Greek pre-dreadnoughts built as regular battleships

[Paul.Ketcham]

The decision to rebuild the decommissioned Mississippi-class pre-dreadnoughts is a very strange one, since the Greeks are one of the only nations that start with pre-dreadnought hulls unlocked. Yet rather than getting relatively-accurate hulls, they end up launching as this (visual mods only):

1.) As mentioned originally, the Greeks start with pre-dreadnought hulls. It doesn't make sense for their pre-dreadnoughts to build as regular battleships, particularly since as intact hulls these two ships would probably be pretty fast to rebuild.
2.) The guns don't exactly match; four 12-inch guns on the pre-dreadnought hull are now represented as being better-armed than almost every dreadnought in the game, only excluding the Colorado and Nagato-class battleships with eight 16-inch guns.
3.) Tech-2 armor is particularly strange for a ship with a 9-inch armor belt; that's battlecruiser levels of armor protection (the only dreadnought in-game with less armor is the Spanish España class, at 8-inches).

The only other note is that both the Mississippi-class and the Salamis-class are queued without names matching the Greek battleship namelist, resulting in the battleships having name duplicates if rebuilt (and being the only ships lacking the RHS prefix).

 

[King Of Heroes]

Pre-dreadnought overall stronger than a Big 7 Battleship sure (not that those are even close to reality either in comparison to other ships)

The module balancing for naval really need a major overhaul to at least *try* to conform with reality I say, at the very least that pre-dreadnought demands pre-tech tree modules to represent just how low its stats should be.

 

[Iskulya]

Probably an oversight.

The naval stuff matters so little in this game in singleplayer that I can see why it was probably overlooked entirely. Who needs ships when you can just make fighters and bombers instead? Even in MP nobody really bothers with ships that aren't submarines aside from Japan, Italy, US, and Britain usually. Once in a blue moon you see German surface raiders.

 

[ThaHoward]

Should have stayed pre-dreadnought. Also give more strategic depth: go deeper with the Schacht plan and get 1 interwar battlecruiser or align with UK and get two WWI era battleships.

 

[Caeric]

Should have stayed pre-dreadnought. Also give more strategic depth: go deeper with the Schacht plan and get 1 interwar battlecruiser or align with UK and get two WWI era battleships.

Technically pre-dreadnoughts as a concept predate WWI by many decades. Most of them were pretty much just leftover reserves at this point after dreadnoughts made them obsolete.

Edited for better clarity

 

[Panzerschiff Graf Spee]

Technically pre-dreadnoughts predate WWI by many decades. Most of them were pretty much just leftover reserves at this point

Uhmm, Dreadnought wasn't launched until 1906. Most active Pre-Dreadnoughts in WW1 were from 1895 and up, plenty of them having been built after the 1900's, right up to the launch of Dreadnought, after which everyone shifted to making Dreadnoughts. They were useful as disposable ships in WW1.

 

[Caeric]

Uhmm, Dreadnought wasn't launched until 1906. Most active Pre-Dreadnoughts in WW1 were from 1895 and up, plenty of them having been built after the 1900's, right up to the launch of Dreadnought, after which everyone shifted to making Dreadnoughts. They were useful as disposable ships in WW1.

That was kind of what I meant, I meant the concept of the pre-dreadnought but I suppose I worded that poorly

 

[Panzerschiff Graf Spee]

That was kind of what I meant, I meant the concept of the pre-dreadnought but I suppose I worded that poorly

Dreadnoughts were miles / decades ahead technologically, the only viable usage of a Pre-Dreadnought post WW1 would be as a targetship, okay maybe as a Coastal Defense ship by adding Torpedo Bulges, but even then the guns would lack the accuracy due to outdated fire controls.

 

[Caeric]

Anyhow, tangentially Salamis is actually a lot more impressive but has its own set of problems.

As basically a modernized version of the initially scrapped one you get an early hull with T2 modules, however in terms of production cost she costs about as much to construct as if you were to design a '36 hull yourself with T2 modules.

If you want to construct Salamis in the first place you presumably want to invest into the Hellenic navy in the first place and you can get a research boost to '36 hulls and simply research the modules yourself faster than you can reach the Schachtplan and get the decision for Salamis in the first place at a similar production cost.

So whilst an interesting historical nod I don't really know if its worthwhile currently since you'll probably not be be able to get her into service before 39/40.

 

[coffeelingfine]

Probably an oversight.

The naval stuff matters so little in this game in singleplayer that I can see why it was probably overlooked entirely. Who needs ships when you can just make fighters and bombers instead? Even in MP nobody really bothers with ships that aren't submarines aside from Japan, Italy, US, and Britain usually. Once in a blue moon you see German surface raiders.

Sad for me because I actually really like the navy part of this game

 

[ThaHoward]

Technically pre-dreadnoughts predate WWI by many decades. Most of them were pretty much just leftover reserves at this point

Mixed up the ship classes then, anyway, cozy up with Britain to get two shit ships (but, they are sufficient against Turkey) or one somewhat "modern" ship, at the cost of only gaining one and extending the Schacht plan. As of now it is basically a no brainer to go for Britain, as you get two battleships of early hull that can be modernized.

