Iowa Class/Bismark Class/Yamoto Class

[5PointOh]

I know its been kind of asked for in the past.  But here it goes.

Battleships for AH:

1: Logic of a Battleship In Aces High.
Seems to be a missing aspect of Aces High in my opinion.  The battleship could bring a new dynamic and perhaps a new type of crowd to Aces High.
 A)The new dynamic would be great naval battles between large tonage of warships. I know some may think this is just another way to kill airfields, but I look at as a chance for long range battleship vs battleship battles. Or carrier group vs battleships.
 B)It seems to be an untapped group of cliental for HTC.  I enjoy playing the Silent Hunter series, but I'd rather be in the large battleships sending large rounds into others.  I don't think I'm alone on that one.

2:How it would work.
Battleships would be seperate from task groups.
 A)Each battleship would have its own port and be completely seperate from any task group.  This allows the option to follow a task group, lead a task group or attack targets idependently.  Also it give a new form of protection for "highly desirable base". 
 B)To destroy a battleship approximately 10,000lbs would be needed to destroy, and typical ship regeneration of 45 min for max strength after hit.  Capturing would work as current task group system does.  Capture Battleship port-->Sink Battleship-->Battleship then captured.
 C) Each country would have each class of battleship or whichever battleship HTC would choose to model (after all its their choice)

3:Pitfalls.
 A)Player only use battleships to shell towns and airfields. 
 B)Captured Battleships are hidden like current task groups. Gamey but what can you do.

Just my thoughs...flame away or add insight.  Either way its my wish. 
 






USS Iowa
Country United States
Ship Class Iowa-class Battleship
Hull Number BB-61
Builder New York Navy Yard, New York, United States
Laid Down 27 Jun 1940
Launched 27 Aug 1942
Commissioned 22 Feb 1943
Decommissioned 24 Mar 1949
Displacement 44560 tons standard; 55710 tons full
Length 887 feet
Beam 108 feet
Draft 38 feet
Machinery Four General Electric geared turbines, eight Babcock and Wilcox boilers, four shafts
Bunkerage 7,073 tons of oil
Power Output 212000 SHP
Speed 33 knots
Range 18,000nm at 12 knots
Crew 1921
Armament 9x16in, 20x5in, 60x40mm anti-aircraft, 60x20mm anti-aircraft
Armor 12-25in belt, 8.5-11in bulkheads, 0.5-6in decks, 1.5-17.3in barbettes, 7.25-19.7in turrets, 0.75-1in secondary turrets, 16-17.5in conning tower



Bismark Class:
Country Germany
Ship Class Bismarck-class Battleship
Builder Blohm & Voss, Hamburg, Germany
Laid Down 1 Jul 1936
Launched 14 Feb 1939
Commissioned 24 Aug 1940
Sunk 27 May 1941
Displacement 41700 tons standard; 50900 tons full
Length 824 feet
Beam 118 feet
Draft 33 feet
Machinery 12 Wagner high-pressure; 3 Blohm & Voss geared turbines, 3 three-blade propellers
Power Output 150170 SHP
Speed 30 knots
Range 8,525nm at 19 knots
Crew 2092
Armament 4x2x380mm L47 SK-C/34 guns, 12x152mm L55 SK-C/28 guns, 16x105mm L65 SK-C/37 / SK-C/33 guns, 16x37mm L83 SK-C/30 guns, 12x1x20mm L65 C/30 machine guns, 8x4x20mm L65 C/32 machine guns
Armor 145-320mm belt, 110-120mm deck, 220mm bulkheads, 130-360mm turrets, 342mm barbettes, 360mm conning tower
Aircraft 4 Arado Ar 196 A-3
Catapult 1 double-ended




Yamoto Class:
Country Japan
Ship Class Yamato-class Battleship
Builder Kure Naval Yard, Japan
Laid Down 4 Nov 1937
Launched 8 Aug 1940
Commissioned 16 Dec 1941
Sunk 7 Apr 1945
Displacement 65027 tons standard; 72809 tons full
Length 863 feet
Beam 121 feet
Draft 34 feet
Machinery 12 Kanpon boilers, driving 4 steam turbines with 4 triple-bladed propellers
Bunkerage 6,300 tons
Power Output 150000 SHP
Speed 27 knots
Range 7,200nm at 16 knots
Crew 2750
Armament 9x46cm, 6x15.5cm, 24x12.7cm, 162x25mm anti-aircraft, 4x13mm anti-aircraft
Armor 650mm turrets, 410mm sides, 200mm deck
Aircraft 7
Aircraft Catapult 2

 

[Guppy35]

The only battleships that make sense for AH are the old clipper bow BBs that did all the pre-invasion work and were there for the last big gun ship to ship battle at Surigo Straights!

