|
Post by skyhawk on May 15, 2019 14:06:26 GMT -6
14k ton AVs that are converted into CVLs provide a full aircraft compliment, middle of the road speed, and splinter armor while also maintaining a decent AA suite as seen below. The frustrating thing I've noted though is the spike in construction time for AVs. They seem to move upwards in months nicely till you reach 10...then they spike up to 19 and seem to stay there. So I tried to build the best AV I could while maintaining the 10 month build time. Got it all finished design wise and then went to produce it and discovered it had jumped up to 19 for some reason. Went back to look at the design to see if anything had changed and it still read as 10 months. Don't know if thats a bug or if AVs of a certain size or complexity are just limited that way. Those out of date CLs you're stuck with at the start of the game, those in the 4k+ range, make for quick (hanger-less) AV conversions. Seems to require 6 aircraft or more but i've managed to make one with 5 and still have it count as an AV. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on May 15, 2019 14:19:39 GMT -6
Tip: You can build a suitable AV, then convert it into a carrier. It can feel a little cheesy, but it was done historically, and fairly well simulates taking a fastish support ship and converting it to a carrier. I think it’s kind of weird to have purpose built CVs behind a tech wall. I’m not sure it’s that much easier to strip all the guns and superstructure off a cruiser and slap on a flight deck than it is to just build a ship that has a flight deck. It's not just there as a technological limitation. It's to stop the player from building purpose-built carriers right off the bat. It's the same reason you have to research dreadnaughts in RTW1.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on May 15, 2019 14:20:51 GMT -6
14k ton AVs that are converted into CVLs provide a full aircraft compliment, middle of the road speed, and splinter armor while also maintaining a decent AA suite as seen below. The frustrating thing I've noted though is the spike in construction time for AVs. They seem to move upwards in months nicely till you reach 10...then they spike up to 19 and seem to stay there. So I tried to build the best AV I could while maintaining the 10 month build time. Got it all finished design wise and then went to produce it and discovered it had jumped up to 19 for some reason. Went back to look at the design to see if anything had changed and it still read as 10 months. Don't know if thats a bug or if AVs of a certain size or complexity are just limited that way. Those out of date CLs you're stuck with at the start of the game, those in the 4k+ range, make for quick (hanger-less) AV conversions. Seems to require 6 aircraft or more but i've managed to make one with 5 and still have it count as an AV. How do you have catapults in 1920? I've never unlocked them, even by 1925.
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on May 15, 2019 14:21:53 GMT -6
14k ton AVs that are converted into CVLs provide a full aircraft compliment, middle of the road speed, and splinter armor while also maintaining a decent AA suite as seen below. The frustrating thing I've noted though is the spike in construction time for AVs. They seem to move upwards in months nicely till you reach 10...then they spike up to 19 and seem to stay there. So I tried to build the best AV I could while maintaining the 10 month build time. Got it all finished design wise and then went to produce it and discovered it had jumped up to 19 for some reason. Went back to look at the design to see if anything had changed and it still read as 10 months. Don't know if thats a bug or if AVs of a certain size or complexity are just limited that way. Those out of date CLs you're stuck with at the start of the game, those in the 4k+ range, make for quick (hanger-less) AV conversions. Seems to require 6 aircraft or more but i've managed to make one with 5 and still have it count as an AV. How do you have catapults in 1920? I've never unlocked them, even by 1925. Those aren't cats. They're cranes that I modeled in myself.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 15, 2019 19:34:18 GMT -6
I'm curious as to whether people think adding bulges during carrier conversion is worthwhile - you get around 500 more tons to work with at the cost of around 10% of the design speed.
Some example CVL conversions for comparing with and without bulges, if you haven't played around with it yourself: From left to right: Original configuration, bulged CVL (oblong flight deck), same-engine CVL without bulges (hourglass flight deck), same-speed CVL without bulges (rectangular flight deck).
Save file is in the attached zip file, in case anyone wants to look at what I did in more detail or play around with the same designs yourself (it's a Game 1 save).
Attachments:ThatIsTheQuestion.zip (439.14 KB)
|
|
|
Post by charliezulu on May 15, 2019 20:21:51 GMT -6
I'm curious as to whether people think adding bulges during carrier conversion is worthwhile - you get around 500 more tons to work with at the cost of around 10% of the design speed.
Some example CVL conversions for comparing with and without bulges, if you haven't played around with it yourself: From left to right: Original configuration, bulged CVL (oblong flight deck), same-engine CVL without bulges (hourglass flight deck), same-speed CVL without bulges (rectangular flight deck).
Save file is in the attached zip file, in case anyone wants to look at what I did in more detail or play around with the same designs yourself (it's a Game 1 save).
I messed around with carrier rebuilds for a few hours today because they'll probably play an important part in the initial 1920s-30s CV "meta". I'm not sure of the exact impact on cost, but if you rebuild with bulges AND replace machinery for a higher speed, you get no speed penalty. Of course, this is marginally useful in a lot of cases where you're not carrying around the ~3 kt of displacement needed for a CVL conversion (airgroup, less the 500t bonus displacement and weight savings from new machinery) in something that can be easily removed, and it's not always cost effective versus just making a new AV and converting it for almost no cost.
