How much armor for Aircraft Carriers?

[serenity]

How much armor for aircraft carriers is worthwhile? I usually do a 6 in belt and 2 in regular deck and 2 in hangar sides and deck for splinter protection, as well as armor my turrets with 2 in top and bottom. I also use unit machinery and torpedo protection 4. Is this overkill? Should I go unarmored or splinter protection only? Should I armor my carriers early game but not late game?

[wlbjork]

Depends where in the game you are.

A 6" belt offers some protection from destroyers and light cruisers speeding in and wrecking the carriers vitals...however, late game thinner armour would help convert shots to 'passthrough' instead of damage. Key here is always to check armour vs penetration of 4"-6" guns.

Agree with 2" max on turrets to maximise splinter protection.

Late game though, you will want more deck armour. Bombs and long range plunging fire will sneer at 2" of deck armour.

I think you can get away without armouring the hangar.

Max TPS is vital. I understand TPS works outside of combat by making it more likely for a mine or submarine torpedo hit to send the ship to the yard for repairs rather than sinking it.

[Deleted]

7in steel slab all across the flight deck is the way to go. Nothing short of a lucky bomb or a mega huge gun at a super long range is ever going through that. And it also covers all the stuff under it.

[ludovic]

For CVs I go for 4" belt, 2" deck, no turret armor, and max TPS. In the past 5 or so campaigns I've only lost 1 carrier to surface or air attack, and that was in a night combat that I couldn't avoid and I was torpedoed. I use fighters as my armor. I use Elite Training and set my carriers on Active status, so when war rolls around my entire crew is usually Veterans and sometimes Expert. Then I have fighters to spare for my CAP which is on Heavy or Maximum. And I can spare the fighters because my Veteran and Expert dive and torpedo bombers don't need as much of an escort, sometimes going toe to toe with enemy CAP.

Then again, I play on Captain's Mode, so more armor might be better in other modes where you are not as able to avoid turning toward the enemy into the wind and thus avoid surface ships.

[sjpc302]

As far as I understand, some deck hits can ignore flight deck armor and only count deck. Of course, some hits also only hit flight deck and not deck. I would say a 2" deck is a minimum, 4.5" should do well before 1935 or so. After that, I often still go with 2" deck since the armor becomes prohibitively heavy. You could do something like 3" deck (mag box) + 4.5" flight deck though.

Torpedo protection 4 is absolutely necessary, unit machinery won't help much at all since AFAIK it only counters one specific type of critical hit that I don't think bombs or torpedoes can cause, it's also not worthwhile generally.

The best armor though is lots and lots of AA. The manual says light AA reduces enemy plane accuracy, so I typically go for a lot of that, say 50-70 pieces. Of course, pack some MAA and a bunch of HAA too.

[director]

For my initial, designed-as-carrier ships, I'm prone to use 2" belt and deck and no flight-deck armor. As carriers get bigger and more capable, I up the flight-deck armor and maybe increase belt/deck to 3" and every capital ship gets max torpedo protection.

I prioritize damage control techs, develop strike aircraft with bomb load/range characteristics and try to carry 4 squadrons (2 fighter, 1 DB, 1 TB) so I can run heavy to maximum CAP.

For additional scouting power, I use CAs with an all-forward armament and 6-12 floatplanes.

[JagdFlanker]

initially no armour, 30+kts, 70-80 fighters and 20-30 torpedo bombers

speed + CAP > armour

or alternately:

prevention > cure

for the 1st CV of course you have to have armour to mount the 8" guns, but i only build a single batch of 1-3 of these, and retire them as soon as i can for CVs with more aircraft instead of armour (once i hit 8 CVs total on super-large fleets)

later game when i have lots of tonnage to spare i'l start adding armour to new CVs, but only because i can

[ludovic]

I just have my standard 4" or slightly less armor on my first batch of 1-2, but I punish my design board by technically having the 8" guns but removing their turret armor and lowering the ammo to 45 rounds or so. Sure, it may also lower the ammo of the secondaries but that only matters if they're DP and that's only a difference of 15 or so in HAA score only during a long battle, much less utility than dropping the ammo to get a few more planes.

