Multiple Classes of One Type

[Masonator]

 Now that we have the ability to individually design every ship type in our fleet, which is fantastic, I'd like to see this feature extended to individual ships.  For example, 2 BBs + 3 BBs, instead of 5 BBs.  I think the cleanest way to implement this would be as a drop-down menu/slider on the Custom Battles screen, underneath the given ship type.  Simply have it take the desired amount of ships selected and let the player split it up however they'd like, and give their chosen groups individual slots in the Ship Designer.

 I made some mock-up images describing this in further detail, but the forum upload limit is preventing me from posting them.

[Commander Reed]

Please. It's so weird having like 5 of the same ship type in battle. Like, we've designed a new ship! We're going to send them all out together! That makes sense! (Not)

Edited November 13, 2021 by Commander Reed

[brucesim2003]

On 11/14/2021 at 7:29 AM, Commander Reed said:

Please. It's so weird having like 5 of the same ship type in battle. Like, we've designed a new ship! We're going to send them all out together! That makes sense! (Not)

Actually it does make sense, especially for capitals. Ships are deployed in divisions, and the closer the characteristics of the ships in a division, the easier it is to use the division. What better than several ships of the same class?

5th battle squadron

USN standard type battleships

The IJN tended to group ships of a class together, from heavy cruisers up.

Most destroyer flotilla's were composed of ships of the same class.

 

The idea of designing several classes of 1 type would be good for custom battles, but not having that ability isn't that weird.

[madham82]

16 hours ago, brucesim2003 said:

Actually it does make sense, especially for capitals. Ships are deployed in divisions, and the closer the characteristics of the ships in a division, the easier it is to use the division. What better than several ships of the same class?

5th battle squadron

USN standard type battleships

The IJN tended to group ships of a class together, from heavy cruisers up.

Most destroyer flotilla's were composed of ships of the same class.

 

The idea of designing several classes of 1 type would be good for custom battles, but not having that ability isn't that weird.

I would say peacetime grouping versus wartime are two entirely different plans. Look at Guadalcanal for the US forces. Pretty much whatever they could throw together. Plus some classes may only have 2 ships (i.e. North Carolina's). 

[brucesim2003]

5 hours ago, madham82 said:

I would say peacetime grouping versus wartime are two entirely different plans. Look at Guadalcanal for the US forces. Pretty much whatever they could throw together. Plus some classes may only have 2 ships (i.e. North Carolina's). 

Most of those groupings I listed were wartime groupings. The only one that wasn't was the USN standard type battleships.

The grand fleet had surprisingly homogeneous divisions, though there were instances of 1/2 sisters or one-off's in various divisions. Same with the battle line of the HSF.

Edited November 22, 2021 by brucesim2003

[madham82]

Not saying it didn't happen, but for every example where they did..there's another that didn't. We definitely should have the ability to design separate classes in the same ship type, no reason not to have it. 

[brucesim2003]

11 hours ago, madham82 said:

Not saying it didn't happen, but for every example where they did..there's another that didn't. We definitely should have the ability to design separate classes in the same ship type, no reason not to have it. 

Oh I agree.

My 1st post was in response to Commander Reed's post that was implying that the idea of having multiple ships in the same class in one battle was daft, and that it never happened.

Edited November 23, 2021 by brucesim2003

[Commander Reed]

5 hours ago, brucesim2003 said:

Oh I agree.

My 1st post was in response to Commander Reed's post that was implying that the idea of having multiple ships in the same class in one battle was daft, and that it never happened.

I never said it was daft, but uncommon.

[brucesim2003]

17 hours ago, Commander Reed said:

I never said it was daft, but uncommon.

You may not have used the word daft, but

On 11/14/2021 at 7:29 AM, Commander Reed said:

...That makes sense! (Not)

implies that you see the idea as daft, stupid, weird, or silly.

[Commander Reed]

14 hours ago, brucesim2003 said:

You may not have used the word daft, but

implies that you see the idea as daft, stupid, weird, or silly.

Okay.