Historical and Useful Super Battleships

[podcat]

Its a tough nut to track. The solution is probably to make BBs better than historical to make the choice less clear cut. or to make carrier techs only shine towards the end of the war to give room for some BBs
And as someone pointed out it depends where you are fighting. If you have land based air power available a BB is a better bet.

Obviously a true super battle ship would look like this

yes please!

 

[podcat]

btw the hoi4 system supports these being modded in very easily. Hell, I think it might even be able to submerge as well, but I'm not 100% if that works.

 

[podcat]

The SHBB label should stop being used. No one ever called the Yamato a SHBB, and I challenge those that think so to find a real source.

Are there actually standardized rules for this stuff? afaik a large cruiser, battle crusier, fast battleship, battleship and super battleship could all mean the same thing depending on who named it. I'm not pretending to be well versed in naval classifications but to be perfectly honest the whole system seems pretty shit.

The Yamato was 30% heavier than Iowa class and 60% heavier than South Dakota class battleships. Imo that warrants a new label to differentiate it, unless we wrap all BB under the same label in which case there will be a pretty wide scope and wouldn't mean much. There is a lot more grounds for this classification imo than differentiating among the ones I mentioned above.

 

[podcat]

I would urge you, if you haven't already set it in stone, to consider that capital ship design and development either needs more than a few classifications of ships (everything from coastal battleships to battlecruisers to the Japanese AC-150 class which makes Yamato and Mushashi look like pikers) or there needs to be a more granular system for ship design in general.

yeah, but all the cool kids laugh at your AC-150 and roll around in glorious german H44s =)

 

[Darkrenown]

I've always wondered what the point of the Shinano was. For all its size it carried less than 50 aircraft? In fact, if wikipedia is correct it carried one less than HMS Glorious despite having over 3 times the displacement. I know it was a [SH]BB conversion, but even so it hardly seems worth the effort of converting it.

 

[podcat]

My response to any German player who attempts or desires to build the H44 class:

haha ;D post of the day

 

[Darkrenown]

According to wiki it had a compliment of 50 aircraft but half of its hanger space was used to support other carriers and was designed to carry up to 120 replacement aircraft in addition to its 50 plane compliment.

As I understand it the intended role was to ferry aircraft, supplies and fuel to contested or threatened islands.

"The remainder of the hangar space would have held up to 120 replacement aircraft for other carriers and land bases"

So in total she would carry 50 aircraft possible to operate in combat ( self defense probably ) + 120 replacement aircraft in stowage + enough supplies and fuel to match what a small convoy could carry.

That still seems like a job better done by a few freighters (maybe with a light escort, but I doubt Shinano was meant to be out alone either) rather than a 65k ton monster though Perhaps they just felt they had to get some use out of it, but you would think fuel-efficiency would have been a major concern by the time Shinano was a factor.

 

[Darkrenown]

Shinano's not a giant freighter though, you're carrying a lot of non-cargo weight, so while 1 Shinano would be more fuel efficient than 10 1/10th size Shinanos I'm fairly sure you could have a few freighters carry the same number of fighters for far less fuel use.