[indy]

You need speed. Carriers after 1935 I have going 33knts. All the escort vessels do that or more. Cheap carriers and lotsa fighters. I probably do 75 fighters depending on where the budget and month breaks are. I do 2” belt, deck and turrets. The cheaper the carriers the more I can afford. If I’m Italy, carriers are built with 7” of flight deck and 6” belt because you’re constantly under threat from land bases.

[oldpop2000]

Jun 11, 2022 17:55:38 GMT -6 indy said:

You need speed. Carriers after 1935 I have going 33knts. All the escort vessels do that or more. Cheap carriers and lotsa fighters. I probably do 75 fighters depending on where the budget and month breaks are. I do 2” belt, deck and turrets. The cheaper the carriers the more I can afford. If I’m Italy, carriers are built with 7” of flight deck and 6” belt because you’re constantly under threat from land bases.

I completely concur with your ideas. The aircraft carrier is a floating air base, not a battleship. Its design should be centered on carrying as many aircraft as possible, ordnance and fuel.  We started the war with two fighter squadrons on board and eventually ended up with 64 fighters. That is what saved our Essex class ships. 

Carriers need speed to launch and recover aircraft along racing to the point of recovery for the returning air wing. Extra weight just reduces that speed.

As for Italy, it does not need aircraft carriers, I never built aircraft carriers playing Italy. It's got plenty of land bases to use. They are unsinkable.

[indy]

Jun 11, 2022 20:02:18 GMT -6 oldpop2000 said:

Jun 11, 2022 17:55:38 GMT -6 indy said:

You need speed. Carriers after 1935 I have going 33knts. All the escort vessels do that or more. Cheap carriers and lotsa fighters. I probably do 75 fighters depending on where the budget and month breaks are. I do 2” belt, deck and turrets. The cheaper the carriers the more I can afford. If I’m Italy, carriers are built with 7” of flight deck and 6” belt because you’re constantly under threat from land bases.

I completely concur with your ideas. The aircraft carrier is a floating air base, not a battleship. Its design should be centered on carrying as many aircraft as possible, ordnance and fuel.  We started the war with two fighter squadrons on board and eventually ended up with 64 fighters. That is what saved our Essex class ships. 

Carriers need speed to launch and recover aircraft along racing to the point of recovery for the returning air wing. Extra weight just reduces that speed.

As for Italy, it does not need aircraft carriers, I never built aircraft carriers playing Italy. It's got plenty of land bases to use. They are unsinkable.

You don’t use any carriers as Italy? I usually always get a few carriers for Italy, but many less than other nations. It’s hard to use airbases cuz you never know where the battle will take place and you can’t afford to have squadrons all over. Unless you’ve done really well in the early game, you’ll surely need 7” flight deck armor because you’re going to take dive bomb hits. 6” of angled belt will stop CLs from turning your expensive carriers into fire kindling and it’s hard for dive bombers to get thru 7” of flight deck armor.

[JagdFlanker]

quick primer on my style of play to explain why i don't armour my carriers - note i never convert warships to carriers, i either convert a floatplane carrier that was built specifically be to converted immediately into a carrier, or i build purpose-built carriers



i play with 60 max airbase size to let carriers shine - that still leaves a massive amount of land airpower in some battles though


the minute i get the ability to build carriers i start making my fleet highly carrier-centric no matter what nation i play - playing super-large fleets i build up to and maintain 8 CVs and ditch all but 3-4 BB/BCs as soon as i have 4 or 5 carriers (usually CVLs early on) just to be my TF leaders (i play admiral, plus the battle generator doesn't give you many large battles unless you have BB/BCs)


because i often play a smaller nation (i almost never play as UK or USA) i usually have to stop building any BB/BCs for 20+ years once i research carriers since all my shipbuilding goes towards building better CVs (plus escorts/utility ships) and constantly replacing the oldest CV in my fleet. so i'm often stuck with 1915-1920 BBs up until the late 40s when i finally max out my CVs and start having gaps in my ship building - i try to make sure i get a few 27kt to 30kt+ BBs in service by 1920 so they can keep up with the carriers


