DLC, an Italy AAR

[w2c]

I'm also eager to see more! I haven't been following the released details religiously but have spotted several changes and really happy about everything I've seen so far. Looking forward to seeing more!

[jatzi]

You have so many. I'd say convert some to CVL's. As you said they're cheap. I'd also consider the above suggestion of turning some into AV's. I might even consider turning one or two into a pseudo battlecarrier. It's not actually possible in the game with the ship designer limits as well as the lack of proper floatplane fighters/bombers. I don't think CAP will even consider using a floatplane even if it has weapons. But FS can carry bombs. It'd be expensive but interesting to do an engine rebuild on a pre-dread, drop the rear turrets, and add in as many floatplane scouts as you can get on there. Raise the speed maybe too a bit. Just a thought

[garrisonchisholm]

A meeting with the King

"Your Majesty I have inaugurated the new divisional structure as we previously discussed, and you will be pleased to note the 1st Battle Squadron has indeed been vested under the authority of your son-in-law, Contrammiraglio Simola."

(Pressing the Division Editor button on the main screen opens divisions, where you can create and assign type to divisions, as well as assign ships and a divisional commander)

"As it has been it shall remain stationed in the Indian Ocean where it gives moment to the distinct direction of your Royal designs."

King Victor Emmanuel III regarded the map before him with an absent air before speaking.

"I desire 3 things for Rome; Order, Prosperity, and Legacy.  The first is the province of the Army, the second is Mine, and the third is yours.  See that Italy is well respected by History, Luigi.  ...See that our Fatherland stays well respected."

The King in fact took great pride in Italy's defeat of England 20 years before, and knew that the commercial rewards they had then reaped had been poured into that same navy which then defeated both Germany and later France.  If Italy was to grow on the global stage it would need to be outside of dead-locked Europe, and the Navy was the tool for that growth.

The King rose signaling the interview was over, and exited to his private offices, the door held open for him by a smiling and confident-seeming Major Domo, former Prime Minister Antonio Salandra.

[garrisonchisholm]

As a curiosity, if a wall of data would be forgiven I thought it might be interesting to post the complete ships logs for the 16 battleships that are the core of the fleet.  I am preparing to write Luigi's draft proposal for fleet composition and it looks like battlecruiser concept submissions will be requested as part of that, so the relative successes of these 16 ships may be informative.

Hopefully in order of commissioning;

[garrisonchisholm]

(It looks like it choked at 11, so here are the final 5)

[zederfflinger]

The expansion looks excellent, and I am very excited to try it out in the future! Have the turret models been updated? They look more detailed.

[garrisonchisholm]

Jan 3, 2022 17:24:28 GMT -6 zederfflinger said:

The expansion looks excellent, and I am very excited to try it out in the future! Have the turret models been updated? They look more detailed.

They have, though in fact the graphics in their entirety will have been improved.  I will hope to share as much of it as I can.  Turrets will be available in wide variety, by epoch and nationality.

[christian]

Interesting to see how the game progresses with the DLC DEV patches
looks like the italian AAR started in patch B-68 ? and currently we are in devpatch B-89

im assuming there are alot more to these devpatches "under the hood" that we dont see
the turret models look absolutely amazing in patch B-89 compared to B-88s old turrets i especially love the new barrels and the barbettes around the turrets




One thing i noticed when designing the Lepanto were the use of duals over triples, were triple turrets deemed too unreliable by navy staff? or was there a reason to go for 7 twin turrets over 4 or 5 triple turrets ?

[garrisonchisholm]

Jan 4, 2022 5:06:57 GMT -6 christian said:

Interesting to see how the game progresses with the DLC DEV patches
looks like the italian AAR started in patch B-68 ? and currently we are in devpatch B-89

im assuming there are alot more to these devpatches "under the hood" that we dont see
the turret models look absolutely amazing in patch B-89 compared to B-88s old turrets i especially love the new barrels and the barbettes around the turrets




One thing i noticed when designing the Lepanto were the use of duals over triples, were triple turrets deemed too unreliable by navy staff? or was there a reason to go for 7 twin turrets over 4 or 5 triple turrets ?

Oh, it was partly due to the late arrival of Improved Triple Turrets due to variable tech, and partly my fascination with irrational adoration of Agincourt.  ^.^

I am actually a bit surprised I have been able to "lift the hood" so completely, so you can thank williammiller for that. 

