|
Post by stevethecat on Jul 6, 2021 11:28:15 GMT -6
From the moment the game unlocks CVLs I set about making miniature fleet carriers capable of 29-32 knots, at these early stages that is obviously a massive compromise as the game is very harsh when it comes to weights. But having CVL's that can keep up with the fleet or outrun enemy combatants is worth it to me, until the game decides it wants to yeet them in another direction anyway...
But doing research on the development of aircraft carriers it seems that history went a different way, from escort carriers which were 16-20 knots to the first light carriers which were 20-25, it seems historical navies chose against speed.
Am I wasting manufacturing budget and hull weight on unnecessary power?
Will have to do some ingame research to see how many 20-25 knot CVLs I can make for the same cost as 30 knot CVLs with equivalent airframes.
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Jul 6, 2021 11:55:17 GMT -6
Stevethecat, I usually don't build many dedicated CVLs. Normally my converted CVLs end up in the 20-23 knot range. Purpose built CVs generally end up in the 26-29 knots range. I do build AVs, that usually end up being about the same speed as the CVLs or CVs depending on tech level. In my current game they hold 12 float planes and run 28 knots. They are my carrier force in the backwaters of the French empire - currently at war with Germany and Japan in 1925. From a resource standpoint, I don't see a notable difference in cost for the increase in speed. On purpose built CVs, I do notice the smaller air-groups (and reduced AC spotting) or anti-air capabilities that arise from the decreased free tonnage that the machinery takes up. I know that I'm out of the ideal HP to speed curve when the machinery tonnage for a knot jumps up an extra couple hundred tons compared to the tonnage increase that the prior knot took. The curve changes with technologies and I believe ship displacement. A couple hundred free tons is often enough to turn a 3" battery into 4" or a 4" battery to 5", add a bunch of shells to the main battery or add a couple of planes which can increase your spotting ability. I do like speed, especially in night battles where I can control the carriers and get them out of the danger zone. But, when I can't stop air operations to run away from the enemy, I really put a premium on the ability to get an extra fighter / or larger strike group getting airborne and a wall of fire from the ship (HA ability and or extra ammo for the main DP guns). Generally speaking I like my CVLs to have a min. spotting ability of 14 with an ideal being 16+ (air group low 30s with catapults), CVs I like a spotting ability above 40 with an ideal around 48-50 (usually I have air-groups around the mid 80s to low 90s).
With the AVs, they are cheap enough that I don't worry about losing them and they listen to orders - they don't provide fighter support, but the float planes can attack enemy airbases and otherwise aid in suppressing enemy fleet maneuvers (generally don't sink anything in my experience though). They are well supported by old DDs and CLs that run interference for them - AI hates torps, so it doesn't press home its advantage in larger ships. Generally the AVs are well behaved and even though mine are slowish they don't seem to get taken down by enemy surface ships.
On gun or torpedo platforms, BBs down to DDs, speed is a premium as want to be able to run down ships or escape from the bigger and badder ships. So I don't pay real close attention to the HP to speed curve.
