The Kongo is a battlecruiser. But, with upgraded main guns it has the same Heavy Attack and Heavy Piercing as the Nagato. And, at the cost of 1 Armor point (25 vs 26) you get more speed (30.0kn vs 20.0kn) AND more Health Points (385.0 vs 367.5). I'm confused as to why you would have higher Health Points with lower Armor, but I'll take it.
Why not build the Kongo class BC instead of BBs as Japan
- Thread starter StanCollins
- Start date
-
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.
Kongo is a bit weird atm; it is classed as a BB in game but has been assigned BC armor, which makes it a hybrid. I have reported this oversight however, and the devs are aware of it. I agree that the Kongos should be BCs really, but they've always been BBs in this game and it would also mean changing the vanilla naval tech tree and messing around with various other files.
All that really needs changing atm is giving the Kongos BB1 armor instead of BC2.
All that really needs changing atm is giving the Kongos BB1 armor instead of BC2.
In my game Kongo is listed as a separate class of heavy ship, not included with the BBs. And, my understanding is that it is the use of BC armor instead of BB armor that defines the ship as a battlecruiser. The question in my mind is: Was Kongo a battleship or a battlecruiser?
However, in my mind, it still makes more sense to build Kongo class ships than BBs.
Yes, because of a strange oversight. I posted a bug about this and a dev replied. Hopefully it gets fixed in 1.62.
The reason for the weird status of the Kongos is because they're defined as battleships but have battlecruiser armor, which is wrong. The armor type needs to match the ship definition; this is an oversight.
Historically the Kongos were battlecruisers that underwent two refits; after the first they were reclassified as 'fast battleships' - which is why Paradox treat them as battleships. However, they weren't really as capable or well-armored as proper battleships and the IJN knew they were taking a gamble by treating them as such. It is telling that as soon as the Kongos went up against enemy capital ships (including heavy cruisers) they either blew up or sank on contact with enemy fire. Battleships aren't supposed to do that. [See also HMS Hood, which was huge and powerful but lacked protection]
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ngo-class-ships-have-wrong-ship-type.1158162/
There are two solutions here:
1) Change the Kongos to be actual battlecruisers, and let the player upgrade them to battleships if desired.
2) Change the Kongos to use 'ship_armor_bb_1' armor type, rather than ship_armor_bc_2'
@Archangel85 - I did #2 in the file I sent you, but #1 is also an option. Whichever option you choose, make sure it is consistent across all the game files or we'll be back at square 1.
I now see what you're saying. I've taken a look at my fleet's ship list and the Kongo is listed among the BBs there. What confused me is that it is shown as a separate class of ship in the ship designer.
Yes, the issue is this:
Code:
create_equipment_variant = {
name = "Kongo Class"
name_group = JAP_BB_HISTORICAL
type = ship_hull_heavy_1
parent_version = 0
modules = {
fixed_ship_battery_slot = ship_heavy_battery_1
fixed_ship_anti_air_slot = ship_anti_air_1
fixed_ship_fire_control_system_slot = ship_fire_control_system_0
fixed_ship_radar_slot = empty
fixed_ship_engine_slot = heavy_ship_engine_2
fixed_ship_secondaries_slot = ship_secondaries_1
fixed_ship_armor_slot = ship_armor_bc_2
front_1_custom_slot = ship_anti_air_1
mid_1_custom_slot = empty
mid_2_custom_slot = ship_airplane_launcher_1
rear_1_custom_slot = ship_heavy_battery_1
}
}If you change ship_armor_bc_2 to ship_armor_bb_1 it should fix the problem, and the Kongos will appear alongside your other battleships. Ship armor defines the type, and so because the class has BC armor, the game thinks they're BCs - but they're not, and they're defined as BBs elsewhere.
The alternative - to make them proper battlecruisers - is more time-consuming and also involves changing the vanilla ship localization.
AFAIK, there are two Kongo designs - one - the BC - is being used for the Hiei, while the other - the BB - is being used for the other 3.
I do not believe so, and I just checked the files to confirm this. All of the Kongos are set up like this:
Code:
ship = { name = "Kongo" definition = battleship start_experience_factor = 0.5 equipment = { ship_hull_heavy_1 = { amount = 1 owner = JAP version_name = "Kongo Class"} } }And the ones in the construction queue are set up with 'ship_hull_heavy_1' - which is correct.
As far as I can see - though please tell me if I've missed something - the only issue is the wrong armor type being specified on the actual ship variant, which is in Japan's country file. There's only one "Kongo Class" variant in there, so there's no confusion.
The vanilla Japanese ship techs are a mess anyways, may as well fix it 2.5 years after release.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ff-before-you-created-your-tech-trees.948270/
I agree with you, and personally I would have a different setup, but I doubt the devs will make large changes here.
Not a bug. The Kongos were designed and built as BCs and later uparmored and reclassified as "fast battleships". We can argue whether or not that made sense but I think they work better in this template to reflect the fact that they are just modernized battlecruisers, not proper battleships built as such from the ground up.
I think it's weird that you have a single ship type in the game that is not recognized as either BC or BB, and you cannot replicate this either. It's like a weird glitch that the ship designer doesn't recognize.
I agree that we can argue over whether the class should be represented as BC or BB, but the current setup is the worst possible 'solution' in that it satisfies neither criteria and confuses both the game and the player [read posts by others here].
Thanks for a reply, though. At least you know about it and have confirmed it. I won't mention it again.
there are so few BC's in the game as it is; others might disagree but I'd like to see more; and since the Kongo class is on the knife's edge between BB and BC, it should be BC IMO.
edited for clarity; my general rule is if something is greyzone or knifedge, you should generally lean towards putting it in whatever group has less things in it.
1936 starts in game with a worldwide total of 105 BB and 4 BC.
As such having 105-7 is more ideal than 108-4.
edited for clarity; my general rule is if something is greyzone or knifedge, you should generally lean towards putting it in whatever group has less things in it.
1936 starts in game with a worldwide total of 105 BB and 4 BC.
As such having 105-7 is more ideal than 108-4.
Last edited:
I agree, and particularly as its protection was ultimately very poor (at least one was sunk by heavy cruiser fire), but that's a matter for Paradox to decide. I was simply trying to point out that the current situation is strange as the game is confusing the ship class in multiple areas.
That's a good question - I assume BB given that they are defined as battleships.
What a about Hiei? It has an BC icon, will it still be treated a BB?
I think the ones in the build queue are treated as BCs - this was really the point of my complaint here, which I don't think Archangel has properly understood. The ones you start with and the ones you build end up as two different types of ship. The whole thing is just a confusing mess - all for what, a slightly different armor profile?
It's not a matter of the template, though -- the primary issue is that Kongo, Kirishima, and Haruna are all indicated as BBs in the fleet view, while Hiei, when it finishes, is shown as a BC. It's confusing, and likely results in the ships receiving different modifiers (e.g., Hiei presumably doesn't benefit from the org from "Floating Fortress" while the other three will.)