[christian]

Jan 4, 2022 9:05:05 GMT -6 garrisonchisholm said:

Jan 4, 2022 5:06:57 GMT -6 christian said:

Interesting to see how the game progresses with the DLC DEV patches
looks like the italian AAR started in patch B-68 ? and currently we are in devpatch B-89

im assuming there are alot more to these devpatches "under the hood" that we dont see
the turret models look absolutely amazing in patch B-89 compared to B-88s old turrets i especially love the new barrels and the barbettes around the turrets




One thing i noticed when designing the Lepanto were the use of duals over triples, were triple turrets deemed too unreliable by navy staff? or was there a reason to go for 7 twin turrets over 4 or 5 triple turrets ?

Oh, it was partly due to the late arrival of Improved Triple Turrets due to variable tech, and partly my fascination with irrational adoration of Agincourt.  ^.^

I am actually a bit surprised I have been able to "lift the hood" so completely, so you can thank williammiller for that. 

Thought it might have something to do with agincourt though you sure took one extra step with 14 inch rifles

I wonder what kind of naval aviation your naval staff pushes you to make

[garrisonchisholm]

A Prescription for a Modern Navy

    By direction of King and Crown I have considered all the available arguments regarding the new Fleet and seen this Eastern Fleet Development Plan drafted.  These steps must be mild at first but will culminate by decade's end with the realization of our final needs.  The Rich and ill-managed Dutch East Indies cannot be allowed to be absorbed by any other state, and while diplomacy has failed with regards to those territories the Navy will stand ready to ensure either their independence or their subsumption.

The following vessels have been deemed necessary for completion by 1930, predominantly for the Far Eastern Fleet.

4  Varese Class Heavy Cruisers

4  Light Carrier Conversions from the Leonardo da Vinci class, with a further 4 retained as mothballed for future determination (conversion or sold-off)

16 Nino Bixio light cruisers (8 building plus a further 8 over the next 4 years)

The above vessels shall be laid down by Dec 31st 1927, following which the state of global development of carriers shall be reviewed and a response designed if warranted.  It is also at this juncture during the 1st quarter of 1928 that designs will be considered for an appropriate new destroyer and our long overdue Battlecruiser or Fast Battleship.  The "GG" class of battlecruiser recently discussed will Not be pursued at this time.

To accompany this naval construction over the next 4 years it will be the Navy's intent to assure that a major aerodrome exists in each regional theatre of operations as well as associated satellite fields as economy allows.  With durable and powerful aircraft engines disappointingly absent the Navy will also seek to foster the development of such powerplants.

We shall hope war-weary Europe allows for a period of peace sufficient for the execution of these plans.

(it appears we have a balanced platform again so I am going to slowly take us through from the present May '24 to January '28, barring of course any game developments.  Thanks for your patience!)

[garrisonchisholm]

(FYI & FWIW some very significant updating is going on, so I once again am pausing just as I planned to start. This may be frustrating but I feel it is for the best, though for clarity's sake the degree of updating in process has been here-to-for unforeseen so I don't think I can yet call into question starting the project in the first place. I'm thinking within a week I'll know what we're dealing with!)

[aeson]

Jan 22, 2022 0:18:46 GMT -6 jatzi said:

Can we sell ships to other nations or is that sold-off bit just fluff? Because selling old ships to other nations would be very cool

You cannot sell ships to other powers, and I would hazard a guess that "sold off" is being used as a synonym for "scrapped," not as 'fluff' for a hypothetical sale of an obsolete ship to some other power. Most warships aren't actually scrapped by the navy that last possessed them - while naval shipyards are probably capable of taking a ship apart, that's not really what they're there for and it's not really the best use of the facility, at least insofar as the navy is concerned - but are instead sold to private concerns which then take the ships to various breakers' yards for scrapping, so the implication of a warship being "sold off" is that it's "sold off [to the breakers' yards]" or "sold off [for scrapping]."

Also, unless I'm missing something, the Leonardo da Vinci class is a ~13,000t 9"-gunned Brandenburg-esque predreadnought battleship with a design speed of 16 knots that dates back to the early 1890s - at least one of them was in commission in 1893 according to the list of ships sunk seen here, and given the name of the ship it wasn't the first of class; that post also indicates that the design year for the Leonardo da Vinci class is 1890, so while it might not quite have been a legacy design at game start it certainly isn't far removed from being such. I very much doubt that any major - or, for that matter, even minor - power would have any real interest in acquiring such an antiquated vessel in the 1930s, and if the game did allow you to sell old ships to other powers (even minor ones not directly represented in the game) then I would report any interest in acquiring a ship such as this as a bug, especially if anything more than scrap value was offered for it.