|
|
|
Post by DeMatt on Jul 6, 2021 15:26:39 GMT -6
Eh, I think 29-32 knots for a 1920s CVL is too fast. That's over CL speeds and almost to DD speeds. It's probably a bit much for 1930s, as well, depending on how much threat you think BC/CA are going to be. 1940s is where I think that speed would be reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by sjpc302 on Jul 6, 2021 15:37:50 GMT -6
Once purpose built carriers are unlocked, I could consider a fast cheap CVL for secondary theaters if you are playing someone like the Americans or British. Before then, its a question of what you might expect them to do. If you expect to be outnumbered and will need your carriers to make a hasty retreat, then a higher speed would be good. If you are confident in your chances in a gun engagement, then just enough to keep up with your battle line should do. The one thing I would not ever do is compromise on the number of aircraft. In my next playthrough, I'm considering curtailing land-based air significantly and going for lots of cheap CVLs to supplement my CVs, since land based air is expensive and hardly ever does what you need it to.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jul 6, 2021 18:04:26 GMT -6
Eh, I think 29-32 knots for a 1920s CVL is too fast. That's over CL speeds and almost to DD speeds. It's probably a bit much for 1930s, as well, depending on how much threat you think BC/CA are going to be. 1940s is where I think that speed would be reasonable. 29-32 knots is in my opinion hardly an overly-fast speed for a modern 1920s CL, and it is certainly not unreasonably fast for such a cruiser by historical standards; an 'official' top speed of around 28 or 29 knots was fairly typical for a modern cruiser by the mid-1910s, and by the late 1910s or early 1920s you're starting to see things like the 33-knot Tenryus and Emeralds or the 35- or 36-knot Omahas and Kumas. Within the game, I typically aim for 29 knots on CLs by the mid 1910s, though I usually don't increase cruiser speeds much beyond that. As to stevethecat's question about CVL speeds, I would say that it depends to a large degree on how you envisage the ship being used. It is true that period CVLs typically had speeds in the low to mid 20s, but period CVLs were generally envisaged as in essence an appendage of the battle line, providing reconnaissance while the fleet was cruising and staying out of the way in a fight, so a top speed of around 20 or 25 knots was considered adequate - fast enough to maneuver relative to the fleet and conduct flight operations while everyone's cruising around at ten or maybe fifteen knots or more or less keep up at battle speed, which even in the absence of the treaties probably wouldn't normally be much over 25 knots in most navies into the early '30s, if not later, since the 23- to 25-knot battleships cancelled at Washington and perhaps even some of the 21-knot superdreadnoughts of the 1910s would likely still be a nontrivial component of the full battle line. If on the other hand you envisage the carrier as part of the cruiser / scouting force operating relatively far from the support of heavy warships, or if you see the future and are an early proponent of an independent carrier striking force, then you most likely want your carriers to have speeds more comparable to contemporary cruisers and battle cruisers as they 'need' the speed so that they can more easily evade trouble, get into striking position before an enemy can stop them, and so on. The later 'fast' CVL / 'slow' CVE divide likewise comes down to envisaged role - the CVL is a fleet unit and so has to be able to more or less keep up with other modern fleet elements at battle speeds and hopefully operate front-line aircraft without restrictions while the CVE is a second- or third-line unit that only really needs to be fast enough to maneuver relative to a convoy and operate its aircraft under normal weather conditions - often at something rather less than full combat load. Thus, you get 20- to 25-knot speeds for many early carriers and 15- to 20-knot speeds for many escort carriers since that was good enough for the role that they were meant to fulfill while the more modern fleet carriers had higher speeds. Within the game, I prefer for my carriers to be capable of at least 29 knots as I want to be able to operate my carriers as a homogeneous unit regardless of which carriers I get for a battle and also need a speed in the high 20s to keep up with 1910s battle cruisers or 1920s and later fast battleships at battle speed, though conversions and sometimes early purpose-built carriers will be slower as I consider a large air group more important than the carrier's other characteristics. As such, I cannot say that I consider 29-32 knots to be too fast for an early CVL, though my own tend to end up around 25-27 knots if I build them in the early- or mid-'20s.
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Jul 7, 2021 9:45:18 GMT -6
Within the game, I prefer for my carriers to be capable of at least 29 knots as I want to be able to operate my carriers as a homogeneous unit regardless of which carriers I get for a battle and also need a speed in the high 20s to keep up with 1910s battle cruisers or 1920s and later fast battleships at battle speed, though conversions and sometimes early purpose-built carriers will be slower as I consider a large air group more important than the carrier's other characteristics. As such, I cannot say that I consider 29-32 knots to be too fast for an early CVL, though my own tend to end up around 25-27 knots if I build them in the early- or mid-'20s.
Aeson,
Would you be willing to explain the advantage of the carriers in having sufficient speed to keep up with the battle line - "...need a speed in the high 20s to keep up with 1910s battle cruisers or 1920s and later fast battleships at battle speed..."?
Is it to provide CAP to the battle line / damaged capital ships? I've been having an issue with extending CAP to formations in the Scouting Force (which almost always encompasses my battle line) - nws-online.proboards.com/post/84045/thread. As I now know some work-arounds, I'm currently experimenting with new carrier management procedures to circumvent the issue.
