction. As they had no clear data, there are estimates how many 35.000 ts BBs may have been built. So you can have a couple of smaller BBs instead of those two Yamatos
- Japan gets whole of Sakhalin. In 1925, they apparently had an agreement with the Soviet Union to be allowed to exploit the oil on the island. This doesn't seem to be in the game, though I don't know why. I haven't had the time to further investiagte this. Maybe this agreement had ended before, maybe it was still in affect. So why not give Japan all of the Island?
- Japan advanced up till Lake Baikal in the Russian Civil war. They might have kept some parts of the territory...
- Japan has several ships that are suited for conversion to CVE, CVL and CV. Why not give it the chance to convert them? The airgroups must be taken from the existing land based groups, so they are just carrier capable and not trained. This seems fair...
- DEI might have surrendered as well, maybe after the Dutch Government being captured by Germany? This way, US and GB might intervene after or while the occupation takes place?
- The Admiral Graf Spee might have stayed int the Indic Ocean some longer instead of returning to the Atlantic and driving to the River Plate. Why not let the battle happen at Cocos Island and Admiral Graf Spee flee to Palau where is still lays (heavily) damaged in 1941?

...

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 56
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/16/2010 2:37:36 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7891
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess



Though I do not know the code I'd think you'd be wrong. You'd have to put in a whole new piece of code allowing ships to change class before they arrive on map, something which does not happen now. I'd bet quite a bit of money that this will not make any of the upcoming patches.

Why not use the easy solution of allowing a conversion after the ship arrived ? Some issues might have to be worked out, as it is of course easier to convert a ship during building then after it is finished, but why not just a HR saying you can only convert on the day of arrival or something similar ?

this is not a problem!

You want a CL/CVL option? Do it this way:

- create a new ship class, called CL/CVL Hull. It has the same tonnage and durability as the CL, but a top speed of 1 and no armament at all.
- give it two possible conversions: 1 CL to the intended CL-Class and 1 CVL to the inteded CVL class.
- make the conversion delay accordingly. If the CL construction takes 700 days and the CVL 800, lett the CL/CVL hull arrive after 699 days and give the CL conversion no delay, the CVL conversion one of 100.

Voilá, you have the option to convert.


And on map and attackable as well.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 57
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/16/2010 9:05:28 AM   
Historiker


Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess



Though I do not know the code I'd think you'd be wrong. You'd have to put in a whole new piece of code allowing ships to change class before they arrive on map, something which does not happen now. I'd bet quite a bit of money that this will not make any of the upcoming patches.

Why not use the easy solution of allowing a conversion after the ship arrived ? Some issues might have to be worked out, as it is of course easier to convert a ship during building then after it is finished, but why not just a HR saying you can only convert on the day of arrival or something similar ?

this is not a problem!

You want a CL/CVL option? Do it this way:

- create a new ship class, called CL/CVL Hull. It has the same tonnage and durability as the CL, but a top speed of 1 and no armament at all.
- give it two possible conversions: 1 CL to the intended CL-Class and 1 CVL to the inteded CVL class.
- make the conversion delay accordingly. If the CL construction takes 700 days and the CVL 800, lett the CL/CVL hull arrive after 699 days and give the CL conversion no delay, the CVL conversion one of 100.

Voilá, you have the option to convert.


And on map and attackable as well.

There are some unattackable places on my map, like the east coast...
Also, this is absolutly realistic. Tons of ships were destroyed while under construction. This is most unrealistic in the game, that this can't happen. (As unrealistic as the fact that you have to pay shipyard points like the ship is under construction while it is already in training...)

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 58
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/16/2010 4:00:39 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7891
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7


quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Smeulders


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bliztk

A thing that has always though for me is that the ships that are being built (in the case of Japan) or delayed should be able to be converted (adding some delay).

For example, the Allies want one of the Cleveland CL changed for a CVL, then that CVL would arrive with for example 180 additional days of delay.

Should not be very difficult to code, I guess



Though I do not know the code I'd think you'd be wrong. You'd have to put in a whole new piece of code allowing ships to change class before they arrive on map, something which does not happen now. I'd bet quite a bit of money that this will not make any of the upcoming patches.

Why not use the easy solution of allowing a conversion after the ship arrived ? Some issues might have to be worked out, as it is of course easier to convert a ship during building then after it is finished, but why not just a HR saying you can only convert on the day of arrival or something similar ?

this is not a problem!

You want a CL/CVL option? Do it this way:

- create a new ship class, called CL/CVL Hull. It has the same tonnage and durability as the CL, but a top speed of 1 and no armament at all.
- give it two possible conversions: 1 CL to the intended CL-Class and 1 CVL to the inteded CVL class.
- make the conversion delay accordingly. If the CL construction takes 700 days and the CVL 800, lett the CL/CVL hull arrive after 699 days and give the CL conversion no delay, the CVL conversion one of 100.

Voilá, you have the option to convert.


And on map and attackable as well.

There are some unattackable places on my map, like the east coast...
Also, this is absolutly realistic. Tons of ships were destroyed while under construction. This is most unrealistic in the game, that this can't happen. (As unrealistic as the fact that you have to pay shipyard points like the ship is under construction while it is already in training...)


Absolutely agree with you. Just imagine a raid on the Kaiser yards at San Francisco or Vancouver...would it make a dent over-all...no, but it would really sting short term to lose 3-6 months of construction.

To accomplish this though you would need to bring the ships in with no weapons on their launch date, have an upgrade immediately available to be done to bring it up to its original configuration or a conversion for the players use, and then probably need to adjust the repair yard sizes.

The question is, can the AI handle it?

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Historiker)
Post #: 59
RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded - 10/17/2010 8:58:25 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3060
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Ok I'm reading a lot about the different conversions and possiblities with the japanese what about the allied side? What about the G 3 battlecruisers and N 3 battleships for the british.

Also been doing a lil reading. Maybe one of you navy guys can help a soldier out here. What is reboilering? I have read a lil about modernization for some of the old US BB's, what things did they want to update? I know the US talked about building the Alaska class battlecruisers (turned into carriers). What else was there if not for the Washington Naval treaty?

Doc

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Alternative History for the Historically Minded Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.250