Wishlist
Väinö I said:
5) AFAIK, research is already re-calculated on daily basis. The fact that the productions is not seems to be WAD (working as desinged). The reasoning being that factories that have already been geared towards producing small arms for 8 rifle divisions can't just suddenly implement new assembly line without interfereing with the production run. I personally think the feature is quite realistic.
If I can make a production faster by killing the process and doing all the work again from the scratch, this IS annoying! And if it is cheaper, too (like in Hawk Lobby or Free Market), this is a bug. And If I build 10 light cruisers, then I can't understand why they use all the old methods up to the end. If it doesn't change automatic, I want some demon that reminds me: If you start this specific process from the scratch, it is cheaper. Your choice.
Väinö I said:
9) Point being? You can already rebase aircraft to the ends of the earth.
They always rebase over enemy territory and gain all the available AA if there is a choice to fly the save or the dangerous route.
Väinö I said:
Also, if I may nitpick to extreme, Germany was not the only nation to build a super cruiser nor did the Washington naval treaty limit CA main batteries to 20 cm.
Show it to me. Sorry, but all other major naval powers have signed the Washington naval treaty (but not all have follwed the paragraphs, see Japan and Italy before WWII) and CA where limited to 20 cm (8'') guns. I don't know of a CA-class that has over 8'' guns. Can you name me one? Battlecruisers and battleships have of course main artillery over 8'', but they are not hvy cruisers, and their numbers where strictly limited by the Washington naval treaty. They where not without intention be called "pocket-battleships" (because of their caliber).
Väinö I said:
Japan did do some carrier hybrid conversions during the war (two ex-BBs, on ex-CA).
And if I may add, those 5.9" batteries on Graf ->Zeppelin are nothing (well besides a complete waste of weight, as only god knows why the Germans presisted on using the obsolete practise of having seperate AA and anti-ship secondaries when everyone else went DP) when compared to the usless 8" guns that some of the Japanese and American CVs sported.
Thanks for the info. Anyway, as far as I know it only a very small number of CV's were sunk by battleships or cruisers (namely the one that I know of: the HMS Glorious)
Väinö I said:
IMNSHO the Spähkreuzers are nothing less than CLs in HoI terms.
You are right - up to 7,500 ts is the displacement of a light cruiser.
Väinö I said:
It does indeed seem that the current ranges of the naval units in the game were based on the assumption that everyone is playing as Italy.
Germany isn't that bad (the operational ranges on it's ships were not as special on avarage as you make them out to be), but the Pacific naval powers, ie. US and Japan, are worse off.
I don't know. I assumed they have used average ranges.
Väinö I said:
From historical pow (and Paradox may have very well chosen to slash the ranges intentionally), I'd like to see around 150%-200% increase in ranges, depending a bit on the type and tech level of the ship,
I don't know why they did it that way. First of all, there WERE ships that had a short range, but for some mission templates they are useless, so, of course, there were ships invented with more range - and other methods, like refuling on the high sea.
I understand that a transport has only 3,000 nm range (maybe historically not correct, but the effects are likely similar to the history) - and having 10,000 men piled one over the other doesn't make it better. But on the other hand, warships don't have this effect like in history. They are puny. If Hitler had the ships you grant him, he would have said from the beginning: "Admiral Raeder, I understand your interest in warships, but they are useless. Get over it. Do you want to have a job in my newly build panzer army?"
I think 10,000 nm (one-way) for ships build after 1936 was a very good range for capital ships, and 20,000 nm was extraordinary. But in reality, they used auxilary ships, so their range increased drastically.
And the more I write and read about WWII navies, the more I get the idea that 'one size fits all' is wrong. All the major powers had different ways to do it their way, so all the ships got different abilitys (apart from the - very basic - ability to move or sink other ships). And some abilitys ARE important, as the range-discussion shows.
IF you think that one size fits all is right after all, then there are a few more shipclasses to think about then only SS, DD, CL, CA, BC, BB, CV and Transport - they are very basic.
Britisch battlecruisers had a total different philosophy then the german Scharnhorst class - the british ships where armored with paper [Edit: and they later tried to better armor them, but a design failure cant't be changed, but they where propperly armed], while the german ships belonged to the class of "fast Battleships" (they [Edit: the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau] where amored like real Battleships, but because of the lack of apropriate guns, they were - temporarily - armed with (9x) 11'' guns instead of the intended (6x) 15'' guns. Because of the outbreak of WWII, this was never changed [the turrets were produced, but not installed]). Note that their size of 3/4 of the Bismarck corresponds with only 3/4 of the (intended) guns of the same caliber.
The Bismarck class was also around 31 knots.
There where short range and long range hvy cruisers, both for totally different usage. (like: Admiral Hipper class <-> Deutschland class)
Light cruiser is a term used for all fast, armored ships larger then a destroyer and not so heavy armed as a "real" cruiser. Their usage is not unified.
And there were ships you force to be a light cruiser, who could be proud to be named like that, like AA battery ships.
Battleships of newer designe where much faster then you assume (Bismarck class over 31 knots!) - but older ones could have the same firepower and nearly the same weight of armor.
Carrier had from nearly 20 airplanes to over 40 airplanes on one ship - a significant difference, even if you upgrade the type of the airplane to a newer one. Maybe you can implement this as a "factor", where 20 standard planes may be equal one, and you multiplicate this factor with the boni from the planes given.
There were carrier with a protection system of a battleship! (namely the Shinano), and other, cheap builds, who were not protected at all (namely the escort carriers).
All the small ships you force to be destroyers (Schnellboote, torpedoboots and more ...) have totally different usage and stats.
And so on...