As I couldn't get consistent CAP to my scout BCs line and given the random vectoring the carriers do for launching and retrieving AC, I've found that by 1930 my attack AC almost always have sufficient range that I can and do put the carriers on a slow to moderate 16-22 knot speed with a heading parallel or away from the expected battle location. I normally assign a squadron of AAA equipped DD or CL and I seriously check on them every 20-30 turns. In the 1920s I generally do the same, but will try to keep them closer to the battle line and I'll seriously check on them ever 5 or so turns; I try to keep the carriers a comfortable 15-40 miles back (depending on AC range and weather conditions). I've lost one CV to enemy ships and I think two CVLs with this strategy.
|
|
|
Post by director on Jul 7, 2021 11:14:44 GMT -6
I don't use my scarce CVL-CV units for anti-sub work or for aircover over an invasion beach, as in real life, since the game only indirectly lets you do that. In-game, all CVL-CV units must be capable of combat, so I settle on a minimum of 27 knots. Going faster doesn't seem to speed up air ops, so I'd rather spend the tonnage on big air-groups.
I have not experimented with building a lot of 20-plane CVEs with 20-22 knot speed for ASW work. Does anyone know if that has value?
Two reasons for having CVs and capital ships with roughly similar speeds: the capital ships can carry a lot of AA and the AI absolutely loves to make a dash at your carriers come nightfall.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 7, 2021 11:26:12 GMT -6
I don't use my scarce CVL-CV units for anti-sub work or for aircover over an invasion beach, as in real life, since the game only indirectly lets you do that. In-game, all CVL-CV units must be capable of combat, so I settle on a minimum of 27 knots. Going faster doesn't seem to speed up air ops, so I'd rather spend the tonnage on big air-groups. I have not experimented with building a lot of 20-plane CVEs with 20-22 knot speed for ASW work. Does anyone know if that has value? Two reasons for having CVs and capital ships with roughly similar speeds: the capital ships can carry a lot of AA and the AI absolutely loves to make a dash at your carriers come nightfall. Here is what I build for ASW in the carrier class. It also has 18 AA guns. and good speed.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jul 7, 2021 12:47:24 GMT -6
Within the game, I prefer for my carriers to be capable of at least 29 knots as I want to be able to operate my carriers as a homogeneous unit regardless of which carriers I get for a battle and also need a speed in the high 20s to keep up with 1910s battle cruisers or 1920s and later fast battleships at battle speed, though conversions and sometimes early purpose-built carriers will be slower as I consider a large air group more important than the carrier's other characteristics. As such, I cannot say that I consider 29-32 knots to be too fast for an early CVL, though my own tend to end up around 25-27 knots if I build them in the early- or mid-'20s.
Aeson,
Would you be willing to explain the advantage of the carriers in having sufficient speed to keep up with the battle line - "...need a speed in the high 20s to keep up with 1910s battle cruisers or 1920s and later fast battleships at battle speed..."? Proximity has a significant impact on CAP. The further your fighters have to fly to get on station, the less time they can spend overhead and the fewer fighters you can have on station at any given moment while maintaining continuous coverage. If my fighters have four hours endurance, then in order to maintain X fighters continuously on station I need to have at least 2X fighters when the carriers are an hour away, 4X fighters when the carriers are 90 minutes away, 8X fighters when the carriers are 105 minutes away, and so on.* The closer my carriers are to the ships I want them to provide CAP for, the better. Furthermore, when you're dealing with ships operating at 20+ knots it really doesn't take very long for a lot of space to open up between the carriers and the formation they're supposed to be supporting - especially since the carrier's maneuvers during flight operations frequently won't confirm to the battle line's maneuvers - and as such you ideally want a carrier to be able to outrun the battle line so that it can make up a bit of lost ground rather than falling ever farther behind as the battle goes on. That becomes less of a concern later as air power becomes preeminent, but as long as the big gun is dominant you want to preserve the battle line's freedom of action as much as possible; you don't want to be breaking off just because your carriers have gotten too far away from the fight to maintain adequate air cover with the fighters that they have left. * Another way to look at this: If I have X fighters on my carriers and they have four hours endurance, then the maximum number of fighters I can maintain continuously over my battle line is 0.5X when my carriers are an hour away, 0.25X when my carriers are 90 minutes away, 0.125X when my carriers are 105 minutes away, et cetera. If I have 40 fighters in my two CVLs, the fighters cruise at 100 knots, and my carriers are 150 nmi away from my battleships, the maximum CAP strength I can maintain over the battleships is 10 fighters - and more realistically something rather less than that as I will also want to use some of my fighters for CAP over the carriers and may also be using some of the fighters for reconnaissance, strike escort, or strike missions, so after you deduct all that my 40 fighters may add up to only 3 or 4 on station over the battleships at any given moment. And that's before I lose fighters to accidents and battle damage.
