View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
AG124
Joined: 28 Jun 2005 Posts: 770 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: Japanese Ships Which Should be in SHIV |
|
|
Since Japanese warships will be the targets in SHIV, I think that a good variety should be included. In SHIII, the lack of warships was not too great a problem to the average campaign player (although it hurt historical scenarios) but in SHIV there needs to be a greater number.
Japanese ships which should be included
Battleships:
- All five classes. If one class needs to be sacrificed, it should be the Ise class.
Carriers:
- Kaga
- Akagi
- Ryujo
- Soryu
- Hiryu
- Shokaku class
- Zuiho class
- Junyo class
- Taiho
- Taiyo class
- Shinano
- Unryu class
It would be nice to have the Hosho but we can live without her. Same goes for the escort carriers Kaiyo and Shinyo. The Ryuho and the Chitose class aren't important enough, IMO.
Heavy Cruisers:
I'd like to see them all included. But if two classes have to be sacrificed, then drop the Aoba and Furataka classes.
Light Cruisers:
The Katori class can be ignored. The rest should be included.
I'm not going to discuss destroyers right now.
Also, there should be a better variety of merchant ships. (and smaller ones, which should be especially true in the PTO.) And there should be a separate class for whale factory ships.
Any thoughts? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DeepSix
Joined: 27 Mar 2005 Posts: 802 Location: DB22
|
Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It may be spitting in the wind, but I vote to include Hosho in that list, since I think there were several boats specifically ordered to attack her based on Ultra intelligence.
Also (and it may have been mentioned elsewhere): tenders and auxiliaries, if possible.
My only other thought at this point is, why would any classes of warships have to be left out? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Torplexed
Joined: 25 Dec 2001 Posts: 1194 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I remember I-Boats were included as possible targets in the original Silent Hunter. I wouldn't mind seeing them again. However, such encounters should be relatively rare. I also hope you don't end up sinking the same warship(s) 3 or 4 times as was also common in Silent Hunter. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CCIP
Joined: 17 Apr 2005 Posts: 3224 Location: Ottawa, Canada [Grid BA7311]
|
Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree, unlike SHIII, the warships in SHIV should be a high priority.
I hope they'll all get in! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GlowwormGuy
Joined: 27 Mar 2002 Posts: 615
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
They should just make a darn good ship editor available so we can include ALL of them.
Mountbatten |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sailor Steve
Joined: 22 Nov 2002 Posts: 5433 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with all of the above, and would also like to make sure that the escorts include Kaibokans. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wulfmann
Joined: 13 May 2005 Posts: 507 Location: Florida
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK, we all agree we want everything and why not, theses were great looking ships and hard to choose.
But, what if we had to choose?
Point, saying we want it all and not showing our priorities means we might get the lesser of what we like best (what ever that is)
So, if we were limited to 4 carrier models 3 battleship classes and 3 heavy cruyiser classes, what would you prefer.
So, respond with your desires but listed in order of preference.
For me, it would be
1 Shokaku (These 2 were the Scharnhost and Gneisenau of the Pacific!)
2 Hiryu (Soryu had the island on the other side so would be in this and Unyru's are enlarged Hiryu's)
3 Taiho
4 Zuiho (third ship would be similar Ryuhu)
5 Shinano
1 Kongo
2 Mutsu
3 Yamato
1 Takao
2 Mogami
3 Nachi
4 Tone
The likelyhood we would have the entire fleet is a pipe dream and would make for a 2009 release so what are the more important ones IYO
Then, what ships would be most important in the US Navy and in list of preference.
Besides the most obvious USS Sacramento at Pearl Harbor!
Wulfmann |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AG124
Joined: 28 Jun 2005 Posts: 770 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | My only other thought at this point is, why would any classes of warships have to be left out? |
Lack of development time/money, lack of space on installation disk...hopefully these potential limitations will not be serious.
As Wulfmann said, some classes of carriers are very similar. This applies to other classes of warships too, although to a lesser degree. Therefore, it is almost definite that someone will kitbash some more after the game is released, even without a SDK.
Anyway, limiting myself to 6 CV's, 3 BB's, 4 CA's, and 4 CL's, and in order of personal preference:
Carriers:
- Shokaku.
- Akagi (Kaga could be kitbashed)
- Hiryu (Soryu and Unryu class could be kitbashed)
- Shinano
- Zuiho (Ryuho could be kitbashed)
- Junyo
Battleships:
- Kongo
- Yamato
- Mutsu
(Both Ise and Fuso classes could be kitbashed, if we had good enough kitbashers).
Heavy Cruisers:
- Takao
- Tone
- Mogami
- Myoko/Nachi
Light Cruisers:
- Agano
- Kuma and either Nagara/Tenryu/Naka
- Yubari |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AG124
Joined: 28 Jun 2005 Posts: 770 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And for US ships:
Carriers (6):
- Yorktown
- Lexington
- Essex
- Independence
- Casablanca
- Wasp
Battleships (3):
- Iowa
- South Dakota
- Pennsylvania
Heavy Cruisers (4):
- New Orleans
- Baltimore
- Northampton
- Portland
Light Cruisers (4):
- Cleveland
- Brooklyn (including subclasses)
- Atlanta
- Omaha |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Torplexed
Joined: 25 Dec 2001 Posts: 1194 Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Since the models for them already exist thanks to SH3 maybe throw in the odd U-Boat or German armed merchant cruiser. There was one German merchant raider...the Michel I think...which was sunk by the US sub Tarpon off Yokohama in 1943 after refitting in Kobe, Japan. The Germans were rather annoyed that she hadn't been given proper escort. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AG124
Joined: 28 Jun 2005 Posts: 770 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think they would need a new Commerce Raider model, as the one in SHIII is too big, and doesn't really look like any of the German raiders of which I have seen pictures (although I haven't seen pictures of all of them). But you are right - even if they don't include the SHIII raider, they should include a new one. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DeepSix
Joined: 27 Mar 2005 Posts: 802 Location: DB22
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know it's supposed to be about Japanese ships, but to the list of U.S. ships I'd like to add my personal preference for the North Carolina and the Washington (BBs 55 and 56), especially *if* playable Japanese subs are included in the game. North Carolina was torpedoed by an I-boat during... ah, I think, Battle of Santa Cruz Islands (at any rate it was during the early part of the Solomons campaign).
(I know, I admit it, I want to have it all.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wulfmann
Joined: 13 May 2005 Posts: 507 Location: Florida
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree on the Washington class as number one (sorry Uncle George((Served on the USS Missouri)).
Remember. What starts in 1944 (Iowas) is not in for 2 full years.
So after the W and NC I would want the South Dakota class and more US cruisers and carriers built than BBs.
There is a limit on what they will be able to do.
Important to note. With Rodney's turrets and South Dakotas super structure the Tennessee and California BBs were rebuilt using a similar super structure to SD. If the SD is made the devs would only need to make the hull to have those as later ships (are you taking notes here devs?)
Wulfmann |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JU_88
Joined: 05 Jan 2006 Posts: 65 Location: UK
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Im with Torplexed, I want other subs around on both sides, I hated being the only U-boat in SH3, its like all the worlds submarines crawl ashore and hide in the bushes when I set out for my patrols. :huh: |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Skubber
Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 106 Location: Rochester, NY, USA
|
Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just on a random check of US submarine sinking records, I counted 5 or 6 Japanese subs sunk. (And one German.)
I think if SHIV is going to include aircraft carriers as targets, it should certainly include Japanese subs as well.
(I'd like to play the Japanese subs, too. But that's probably asking too much.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|