New Naval Unit Poll: VOTE HERE!

Hello Everyone!

This is it; All of Jacob's and my own ideas all together with a poll included! A few notes in this regard; Aircraft Carriers are NOT included in this poll. This is due to our understanding that Aircraft Carriers are most likely already being produced and worked on. In a nutshell, this poll is to get an idea of what ship the Call of War Community would like released AFTER Aircraft Carriers are completed.

If possible, I would like to request that this Thread be "stickied" so as many people as possible get the chance to view and vote on this thread as possible.

Here are all our previous threads for reference:

BATTLECRUISERS

James Hylton wrote:

Battlecruisers, also called "Fast Battleships", were characterized by three prominent features; Big guns like a Battleship, Very fast speeds for their size, and lighter armor compared to other ships. Some also possessed decent anti-air defenses. The most famous example was the HMS Hood, the largest Battlecruiser ever built in England and possibly in the world. Our Great-Grandfather served on one of the last Battlecruisers ever commissioned, the USS Alaska of the Alaska-Class Battlecruisers.

Considering these factors, Jacob and I decided on the following as potential stats for an in-game Battlecruiser;

Would require a Level 2 or 3 Shipyard, and a Level 1 Factory to produce.

Cost to build: 3000 Goods, 400 Manpower, 3000 Metal, 1000 Oil, 6500 Cash.

Build Time: 1 day, 18 Hours, unboosted.

Researchable after day 6. Research Costs: 3000 Goods, 4000 Rare Materials, 5,500 Cash.

Level 2 research at 12 days, Level 3 at 18 days, and Level 4 at 24 days, etc.

Daily upkeep; 65 Food, 150 Oil.

Attack Range; 40-50km at Level 1, 60-70km at max level.

Speed; 38km/h at level 1, maximum of 64km/h at max level.

Attack Stats: 18.0-20.0 Attack against Ships, up to 28.0-30.0 attack at max level. 1.5-4.0 attack vs. infantry (depending on level). 1.0-3.0 attack against tanks/armor (also based on level). 0.3-0.8 Attack against Submarines (Level-based again). 2.5-6.0 Attack vs. Cities, level-based.

Defense Stats: 4.5 Defense vs. Aircraft, increasing to 10.0 Defense at max Level. 10.0-15.0 defense against ships depending on level. 0.2-0.8 Defense against Submarines, based on level. (The low Sub defense is meant to reflect their real-life vulnerabilities).

HP Stat: 45 or 55

Their primary role would be to engage ships of cruiser-size or smaller and provide support for capitol ships (especially aircraft carriers, assuming they are soon released).

Corvettes/Frigates/Escorts

James Hylton wrote:

Corvettes and/or Frigates is a title applied to smaller ships such as the British Castle-class corvettes or Frigates of the same era, such as the Captain-Class Frigate.

Historically, they were smaller than Destroyers, and generally used for escort duty. They were also fairly quickly produced both before and during the war. For this game, the idea would basically be "Militia of the seas". Thus for game purposes, we came up with the following for stats;

Research Costs: 2000 Goods, 1500 Rare Materials, 2000 Cash

Research time: 12 hours at level 1, plus 4 hours time per level.

Research Levels: Level 1 at day 1, level 2 at day 4, level 3 at day 8, level 4 at day 12.

Build Costs: 600 Goods, 200 Manpower, 1500 Metal, 200 Oil, 2000 Cash.

Build Time: 1 day, unboosted.

Upkeep: 15-25 Food, 60 Oil.

Defense stats: 1.5 against Subs, 1.0 against surface ships, and 0.3 against aircraft.

Attack stats: 1.5 vs Ships, 1.0 vs Subs.

Speed: 46 km/h to 66km/h, level dependent.

HP: 15-20

Range: of at least 10 km, maximum of 25 km, level based.

Production Requirements: Level 1 Naval Base.

These would essentially be escorts for convoys, or very cheap and easy to produce Navy units. My brother thinks they could also be useful as scouts.

Minelayers and/or Minesweepers

James Hylton wrote:

Idea my brother and I had for adding a more strategic element to Naval warfare in the game. Minelayers would be based upon ships like the British Abdiel-class of WWII. These ships would possibly have characteristics as follows;

Research Costs: 2500 Goods, 2000 Rare Materials, 3000 Cash

Research time: 24 hours at level 1, plus 6 hours per level.

Research Levels: Level 1 at day 4, level 2 at day 8, level 3 at day 12, level 4 at day 16.

Build Costs: 1000 Goods, 225 Manpower, 2000 Metal, 250 Oil, 2750 Cash.

Build Time: 1 day, 6 hours, unboosted.

Upkeep: 20-25 Food, 65 Oil.

Defense stats: 2.0 against Ships and Subs, 0.5 against aircraft, plus 0.3 per level.

Attack stats: 1.0 vs Ships and Subs, plus 0.3 per level.

Speed: 28 km/h to 40km/h, level dependent.

HP: 25-30

Range: 20 Km.

Production Requirements: Level 2 Naval Base, Level 1 Factory.