|
|
|
Post by kriegsmeister on Jul 7, 2021 13:07:22 GMT -6
For me, because of the lack of a ability to override the computers incessant need to fly into the wind at all times. I actually find higher speeds to be counterproductive and leave my carrier designs at the minimum speed to match the bulk of my battlefleet. CVLs tend to stay at around 20-22 knots of the first CA conversions. CVs stay 24kts if my battle line is still slower than that and deck catapults haven't been invented yet. If my battle line is faster when I start making a homogeneous fast battleship, than the CVS will match that speed whether it be anywhere from 28-32knots.
Simply put you can't control a carrier while it's conducting flight ops and it takes hours to try and stop cap manually and only really stops when everything autolands before nightfall. Because of this when your carriers get spotted by enemy ships, they wouldn't even be able to use their speed to runaway, and are just as likely to sail directly into the enemy guns. So the only effective way of protecting them is having good screening forces that can shoo hostiles away. But in the meantime keep your carriers as cheap as possible with low speeds and little to no armor so that inevitable losses don't hurt as much.
|
|
|
Post by gurudennis on Jul 7, 2021 16:14:03 GMT -6
You can absolutely build cheap dedicated CVLs that are only slightly faster than your main battle line (BB) with a view to a fighter-dominated loadout. By the time aircraft become a serious threat, this probably means 25-ish kts for the BBs and therefore perhaps 27-ish kts for a CVL to be effective. Of course, fleet carriers will always be more cost-effective both per aircraft and per ton, but CVLs are easier to spare in secondary theaters and cheaper to lose to inevitable fires.
|
|
|
Post by dohboy on Jul 7, 2021 18:54:39 GMT -6
I used to be one of the people who didn't see much value in high speed for CV/CVL. The more I see, the higher speed I go for.
Carriers are practically useless for me unless I get them well out to the flanks. They will drop every munition on a sinking hulk while the enemy retreats. The carriers spend nearly half their time running 30 knts into the wind, if that's the opposite direction as I need to go my only real gain is however much higher my max speed is, and the initial run before air ops begin. I will give up aircraft to put munitions on the right targets.
|
|
|
Post by nimrod on Jul 7, 2021 19:43:38 GMT -6
Thank you for the in depth reply Aeson.
kriegsmeister's experience matches my own.
Dohboy's point on AC attacking sinking ships is familiar to me. I've found that I invariably launch strikes ASAP based on the heading of the main and scout force. I'll generally hold a ready second strike; and it is usually sent on the fringes of where I think the battle is developing - this helps to avoid the attack sinking ships while also disrupting enemy retreats so that damaged ships can re-engage.
|
|
|
Post by mobeer on Jul 8, 2021 3:06:20 GMT -6
For an early carrier with only torpedo bombers then high speed might be a nice to have but will be very expensive as engines are underdeveloped. Once fighters (hence CAP) are carried then the carrier becomes near uncontrollable, at which point high speed is a liability.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jul 8, 2021 4:12:49 GMT -6
You can use patrol for carrier division to remain in area. Such division will turn to wind if aircraft is launched or recovered howerer it tries to remain in patrol area if possible.
|
|