seowhq.net

Hi all,

Shipping will play a fundamental part in the campaign so I think it is very useful for all to have a good overview of which ships are in the campaign phase1 & their capabilities. Some ships which will appear in a later phase have been included but this is certainly not a complete list (especially Allied).

The below list deals with this. The same info can be found in the costs page.

A few things:
1. All weights should be looked at with a eye at fitting this within the load/unload philosophy. Obviously, the weights for a BB were substantially larger but it is just easier to reduce/increase weights to a standard value to make sure it all adds up.
2. All tanker type ships can only carry supply (enforced).
3. All ships can move freely. There are no command/control restrictions.
4. CV, BB, BC, CL & CA type ships have command/control capability which is useful for ship redeployment (use the build-in SEOW funtionality).
5. The reference work for ship speeds, armament & carrier capacity used is: The War At Sea 1939-1945 - The offical British Naval History of the Second World War by Captain S. W. Roskill DSC, RN. The writer and his team were all active officers in the RN during the War and had unrestricted access to all Allied archives and captured Axis archives. Volume I, Appendix D, G & H deal in detail with the Navies of the British, German & Italian respectively.
6. Speeds for the warships are historical, speeds for the transports are not. The are tuned to the restrictions of space & time of the campaign.
7. The SEOW value "range" regulates how far a ship can go on a full fuel tank. It does not take into account the speed of the ship during missions. In an effort to fit this all together with the operational nature of the campaign many changes have been made to the range and fuel capacity of the ships. We'll have to see how this all works out in the campaign and adjust if necessary.
The desired effect should be that ships will not be able to just steam full speed for the full amount of missions and that they need to refuel at regular intervals. The smaller the ship, the more often they should refuel in port, or through the use of oilers.

Cheers,
Petr

UPDATE
V2 is below. Some considerations:
1. Some fine tuning on ship ranges, usually increased.
2. Fuel capacity is on the whole reduced. The main reason is to fit it more with the supply capacities and so on. Especially inshore ships would otherwise be totally cost un-effective.
3. The Shuka does not have a surfaced entry in the ship.ini and as such could not be limited to 18km/h which would give problems. Therefore, all Axis subs are now the TypeVII/C.
4. Included are the numbers of each gun and engagement ranges per ship to allow you to make informed decisions on which odds seem acceptable and which not. Have fun!
It's not really all that well readable so here's the link to the xls version: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/636 ... nfov1.xlsx




OLD VERSION - FOR COMPARRISON ONLY

Petr, dont forget the RoF what I asked in that meeting we had.

Hi Jack, what would you propose re: RoF?

Petr wrote:Hi Jack, what would you propose re: RoF?

I really would not know, but I know its very important. I am not sure if we want the ships to be 1.0

Maybe from 2.0 - 3.0 ? I dont know...

It's a tricky thing to get right
Too much is bad, too little is probably worse?

I've put this down as a topic for the next meeting.

Few questions from me...

1) How the ships collision, after destroying one ship in TF, will be treated?

The thing is, we know that the ships in IL2 are pretty stupid and if they are in coloumn and you destroy the first ship, every other will collide with it. In RL that scenario would be impossible, and becouse of IL2 ships inteligence we are unable to use such a usefull array as coloumn is.

Of course, if ships collide due to uncarefull plannig, that`s it they are dead, and that should be treated as man`s mistake.

2) How will the friendly fire from ships will be treated?

3) Connected with 2), will skip bombing be allowed?

4) What are the radar ranges from BBs and cruisers? If I understand correctly, destroyers don`t have radars enabled?

102nd-YU-Mornar wrote:Few questions from me...

1) How the ships collision, after destroying one ship in TF, will be treated?

The thing is, we know that the ships in IL2 are pretty stupid and if they are in coloumn and you destroy the first ship, every other will collide with it. In RL that scenario would be impossible, and becouse of IL2 ships inteligence we are unable to use such a usefull array as coloumn is.

Of course, if ships collide due to uncarefull plannig, that`s it they are dead, and that should be treated as man`s mistake.

