Build doctrines for 1920 legacy fleet, in lieu of manual bld

[rimbecano]

I understand the rationale for not allowing manual legacy fleets for 1920 starts, but it does create some problems. I find that it's very difficult to get a 1920 US start where the legacy fleet does not include ships that both:

A) Significantly depart from my personal build doctrine. That is, not just deviate from the way that I would prefer to build them, but deviate to the extent that I would likely throw out a ship gained in a peace treaty without even considering whether its technology is up to date.

and

B) Significantly depart from the historical build doctrine of the US Navy.

Now, this isn't entirely unsurprising, as many elements of my build doctrine are similar to that of the historical USN, but it's really frustrating to be given things like non-cross firing wing turrets (I really don't like turrets that don't fire on both broadsides), or second-from-the-end turrets that aren't superfiring, when the USN never built a single dreadnought with such features. (Getting Gangut-style battlecruisers is especially frustrating).

I suggest that the player be given a few inputs into the legacy fleet design process. Not in terms of any direct influence over individual designs, but boxes or dropdowns that influence the behavior of the auto-builder. For example:

"Battlecruisers: Firepower over armor" -> Gives "British style" battlecruisers. For flavor, tooltip could say "Speed is armor!"
"Battlecruisers: Armor over firepower" -> Gives "German style" battlecruisers.
"No Battlecruisers"
"No wing turrets"
"All main guns must bear on both sides" -> No wing turrets without CDF.
"Prioritize front / rear superfiring" -> Select whether to prefer a front or rear superfiring turret if technology allows both options, but only three centerline turrets (or if using a template with only three turrets).
"Use at least 1/2 superfiring turrets if available" -> If technology and the number of centerline turrets being used for the design allows, use at least 1 (or 2) superfiring turrets.
"No superfiring"
"Use at least N triple turrets if available" -> Places at least N triple turrets (unless the total number of turrets on the ship is lower)
"Use at least N quadruple turrets if available" -> As above.

A player desiring a US-style fleet mix might select "No battlecruisers", "No wing turrets", "Prioritize front superfiring", "Use at least 2 superfiring turrets if available", and "use 2 triple turrets if available".

A player desiring a similar fleet mix, but allowing ships with a Lion-style layout would use the same options, except for "Use at least 1 superfiring turret if available" in place of "Use at least 2...".

A player desiring a fleet of Gangut-style ships would select "No wing turrets", "No superfiring", and "Use at least 4 triple turrets if available".

As has been suggested before, it would also be fun to have a "Use historical fleets" setting, where all nations use the legacy fleets that they had in history (scaled for game size).

[captainloggy]

I agree that the legacy fleet builder could be improved (thinking of a glass-cannon Gangut-style battlecruiser with short range, low freeboard AND cramped accomodations I got as Japan once), though I think you'd gratly enjoy seawolf 's h1922 historical legacy fleet mod as an alternative.

[cabalamat]

The way it could work is the program has designs for actual ships of the various countries and bases the built ships loosely on those designs. So when building ships for Britain, they might look like the Queen Elizabeth or Rodney classes; for Japan, like the nagato, for USA, like the Standard battleships, etc.

[aeson]

Mar 21, 2020 0:22:52 GMT -6 rimbecano said:

second-from-the-end turrets that aren't superfiring, when the USN never built a single dreadnought with such features.

The Florida and Delaware classes might dispute that; their three rear-most turrets correspond most closely to a VWY configuration in the game.

[rimbecano]

Mar 21, 2020 8:41:48 GMT -6 aeson said:

Mar 21, 2020 0:22:52 GMT -6 rimbecano said:

second-from-the-end turrets that aren't superfiring, when the USN never built a single dreadnought with such features.

The Florida and Delaware classes might dispute that; their three rear-most turrets correspond most closely to a VWY configuration in the game.

Oh, interesting. The big thing that annoys me, though, is that all of my most modern BCs in a 1920 US start seem to be either Lions or Ganguts, both types not having four turrets without rear superfiring (or any superfiring, for the Ganguts). If there are four or more turrets, I want both front and rear superfiring, and so did the historical USN.

[dorn]

Mar 21, 2020 11:58:26 GMT -6 rimbecano said:

Mar 21, 2020 8:41:48 GMT -6 aeson said:

The Florida and Delaware classes might dispute that; their three rear-most turrets correspond most closely to a VWY configuration in the game.

