|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Dec 6, 2017 18:16:25 GMT -6
I didn't know this - could you explain it in more detail? Why does a blank refit reduce the maintenance costs? Do you do this for all ship types? Well, when a cruiser is designed, I don't use colonial service. I add it during refit. When the cruiser newly commissions, I refit it immediately. The reduced maintenance cost would be especially useful on foreign stations. When a DD newly commissions and I wanna build more, I refit the new DD and build using the refit class. This saves construction cost. Same goes for AMC spam build in wartime. It is easy to see. Build say 2 CLs. When they commission note maingenance costs. Blank refit one and leave the other as is. Note mainfenance cost and construction cost- the refit one is lower in both. Huh. Yes, I've gotten both of those to work but I think they might be bugs. Particularly being able to retrofit colonial service without a weight penalty. That really shouldn't happen. I didn't think that was possible in previous versions of the game but perhaps something was changed in the last beta. Also possible I'm just not remembering correctly. I'm using V. 1.34 b1. It's actually easy to rationalize the slightly reduced costs and maintenance for a new ship built to a refit design compared to the original. Except for destroyers, you have to wait a couple of years for the original to be completed and various small improvements could have been made to the design in that time that would make follow-on units slightly cheaper. The reason I think it might be a bug though is when you bring up the original design and the refit design in the ship designer they both have the same price listed. Then you go to the build screen and the prices are different. There was a problem with all ships having different costs listed in the designer and build screens in a previous version of the game but they fixed that. Maybe it's crept back in again somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by Noname117 on Dec 6, 2017 19:13:41 GMT -6
Ok, my strategy of penny pinching: In times of low tension peace, I tend to try to mothball as much of my fleet as possible. Half of every class of ship and all coastal patrol DDs and MS go into the mothball fleet. Almost everything else, except maybe my most modern battleship, battlecruiser/armored cruiser, 2-3 light cruisers, and 4 destroyers, goes into the reserve fleet. Old fleet cruisers usually will wind up replacing colonial cruisers, but I don't really refit them for it (though I usually like to modernize their fire control before sending them to station).
When tensions are getting high (enough that I'm concerned about a war starting within a year-ish), I usually turn on training and start putting more of my reserve ships in the active fleet and more of my mothballed ships in the reserve fleet. This usually requires production of a couple big ships to be suspended.
Immediately after a war, I axe training, scrap all the ships I think will be useless except as cannon fodder by the next war, and put all of my ships into the mothballs and reserve fleet (with my next batch of ships for the active fleet likely to be done before the next war). This might make annexing stuff in peacetime more difficult though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2017 19:58:43 GMT -6
Particularly being able to retrofit colonial service without a weight penalty. Yup, it's just I have zero problems using it. Especially considering 1.34b1 is the last version. Whatever kinks it has will stay. |
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Dec 7, 2017 10:00:12 GMT -6
I am just doing experiment using cheap cruiser for raiders and colonial duties for legacy fleet.
The main principles are:
- bellow average or minimal armor
- average guns (lots of 5" guns)
- slow speed 18 knots
Effects:
- very small building costs (~6-7 M)
- very low maintenance costs (~40k)
- live time about 10 years
Idea of this cruiser is:
a) this ship will not meet first rate cruisers in colonial duty, which are faster, better armored and better gunned (at least UK did not have these type of protected cruisers at all)
b) second rate cruisers which are more expensive have not so high firepower and are not danger
Right know I am in 1910 as USA and use these type of cruisers in Northern Europe as riders. They proved quite important as they won the war against UK. They completely bring UK to surrender due to merchant navy losses. They was able to deal with UK protected cruisers as they were rather small around 4.000 tons maximum but they displacement was spent on speed so they broadsides were quite lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by bramborough on Dec 7, 2017 10:51:59 GMT -6
A pretty modest measure, and not universally applicable to all nations/playstyles. If I'm using a lot of submarines (which I tend to do), then during peacetime I halt construction with 1 month remaining; that way I'm paying neither maintenance nor construction costs for them. They're just sitting there free-of-charge, in a "break glass in case of war" status. Then at war outbreak, I pop them all out 1 month into the fight. This has the added advantage of commissioning with the most updated sub technology and readiness percentage. As far as I can tell, either in game or manual, submarines aren't affected by crew quality, so, other than a 1-month delay in getting a lot of subs into the fight, I haven't discerned a downside.
|
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Dec 7, 2017 12:47:46 GMT -6
I guess maintenance cost is based on cost to build new to the specs of the latest refit.
|
|