Abilities: Can deploy 1-3 minefields per day, depending on level. Mines are stationary stealth units with 15-30 attack vs. ships and subs and take 3 hours to deploy. Can be detected by Destroyers, and removed by Minesweepers.

Minesweepers would be the counter to minefields, such as the Admirable-Class of WWII, with the following possible stats;

Research Costs: 2000 Goods, 2500 Rare Materials, 3500 Cash

Research time: 24 hours at level 1, plus 6 hours per level.

Research Levels: Level 1 at day 4, level 2 at day 8, level 3 at day 12, level 4 at day 16.

Build Costs: 1500 Goods, 150 Manpower, 1000 Metal, 250 Oil, 3250 Cash.

Build Time: 1 day, unboosted.

Upkeep: 15 Food, 45-65 Oil.

Defense stats: 1.0 vs Ships, 2.0 vs Subs, 0.3 vs aircraft, plus 0.3 per level.

Attack stats: 1.0 vs Ships, 0.5 vs Subs, plus 0.3 per level.

Speed: 20 km/h to 30 km/h, level dependent.

HP: 15-20

Range: N/A

Production Requirements: Level 2 Naval Base, Level 1 Factory.

Abilities: Can remove enemy minefields without damage; process takes 3-6 hours.

See Here for the original thread.

Hospital Ships/Support Ships

James Hylton wrote:

This one took a few days for us to figure out due to historical complications; many Hospital Ships did not belong to a specific class, but were instead luxury liners that were converted for the purpose. One of the most famous examples would be the Britannic, the ill fated Sister Ship of the Titanic (Britannic was also the largest ship to be sunk during WWI). Also, in world war two, there were actually two types of Hospital ships; those used by the Army, and those used by the navy, and each had different roles.

We decided that to keep things simple, we wouldn't distinguish between the two. We also concluded that these ships would likely follow the role of "damaged troop transport and healing unit". They would also likely follow the design of the WWII Comfort-Class ships. Stats could apply as follows:

Research Costs: 1500 Goods, 1750 Rare Materials, 2500 Cash; Add 500 to each cost for level 2.

Research time: 24 hours at level 1, 48 hours at level 2.

Research Levels: Only 2 levels - Level 1 at day 6, level 2 at day 14

Build Costs: 1000 Goods, 125 Manpower, 1500 Metal, 300 Oil, 2250 Cash.

Build Time: 1 day, 12 hours, unboosted.

Upkeep: 30-45 Food, 50 Oil.

Defense stats: 2.5 against Ships and Subs, 0.5 against aircraft, plus 0.5 at level 2.

Attack stats: Hospital Ships would be non-combat units.

Speed: 20 km/h to 30km/h, level dependent.

HP: 20-30

Range: N/A

Production Requirements: Level 1 Naval Base, Level 1 Factory, Level 1 Barracks.

Abilities: Boosts the morale of transported units just as if they were stationed in a friendly province and allowed to recover over time, even while the ship is moving. At level two the regeneration would be equivalent to being stationed at the capitol. Can hold a maximum of three infantry units (Not armored units).

"I'd be unstoppable if it wasn't for Law Enforcement and Physics!"
-James Hylton
"BOLDLY GOING FORWARD! ('Cause I can't find Reverse)"
"I have returned from my wilderness Exile!!!"

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

30 Replies

I think mine sweeper and mine layers would be nice. It would require to be more cautious.

Carl Wilson
“Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?”
― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue
"Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China."
Bernard Law Montgomery, British general

Vote Battlecruisers!


"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.
"Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.

I voted Minesweepers for now. Don't we have enough deck gun ships right now? What would a "Battlecruiser" do, and how would it be different? Please inform me, the best way to learn, after all is to listen!

Carl Wilson
“Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world's problems?”
― Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995: An Exhibition Catalogue
"Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: 'Do not march on Moscow'… Rule 2 is: 'Do not go fighting with your land armies in China."
Bernard Law Montgomery, British general

Carl Wilson wrote:

I voted Minesweepers for now. Don't we have enough deck gun ships right now? What would a "Battlecruiser" do, and how would it be different? Please inform me, the best way to learn, after all is to listen!
The general idea is that they would sacrifice armor for speed. They would have lower defense, but would be faster to make and cheaper than Battleships. A choice between survivability and speed (which, in this game, could make a pretty big deal).

Sorry for the late response: I've been on hiatus for almost a year. I'm back now!

"I'd be unstoppable if it wasn't for Law Enforcement and Physics!"
-James Hylton
"BOLDLY GOING FORWARD! ('Cause I can't find Reverse)"
"I have returned from my wilderness Exile!!!"

The only one I like at this time is the escort. I do think that they will make great scouts similar to armored cars and naval bombers. I cant see a difference between the battlecruiser and the existing nuclear battleship. Minelayers are a good idea, but they will need to be tweaked so that they don't become too overpowered. Same issue for the hospital ships, and I don't see why someone would want to invest in them. If a submarine finds them, the player loses not one, but three units.