 

[Caeric]

Mixed up the ship classes then, anyway, cozy up with Britain to get two shit ships (but, they are sufficient against Turkey) or one somewhat "modern" ship, at the cost of only gaining one and extending the Schacht plan. As of now it is basically a no brainer to go for Britain, as you get two battleships of early hull that can be modernized.

Well, the problem is that despite being heavily modernized you are still building Salamis at full cost similar to just designing a ship yourself, especially outrageous for the two Mississippi class having to build 2 ships at 10k cost when in reality you're only supposed to be refurbishing two already existing ships back to sea worthiness.

As for solutions, given the correct class I guess the two Missisippis should be pre-dreadnoughts at somewhere between 50-80% completion (I don't know what state they where in since decommissioning and how much work would be needed approximately to bring them back into service), as for Salamis, considering her cost in both foci and production cost, whilst having her start with some progress done might be unrealistic but maybe a timed national spirits like "German Naval Technology Assistance" giving 10-20% dockyard output for a limited time period might make her more worthwhile?

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Pre-dreadnought overall stronger than a Big 7 Battleship sure (not that those are even close to reality either in comparison to other ships)

in fairness, many ships are weaker than they should be.
But @Paul.Ketcham is right that the hull, armament and armour are too advanced.
It should be pre-dreadnought, 1xLv.1 heavy battery, 1xLv.1 battleship armor. (otherwise the same?) and the ships should get the prefix.

Anyhow, tangentially Salamis is actually a lot more impressive but has its own set of problems.

What would you change about the RHS Salamis?

 

[Caeric]

in fairness, many ships are weaker than they should be.
But @Paul.Ketcham is right that the hull, armament and armour are too advanced.
It should be pre-dreadnought, 1xLv.1 heavy battery, 1xLv.1 battleship armor. (otherwise the same?) and the ships should get the prefix.


What would you change about the RHS Salamis?

Nothing about the ship design itself per se, but maybe add a bit more progress on it since it takes nearly as long as a brand new '36 hull to complete.

Either that or make the decision available slightly earlier. You'll barely have it ready in time for taking on Turkey, I think the earliest I've managed is mid-late '39.

 

[Znail]

The decision to rebuild the decommissioned Mississippi-class pre-dreadnoughts is a very strange one, since the Greeks are one of the only nations that start with pre-dreadnought hulls unlocked. Yet rather than getting relatively-accurate hulls, they end up launching as this (visual mods only):
View attachment 642725

1.) As mentioned originally, the Greeks start with pre-dreadnought hulls. It doesn't make sense for their pre-dreadnoughts to build as regular battleships, particularly since as intact hulls these two ships would probably be pretty fast to rebuild.
2.) The guns don't exactly match; four 12-inch guns on the pre-dreadnought hull are now represented as being better-armed than almost every dreadnought in the game, only excluding the Colorado and Nagato-class battleships with eight 16-inch guns.
3.) Tech-2 armor is particularly strange for a ship with a 9-inch armor belt; that's battlecruiser levels of armor protection (the only dreadnought in-game with less armor is the Spanish España class, at 8-inches).

The only other note is that both the Mississippi-class and the Salamis-class are queued without names matching the Greek battleship namelist, resulting in the battleships having name duplicates if rebuilt (and being the only ships lacking the RHS prefix).

I get from wiki that Salamis is supposed to have 8x 14inch guns and that seems to fit with the ship we got in the game? I agree on that the armor makes no sense though.

 

[Paul.Ketcham]

I get from wiki that Salamis is supposed to have 8x 14inch guns and that seems to fit with the ship we got in the game? I agree on that the armor makes no sense though.

Technically I didn't bring up the Salamis-class since, having been partially-scrapped, putting it together is akin to building a new ship. Thus, having upgraded stats is technically fine since the ship wouldn't be built necessarily with the same configuration or tech.

That said, no other ship with 14-inch guns has tier-2 weapons, except the relatively-modern King George V-class (which had quadruple-turrets as well). Salamis was designed with the same exact guns that arm the Chilean Almirante Latorre-class. 14-inch weapons on the American standard battleships, the Japanese Kongo and Ise-classes, and the Bretagne-class (13.4-inch) are all tier-1. Tier-2 weapons, with the exception of a few really strange ones (Germany has no sane reason to have tier-2 weapons for the least-powerful capital ship guns of any battleships in the world for the Scharnhorst and Deutschland panzerschiffe), fit on either newish 15-inch weapons (i.e. the French Richelieu or Italian Dunkerque) or older 1920s 16-inch weapons (Colorado, Nagato, Nelson).

Scharnhorst's guns are a whole different mess of the base-game's content that really deserves some attention, but that's a total overhaul of several entire nation's shiplists (i.e. nearly every heavy cruiser in the game is too slow, Panzerschiffe have a crippling lack of HP despite historically being oversized and well-armored, etc).