keep your CVs on AF between wars and NEVER put CV airgroups in reserve - preserve that experience, if you beat up the enemy air power early in the war you have a chance of keeping air superiority until the end of it. this is VERY expensive so i disband all land based airpower between wars, and also this is why i keep so few BBs. put your BBs and escort DDs in fleet reserve, and everything else in mothballs to save cash


once i have aircraft/carriers in service my BBs stay away from surface combat and i let the aircraft do all the work - if my BBs do start a battle relatively close to the enemy i might rush towards them just to get my DDs closer, call a flotilla attack, then run away to let my DDs do their thing, but otherwise i keep my BBs away from surface combat. once this phase of the game starts BBs don't need a lot of big guns so if i do design and BBs after i get carriers they might get 4-6 "ceremonial" 16" to 20" guns, and otherwise they are designed to be fast oversized AA platforms


the key to success with all carrier battles is at the start of battle you make sure ALL task forces are 'core' with each other so they bunch up and share CAP; keep your carriers at about 2/3 range of your strike aircraft from the enemy; and if your carriers start wandering away to launch planes keep your BBs (always your lead TF on admiral) close to maximize CAP - don't need armour if the enemy gets swarmed before they reach your ships


if you start a battle with your own land-based air close by make sure to turn off search on your carrier airgroups and let land-based handle search to keep your carrier airgoups maximized. there will be many battles where you may not get off any airstrikes due to failure to spot the enemy and/or "circumstances", but not every battle is the Battle of Midway

[oldpop2000]

Jun 11, 2022 21:22:54 GMT -6 indy said:

Jun 11, 2022 20:02:18 GMT -6 oldpop2000 said:

I completely concur with your ideas. The aircraft carrier is a floating air base, not a battleship. Its design should be centered on carrying as many aircraft as possible, ordnance and fuel.  We started the war with two fighter squadrons on board and eventually ended up with 64 fighters. That is what saved our Essex class ships. 

Carriers need speed to launch and recover aircraft along racing to the point of recovery for the returning air wing. Extra weight just reduces that speed.

As for Italy, it does not need aircraft carriers, I never built aircraft carriers playing Italy. It's got plenty of land bases to use. They are unsinkable.

You don’t use any carriers as Italy? I usually always get a few carriers for Italy, but many less than other nations. It’s hard to use airbases cuz you never know where the battle will take place and you can’t afford to have squadrons all over. Unless you’ve done really well in the early game, you’ll surely need 7” flight deck armor because you’re going to take dive bomb hits. 6” of angled belt will stop CLs from turning your expensive carriers into fire kindling and it’s hard for dive bombers to get thru 7” of flight deck armor.

I don't build fleet carriers but will build seaplane carriers because they can be useful for scouting and attacking convoys. I haven't tried building light carriers but I don't see them as being necessary. 

[garrisonchisholm]

Jun 8, 2022 19:18:24 GMT -6 @pavelsvt said:

7in steel slab all across the flight deck is the way to go. Nothing short of a lucky bomb or a mega huge gun at a super long range is ever going through that. And it also covers all the stuff under it.

I should point out, I "Liked" this statement because it made me laugh so hard. 

[garrisonchisholm]

I'll chip-in my two-bits here. I originally did not armor my carriers, but in some of my biggest carrier battles (usually as Japan) I would lose about a third of my carriers to sink about half of the enemy, which though positive is a rather painful exchange. Just 2" of deck armor (observed over many games) seemed to cut my carrier losses in half, but 2" of deck armor is (roughly) a full squadron. So which squadrons to lose was the question. Fighters are the squadron to lose. I always favor the range-range-range mantra in my carrier aircraft, so if it is a "classic" carrier battle I simply maneuver so as to be able to launch and then retire, and hopefully the only air attack I face are some land-based aircraft from somewhere far away. The cincher comes if the battle is in a more confined sea than I would prefer, or some other unpredictable randomness happens, and then sometimes you just need to look at the starting position and say, "the most points I will get from this will be the ones I don't lose by quitting the field post-haste."

...but now I have to see what an Essex looks like with a 7" slab of deck armor.

(edit; it has 36 aircraft at 32k tons. ^.^)