2) How will the friendly fire from ships will be treated?

3) Connected with 2), will skip bombing be allowed?

4) What are the radar ranges from BBs and cruisers? If I understand correctly, destroyers don`t have radars enabled?

1. Tricky question! DB actions as a general rule should be avoided. It will also be very difficult to differentiate between uncareful planning and some other issue.
I'd like to hear what people suggest for this.
2. There's nothing to do about that until they solve this issue in IL2. See also point 1.
3. This is a topic for the meeting at 02/09.
4. I believe radar on ships is the 30km version. Correct, only large warships have radar.

OK, thanks, mate.

Regarding collision. From my point of view its quite easy to differentiate this two cases. If the ships are in TF they can collide with each other only in case as written in my last post.
Ships from two different TFs or single ships can collide only becouse of man`s error.
The thing I don`t know is can admin see if collided ships were in same or different TFs or single ships?

I agree that messing around with DB should be avoided, but, as I see, the ships are crucial in this campaign, so my opinion is that the ships should have some additional attention of admins. Of course naval planners should take measures for avoiding collisions even in TFs, but you know, s..t happens and it would be shame that planners lose their precious supplies due to stupidity of ships. I believe hostile action will be more than enough

II/JG77_Jack wrote:

Petr wrote:Hi Jack, what would you propose re: RoF?

I really would not know, but I know its very important. I am not sure if we want the ships to be 1.0

Maybe from 2.0 - 3.0 ? I dont know...

Barents Sea campaign had the value = 4.0

4.0 = .25 % of historical value.

That's fine with me if all agree.

I would say that if DB action is to be avoided at all costs, ship collisions must be accepted no matter how they occur.

When you sink a first ship in a column, the second ship will run into the first and it will be sunk. Therefore the planner must take care of not running columns of ships and plan the maneuvering of the entire TF to minimize the risks. It is quite possible with careful planning even without small scale MP maps. You can always re-create your TF in the FMB and then displace ships to correct locations in the MP using exact coordinates from the FMB.

After that you only have to steer your ships in favorable directions to avoid them lining up.

4.0 = .25 % of historical value

4.0 = 25 % of historical value (forget the ".")

Cheers,
4S

From experience of a frustrated naval commander and the many faults of ships I would suggest a rof of 2.

Ships collide with each other, ships collide with sinking ships, ships shoot at each other frequently destroying cargo with cannon fire and ships can be very ineffective against air attack often only damaging aircraft after ordnance release. If we set the reload rate to 2 we will see a more effective fire pattern meaning ships can be more widely dispersed to avoid friendly fire and we will force a more realistic attack pattern as flying directly amongst a large taskforce will become very dangerous. This will also give greater merit to skilled dive bomb and torpedo pilots who can accurately launch torpedos at 1km+ range or dive bomb from several thousand feet. Sinking ships was a dangerous and difficult task.

Classic EAF19 wrote:From experience of a frustrated naval commander and the many faults of ships I would suggest a rof of 2.

Ships collide with each other, ships collide with sinking ships, ships shoot at each other frequently destroying cargo with cannon fire and ships can be very ineffective against air attack often only damaging aircraft after ordnance release. If we set the reload rate to 2 we will see a more effective fire pattern meaning ships can be more widely dispersed to avoid friendly fire and we will force a more realistic attack pattern as flying directly amongst a large taskforce will become very dangerous. This will also give greater merit to skilled dive bomb and torpedo pilots who can accurately launch torpedos at 1km+ range or dive bomb from several thousand feet. Sinking ships was a dangerous and difficult task.

agree

And in addition, skip bombing (and any other attack which is performed in simular way as skip) should be forbiden (in order to minimize friendly fire between ships) and also all ships should be veteran/ace skilled.
So it would be only allowed torpedo attacks, and dive bombing attacks.

Having a reload of 2 or less will deter a lot of skip bombing type attacks which is positive news all round. Merchant ships have long been seen and regarded as sitting ducks even when in convoy with strong flak cover.