Oh, interesting. The big thing that annoys me, though, is that all of my most modern BCs in a 1920 US start seem to be either Lions or Ganguts, both types not having four turrets without rear superfiring (or any superfiring, for the Ganguts). If there are four or more turrets, I want both front and rear superfiring, and so did the historical USN.

The issue is that designs used by AI is based on historical ships. As USA had no battlecruiser, they always use general battlecruiser design for that period. 
And the creation of design is limited in way how AI adopt. They add guns to turret, remove or add turret but I cannot remember to see that AI change position to turret. Gangut type is quite often everywhere even if only Russia build such battleships. Battleship without at least one superfiring turret was mainly the first dreadnoughts only and Russian battleships.

[captainloggy]

The Italian Dante Alighieri also used such a turret arrangement.

[aeson]

There's also the French Normandie class, which would have used a three-turret variation on the linear arrangement if any had been completed as battleships, though the outbreak of the First World War meant that work on the five ships of the class was suspended, and four were scrapped incomplete in the early-mid 1920s while the fifth was completed as an aircraft carrier.

[alant]

Trying to start a 1920 scenario as US player and OMG what trashy battle cruisers.

All or nearly all are both Short Range and Cramped. Pretty much useless as I see them. Tried half a dozen different starts, with and without Washington Naval Treaty. All of them were like that. Usually some of the BBs were also short ranged. Didn't check DDs each time, but when I did half or those were Short Range.

STOP IT!!! Just stop it.

Is there anything simple (my skill level) that a player can do about this?

[aeson]

Scrap all of them and use the money you save to build decent ships?

If you want to try your hand at modding, you could also replace the ship design templates, though I would strongly recommend making a backup of the original files before doing so. The easiest way to create a new ship template file is to open the Ship Design menu in the game, create and save a ship design, find the design file in the save folder, open it with a text editor, and save a copy of it under the name of the template you want to replace using the *.tdf extension rather than the *.x0d extension used for player ship design files - you should be able to do that with a basic text editor like NotePad.

[alant]

Oct 2, 2020 8:39:25 GMT -6 aeson said:

Scrap all of them and use the money you save to build decent ships?

If you want to try your hand at modding, you could also replace the ship design templates, though I would strongly recommend making a backup of the original files before doing so. The easiest way to create a new ship template file is to open the Ship Design menu in the game, create and save a ship design, find the design file in the save folder, open it with a text editor, and save a copy of it under the name of the template you want to replace using the *.tdf extension rather than the *.x0d extension used for player ship design files - you should be able to do that with a basic text editor like NotePad.

Scrapping and then building an entirely new fleet doesn't make sense. First off, it wouldn't be ready for years leaving you vulnerable for too long. Second, would you have the budget to start building a 1 for 1 replacement fleet? 

Not real interested in learning to mod. Also wouldn't be "fair" to mod just my own ships and leave the rest of the world with crap designs.

Is there a set of downloadable/importable Mods for various years with or without the various treaties?

[wlbjork]

Nov 3, 2020 14:13:11 GMT -6 alant said:

Oct 2, 2020 8:39:25 GMT -6 aeson said:

Scrap all of them and use the money you save to build decent ships?

If you want to try your hand at modding, you could also replace the ship design templates, though I would strongly recommend making a backup of the original files before doing so. The easiest way to create a new ship template file is to open the Ship Design menu in the game, create and save a ship design, find the design file in the save folder, open it with a text editor, and save a copy of it under the name of the template you want to replace using the *.tdf extension rather than the *.x0d extension used for player ship design files - you should be able to do that with a basic text editor like NotePad.

Scrapping and then building an entirely new fleet doesn't make sense. First off, it wouldn't be ready for years leaving you vulnerable for too long. Second, would you have the budget to start building a 1 for 1 replacement fleet? 

Not real interested in learning to mod. Also wouldn't be "fair" to mod just my own ships and leave the rest of the world with crap designs.

Is there a set of downloadable/importable Mods for various years with or without the various treaties?

You could try SeaWolf's Historical Start Mod. Should give you historically accurate ships for 1920 per nation.

There are also mods for 1936 and 1900. Note that these are really pre-made save games rather than having modified game files.

[alant]

I've downloaded the 1936 start mod and have got it running. Looks pretty cool.