Edit: Incomplete sentence

 

[Znail]

Sure, I see no reason for tier 2 guns for Salamis.

 

[Caeric]

Technically I didn't bring up the Salamis-class since, having been partially-scrapped, putting it together is akin to building a new ship. Thus, having upgraded stats is technically fine since the ship wouldn't be built necessarily with the same configuration or tech.

That said, no other ship with 14-inch guns has tier-2 weapons, except the relatively-modern King George V-class (which had quadruple-turrets as well). Salamis was designed with the same exact guns that arm the Chilean Almirante Latorre-class. 14-inch weapons on the American standard battleships, the Japanese Kongo and Ise-classes, and the Bretagne-class (13.4-inch). Tier-2 weapons, with the exception of a few really strange ones (Germany has no sane reason to have tier-2 weapons for the least-powerful capital ship guns of any battleships in the world for the Scharnhorst and Deutschland panzerschiffe), fit on either newish 15-inch weapons (i.e. the French Richelieu or Italian Dunkerque) or older 1920s 16-inch weapons (Colorado, Nagato, Nelson).

Scharnhorst's guns are a whole different mess of the base-game's content that really deserves some attention, but that's a total overhaul of several entire nation's shiplists (i.e. nearly every heavy cruiser in the game is too slow, Panzerschiffe have a crippling lack of HP despite historically being oversized and well-armored, etc).

Sure, I see no reason for tier 2 guns for Salamis.

All the more reason to make her faster to build assuming the module gets nerfed. Rather curious what guns they would hypothetically procure even for a modernized Salamis? Modernized American 14"/50s? The twin B-mount of the KGV's BL 14" Mk VII? A refurbished and improved version of the German 35cm guns intended for the cancelled Mackensen-class given the closer cooperation with them?

 

[Paul.Ketcham]

All the more reason to make her faster to build assuming the module gets nerfed. Rather curious what guns they would hypothetically procure even for a modernized Salamis? Modernized American 14"/50s? The twin B-mount of the KGV's BL 14" Mk VII? A refurbished and improved version of the German 35cm guns intended for the cancelled Mackensen-class given the closer cooperation with them?

Considering that the hull was partially-scrapped and thus the barbette limitations seem a bit less strict, I'd actually lean in favor of the 38cm C/34 used on the Bismarck, for a few reasons:
1.) 15-inch guns match a tier-2 weapon better than smaller ones.
2.) Germany doesn't have the 35cm guns anymore, and none are ready to be built; the 38cm guns were being built for the Bismarck-class, O-class, and the Soviet Kronshtadt-class, making them significantly simpler to acquire. The 28cm is technically more realistic, but its a bad fit for a tier-2 heavy gun (and I can't see Greece putting this much work into fixing a dreadnought but killing the firepower in the process).
3.) While the historic ship used British guns (and 14-inch ones), the prerequisites to acquire the Salamis require relations with Germany, not Britain. British or American guns arming the ships would be a bit silly for an Axis or Central Powers-allied Greece.

If you wanted to stick with 14-inch weapons anyways, the German-focused nature of the decision seems to suggest that it should be a new German 35cm, while the more realistic option would probably be British 14" Mk VIIs. The US is pretty hostile to weapons sales in the 1930s, so they seem a lot less likely. I could see a case being made for Greece being able to play both sides since they managed it historically, but the 1930s are a lot more problematic than the 1910s for those sorts of political machinations.

 

[Caeric]

Considering that the hull was partially-scrapped and thus the barbette limitations seem a bit less strict, I'd actually lean in favor of the 38cm C/34 used on the Bismarck, for a few reasons:
1.) 15-inch guns match a tier-2 weapon better than smaller ones.
2.) Germany doesn't have the 35cm guns anymore, and none are ready to be built; the 38cm guns were being built for the Bismarck-class, O-class, and the Soviet Kronshtadt-class, making them significantly simpler to acquire. The 28cm is technically more realistic, but its a bad fit for a tier-2 heavy gun (and I can't see Greece putting this much work into fixing a dreadnought but killing the firepower in the process).
3.) While the historic ship used British guns (and 14-inch ones), the prerequisites to acquire the Salamis require relations with Germany, not Britain. British or American guns arming the ships would be a bit silly for an Axis or Central Powers-allied Greece.

If you wanted to stick with 14-inch weapons anyways, the German-focused nature of the decision seems to suggest that it should be a new German 35cm, while the more realistic option would probably be British 14" Mk VIIs. The US is pretty hostile to weapons sales in the 1930s, so they seem a lot less likely. I could see a case being made for Greece being able to play both sides since they managed it historically, but the 1930s are a lot more problematic than the 1910s for those sorts of political machinations.

I just didn't think the 38cm guns would be able to fit but perhaps I'm wrong on that.

Now that I think of it they kind of missed out on an oppurtunity to make Vasilefs Konstantinos an option for allying with France over Brittain.