USS Colorado fired more tonnage of ammo in WW2 and spent more time in the line then any other ship of the US Navy.  That's a battleship!

Firing at Tarawa in this case.

[Masherbrum]

Absolutely Dan.  The USS West Virginia and Colorado would compliment the "look" better.

Also, MANaTEE would be permanently stuck in DD's and unable to enter the BB's providing us with more entertainment.

[Wildcat1]

this is perhaps the first intelligent request for battleships that i've seen

like the others stated, it should be South Dakota Class instead of Iowa Class.

+1 though

[Volron]

Oh the joy's of lobbing 16" shells at things.

5PointOh,
So they are only used to shell airfields and towns, I don't see that as a pitfall.  Annoying, it would be, but I wouldn't consider it as a pitfall.  There were not many BB surface engagements compared to how many times they were use in the bombardment role.  As for the hiding of the BB groups, that's not a pitfall, that's routine AH tactics.   So in the end, these 2 pitfalls you pointed out don't hold a lot of water, so to speak.  The question I have is, "Will the BB TG's take on or take over the role of launching LVT's and PT's, or will the CV TG's still keep that option?"

Either way, I really like the idea of adding battleships into Aces High.

Now, for the Fire Control Towers...

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,299671.msg3835787.html#msg3835787

Maybe this idea could be implemented as well?  Not just for the battleships, but for all capable ships.

[Debrody]

Just guess that firepower.
+1

[dstrip2]

if they ave their own port, why not give them 2 or 3 destroyers as well? the war proved how vulnerable these big targets are from the air, plus the extra ships would make them easier to pick out (harder to hide 4 ships that 1 ship)

or.. (less for HTC to do as far as map redesigns) have some ports have both cv group and bb group, maybe 1/3 of ports on any given map could have bb group attached to it also


+1 





i have SH4 and love it. play that when i need my strategy/navy fix

[Guppy35]

this is perhaps the first intelligent request for battleships that i've seen

like the others stated, it should be South Dakota Class instead of Iowa Class.

+1 though

Understand that the ground pounding BBs were not South Dakota Class or Iowa.  Those were 'fast' BBs that were with carrier groups. 

If you really want to do it with BBs you need the slower BBs that were used specifically for shore bombardment.  And then you'd build the TGs around the slower CVE carriers that provided the offshore air support.

Alternately you'd have fast BBs with the big carriers and those would be in open water, not right off shore like they can be in game and it would be purely for carrier group v carrier group.

Seperate the fast from the slow BBs.  They did two different jobs during WW2.

And as mentioned the last big BB fight was the Pearl Surviviors vs Japanese BBs at Surigo Straights with the West Virginia scoring on it's first salvo at 24K yards on a Japanese BB with the old BBs themselves clobbering the Japanese force.

[waystin2]

I'll give it a +1   BIG GUNS!

[5PointOh]

I'd have no issues with the BBs not being able to sit as close to shore as our current CV groups do.

Dan you're wealth of knowledge still amazes me. Thanks for the additions to the topic.

[Guppy35]

No problem Copr   You happened to pick one that is a small obsession with the clipper bow battleships produced between the wars.  As with anything, I have a hard time with the latest and greatest apparently

Those BBs did fight shore batteries and on occasion got hit by those same batteries. 

If you watch the video here, it's classic what could be in AH based on real history.  LVTs going ashore at Iwo with destroyers, cruisers and old BBs, in this case USS Tennessee, in close pounding Mt. Suribachi.

http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675062104_Battle-of-Iwo-Jima_Mount-Suribachi_landing-vehicle-tracked_smoke-from-explosion

[5PointOh]

I've always had a love for the WWII era naval vessels, and really considered the added benefits for scenarios as well.  Such great power in the guns and the overall size still amazes me.

[RTHolmes]

if we're going to have Bismarck, we should have Hood and Price of Wales too

[RTHolmes]

wiki has this very cool photo. moored together (!) in 1937, from front to back: Graf Spee, Resolution and Hood.



my grandfathers first ship was a revenge class like Resolution, really looks its age next to its neighbours.

[Scotty55OEFVet]

I could get on board with that. I also wanted to bring up an idea...We all know that individual guns and such can be destoryed as Cv's and Cruiser's are hit over and over, but what about ths:

In all actuality, if a ship was hit in a certain area, torpedo or bomb, it would be kinda cool if it damage would be just like the real thing. Such as a Torp or Bomb hit in a certain area ("steering controls" as an example) then the ship would respond accordingly. A hit on steering componenets would say render the ship only allowed to maneuver in circles as it did in real life. If a torp hits in a certain area then the ship would begin to list to a certain side, etc. I am positive that this has been brought up in the past, but I think it would bring even more realism to the Sea aspect of AH...What say you?