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on May 15, 2019 20:36:15 GMT -6
I think it’s kind of weird to have purpose built CVs behind a tech wall. I’m not sure it’s that much easier to strip all the guns and superstructure off a cruiser and slap on a flight deck than it is to just build a ship that has a flight deck. It's not just there as a technological limitation. It's to stop the player from building purpose-built carriers right off the bat. It's the same reason you have to research dreadnaughts in RTW1. I think it's more as a workaround to demonstrate the initial resistance to the carrier idea by the "battleship Admirals". Sure, in 1920 any nation probably could have built carriers, but it was controversial. I assumed that Dreads were initially locked off both partially as a result of doctrine, but also difficulty in compressing machinery spaces down enough to accommodate the turret/barbette/magazines. I'm curious as to whether people think adding bulges during carrier conversion is worthwhile - you get around 500 more tons to work with at the cost of around 10% of the design speed.
Some example CVL conversions for comparing with and without bulges, if you haven't played around with it yourself:
From left to right: Original configuration, bulged CVL (oblong flight deck), same-engine CVL without bulges (hourglass flight deck), same-speed CVL without bulges (rectangular flight deck).
Save file is in the attached zip file, in case anyone wants to look at what I did in more detail or play around with the same designs yourself (it's a Game 1 save).
I bulged a 4,500t CL, turned it into a CVL and thus managed to get it to carry 8 aircraft. I'd say that's a pretty good complement for a mid-sized CL conversion.
|
|
|
Post by pirateradar on May 15, 2019 20:45:03 GMT -6
Yes, it's my impression that the limitations on building keel-up CVs and CVLs at first is to properly simulate skepticism of such designs. 1920 is just about when purpose-built CVLs were starting to be laid down--I haven't gone poking around the tech files yet to see what year the game thinks keel-up CVs should start showing up.
Edit: according to the tech files purpose-built CVLs are a 1920 tech and purpose-built CVs are a 1926 tech.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 15, 2019 20:47:21 GMT -6
I'm not sure of the exact impact on cost, but if you rebuild with bulges AND replace machinery for a higher speed, you get no speed penalty. Fuji and its sisterships were 18kn predreadnoughts; since a viable CVL on the 1920 start needs to hit at least 20 knots, all of them were rebuilt for higher speeds. The bulged version came out of the rebuild two knots slower than its design speed of 23 knots without having a "failed to make design speed" event; the non-bulged CVL conversion with the same engine rebuild was designed for 23 knots and made 23 knots without having a "failed to make design speed" event. The (0 knots) that can show up next to the Bulged checkbox is almost certainly a display bug. According to ResearchAreas2.dat, purpose-built CVLs should become available c.1920, CV conversions should become available c.1921, and purpose-built CVs should become available c.1926. I suspect that there's a nontrivial risk of getting the tech late, though.
|
|
|
Post by charliezulu on May 15, 2019 21:12:07 GMT -6
I'm not sure of the exact impact on cost, but if you rebuild with bulges AND replace machinery for a higher speed, you get no speed penalty. Fuji and its sisterships were 18kn predreadnoughts; since a viable CVL on the 1920 start needs to hit at least 20 knots, all of them were rebuilt for higher speeds. The bulged version came out of the rebuild two knots slower than its design speed of 23 knots without having a "failed to make design speed" event; the non-bulged CVL conversion with the same engine rebuild was designed for 23 knots and made 23 knots without having a "failed to make design speed" event. The (0 knots) that can show up next to the Bulged checkbox is almost certainly a display bug. Hmm. After testing, it definitely seems to be a display bug. No exploiting bulging then to make a ~1905 fleet of small battlecruisers ready for quick conversion as soon as the techs show up.
|
|
|
Post by dougphresh on May 16, 2019 0:10:09 GMT -6
It’s converting those Bs I worry about. Although better auto-build logic would help. Too big to be CVEs too slow to be CVs.
|
|
|
Post by Sven on May 16, 2019 2:26:02 GMT -6
i guess in my Campaign i will wait until i can build CVLs and CVs from scratch.
I tried to convert some existing ships into CVLs, since the British have the technology for that at start.
First, i got all error messages both imaginable and unimaginable. So, i played around a bit, and i got it to work, but the resulting carrier was an abomination!
I am thankful for that you CAN do it, but i think i will pass on that matter.
|
|
tc27
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by tc27 on May 16, 2019 2:48:52 GMT -6
Interesting - I found converting existing pre dreads into CVLs pretty easy right from the start. As as the B's the game generates are around 15k tons they can hold a useful airgroup.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 16, 2019 3:08:14 GMT -6
i guess in my Campaign i will wait until i can build CVLs and CVs from scratch. I tried to convert some existing ships into CVLs, since the British have the technology for that at start. First, i got all error messages both imaginable and unimaginable. So, i played around a bit, and i got it to work, but the resulting carrier was an abomination! I am thankful for that you CAN do it, but i think i will pass on that matter. There was historically not good carriers. It is because there were new and all designs war just test. They used ship which they have plenty of them and would be scrapped. Only better was Lexington class as it was large and light hull - lightly armoured.
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on May 16, 2019 13:21:51 GMT -6
How the hell AI? Seriously! WTF? Somehow the UK AI appears to have managed to convert a pair of BCs into CVLs when I couldn't manage the same in any UK game I played. I've played enough of the demo now to know the AI is lucky to complete even one CVL conversion before the end of the game. So I was amazingly surprised when I checked in on the Almanac playing as Japan in early 1923 and found that not only had the Brits managed to convert a PAIR of CVLs...they were made from ****ing BCs! And they were parked on my doorstep because of a flair up of tensions between Russia and Japan(The Brits were cool with me). I'd say it was probably because i'd managed to convert 5 pre-dreds into CVLs early on and had a sixth AV to CVL conversion in the works. Still...kinda frustrating when they can seemingly bend the rules for these sorts of things. Attachments:
|
|