[jatzi]

Jan 22, 2022 1:17:38 GMT -6 aeson said:

Jan 22, 2022 0:18:46 GMT -6 jatzi said:

Can we sell ships to other nations or is that sold-off bit just fluff? Because selling old ships to other nations would be very cool

You cannot sell ships to other powers, and I would hazard a guess that "sold off" is being used as a synonym for "scrapped," not as 'fluff' for a hypothetical sale of an obsolete ship to some other power. Most warships aren't actually scrapped by the navy that last possessed them - while naval shipyards are probably capable of taking a ship apart, that's not really what they're there for and it's not really the best use of the facility, at least insofar as the navy is concerned - but are instead sold to private concerns which then take the ships to various breakers' yards for scrapping, so the implication of a warship being "sold off" is that it's "sold off [to the breakers' yards]" or "sold off [for scrapping]."

Also, unless I'm missing something, the Leonardo da Vinci class is a ~13,000t 9"-gunned Brandenburg-esque predreadnought battleship with a design speed of 16 knots that dates back to the early 1890s - at least one of them was in commission in 1893 according to the list of ships sunk seen here, and given the name of the ship it wasn't the first of class; that post also indicates that the design year for the Leonardo da Vinci class is 1890, so while it might not quite have been a legacy design at game start it certainly isn't far removed from being such. I very much doubt that any major - or, for that matter, even minor - power would have any real interest in acquiring such an antiquated vessel in the 1930s, and if the game did allow you to sell old ships to other powers (even minor ones not directly represented in the game) then I would report any interest in acquiring a ship such as this as a bug, especially if anything more than scrap value was offered for it.

By fluff I meant synonym for scrapped. And idk depends on the requirements a nation has. I know of tons of nations that have used equipment long after it's been determined to be obsolete by larger superpowers. Considering it a bug seems extreme. 

[aeson]

Jan 22, 2022 22:22:33 GMT -6 jatzi said:

And idk depends on the requirements a nation has. I know of tons of nations that have used equipment long after it's been determined to be obsolete by larger superpowers. Considering it a bug seems extreme. 

It's a ship whose design dates to about 1890 and which probably wasn't built much later. It's 30+ and more likely 35+ years old; it's very likely that its 9" main battery guns are Q-2 (so probably something like a later-mark British 9.2" / 31.5 such as was carried by the Blake and Edward classes) and probably have pretty low maximum elevation by 1930s standards; if it hasn't been bulged then it doesn't have any underwater protection to speak of; its armor might be 12.5" thick but is so old that it's probably no better than half that thickness of modern armor (I'd expect a nickel-steel armor, which historically probably needed to be ~40% thicker than even the early Krupp armor of the mid-1890s to achieve a similar level of protection given that 10.2" early Krupp armor ~ 12" contemporary Harvey armor and 13" Harvey armor ~ 15.5" contemporary nickel-steel armor); its obsolescence means that the Italian navy probably hasn't bothered doing any significant maintenance on it for the last two decades, so its engines are likely worn out, its bottom is probably in poor condition and riddled with leaks, and any internal "watertight" bulkheads it may have probably ceased to be even a fair approximation of watertight a decade or more ago.

Also, I would regard it as quite likely that a 15- to 25-year-old cruiser or a cheap modern-ish destroyer-type vessel would better fit the requirements of even a minor power's navy than a battleship such as this - if nothing else, both the cruiser and the destroyer would be significantly faster, the cruiser might and the destroyer almost certainly would have lower crew requirements, and unless the battleship was fairly thoroughly modernized at some point in the last 20 years it'd probably be easier to find repair parts for the cruiser and the destroyer than for the battleship since the latter was already obsolete 30 years ago - and would probably be available at a competitive cost (especially a cruiser at the older end of the range given, since a major power which has a cruiser in that age bracket is probably looking to get rid of it). Oh, and whatever passes for the antiquated battleship's electrical systems are probably even more of an overburdened and jury-rigged mess than a turn-of-the-century cruiser's would be.