James Hylton wrote:

The general idea is that they would sacrifice armor for speed. They would have lower defense, but would be faster to make and cheaper than Battleships.
And exactly how many "battlecruisers" put in a guest appearance in World War II? I can think of one that was involved in an important naval action: HMS Hood, and I think most of us know how that ended. The original idea was that battlecruisers would have battleship-size guns and cruiser-weight armor in order to chase, outgun and destroy cruisers that were operating as commerce raiders. In practice, admirals made the mistake of pairing something that looked like a battleship (i.e. a battlecruiser) against a real battleship (i.e. one with hull and turret armor that could take direct hits from battleship-size guns), with unfortunate consequences for the battlecruiser crew.

Big-gunned, thin-armored battlecruisers were largely a WWI-era concept, one that most major navies abandoned after the conceptual flaws were exposed for all knowledgeable observers to see as a result of the Battle of Jutland.

Bottom line: the battlecruiser was a minor type with few examples in existence in 1939-45, and even fewer that played anything like a significant role in the war.

MontanaBB wrote:

James Hylton wrote:

The general idea is that they would sacrifice armor for speed. They would have lower defense, but would be faster to make and cheaper than Battleships.
And exactly how many "battlecruisers" put in a guest appearance in World War II? I can think of one that was involved in an important naval action: HMS Hood, and I think most of us know how that ended. The original idea was that battlecruisers would have battleship-size guns and cruiser-weight armor in order to chase, outgun and destroy cruisers that were operating as commerce raiders. In practice, admirals made the mistake of pairing something that looked like a battleship (i.e. a battlecruiser) against a real battleship (i.e. one with hull and turret armor that could take direct hits from battleship-size guns), with unfortunate consequences for the battlecruiser crew.

Big-gunned, thin-armored battlecruisers were largely a WWI-era concept, one that most major navies abandoned after the conceptual flaws were exposed for all knowledgeable observers to see as a result of the Battle of Jutland.

Bottom line: the battlecruiser was a minor type with few examples in existence in 1939-45, and even fewer that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_battleship_Scharnhorst

This ship repeatedly showed by the Royal Navy, and her Sister ship was just as good. Both ships are described in various sources as battle-cruisers due to the lack of German identification

"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian
"Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher
"The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher
Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW
Game Username: LordStark01

I mean, I get your point and I do agree that as a real world concept they failed in their primary role of screening BB and aiding carriers (as was the case with the japs), and did better lend themselves are more expensive convoy raiders (and Heavy Cruisers did that just fine) in terms of the game, it would act as a stepping stone from cruiser to Battleship.

"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian
"Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher
"The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher
Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW
Game Username: LordStark01

TankBuster wrote:

This ship repeatedly showed by the Royal Navy, and her Sister ship was just as good. Both ships are described in various sources as battle-cruisers due to the lack of German identification
I am familiar with both. Here's the question: Were the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau undergunned battleships, "battlecruisers," or up-gunned heavy cruisers? It's an unanswerable question because references of the time referred to them as battleships or pocket battleships, and the class was sui generis with small battleship/battlecruiser-size displacement but intermediate-size 11-inch guns -- the only comparable ships built by another major power were the U.S. Navy's two Alaska-class cruisers, which had similar displacement and slightly larger 12-inch guns, and were designed to counter a commerce raider threat from the Japanese navy that never materialized. The U.S. Navy classified the Alaskas as heavy cruisers and they, like the Iowa-class battleships, spent most of their active careers providing fire support for U.S. Marine Corps amphibious landings and AA cover for the U.S. Navy's fast carriers.

I think if we are going to add another type of warship to the COW research menu, it should be one that was a common type, not some odd hybrid represented by rare bird "battlecruisers" that were not even really defined clearly in contemporary references like Jane's.

MontanaBB wrote:

TankBuster wrote:

This ship repeatedly showed by the Royal Navy, and her Sister ship was just as good. Both ships are described in various sources as battle-cruisers due to the lack of German identification
I am familiar with both. Here's the question: Were the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau undergunned battleships, "battlecruisers," or up-gunned heavy cruisers? It's an unanswerable question because references of the time referred to them as battleships or pocket battleships, and the class was sui generis with small battleship/battlecruiser-size displacement but intermediate-size 11-inch guns -- the only comparable ships built by another major power were the U.S. Navy's two Alaska-class cruisers, which had similar displacement and slightly larger 12-inch guns, and were designed to counter a commerce raider threat from the Japanese navy that never materialized. The U.S. Navy classified the Alaskas as heavy cruisers and they, like the Iowa-class battleships, spent most of their active careers providing fire support for U.S. Marine Corps amphibious landings and AA cover for the U.S. Navy's fast carriers.

I think if we are going to add another type of warship to the COW research menu, it should be one that was a common type, not some odd hybrid represented by rare bird "battlecruisers" that were not even really defined clearly in contemporary references like Jane's.

True, as we can't settle on an actual ship type is does make my point mute. I agree however, maybe we need a more common and easier to define ship
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian
"Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher
"The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher
Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW
Game Username: LordStark01

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Suggestions
Quick Launch