Unit Errata

Place bug reports / questions here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
BattleGoat Team
Posts: 6
Joined: Aug 29 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#436 Post by Sumojoe118 » Sep 09 2019

This has been corrected for the next update.

Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 971
Joined: Jan 11 2016
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#437 Post by Nerei » Sep 11 2019

Sumojoe118 wrote:
Sep 04 2019
Hi SGTscuba, we have looked into the build time of the Atlanta Class Cruiser and it seems to fall in line with the average of the build times listed on the wikipedia page for this ship.
If you find any other details for why it should be lower we will look further into it.

Will you accept if I make a few arguments?

If so consider that build times in general are fairly far from realistic and setting a few units build times to more realistic values will just make them less viable. 360 days is like SGTscuba said generally what the game says it takes to build a world war 2 cruiser.

E.g. CL-119 USS Juneau takes 360 days to build. That is a modified Atlanta class cruiser.

Cleveland, Brooklyn, Providence and Galveston also takes around 360-370 days and are all US Light cruisers from around the world war 2 era (or guided missile cruisers build on these hulls)
Pensacola, Alaska, Wichita, Baltimore, Portland and Boston are in a similar range with Des Moines and Oregon City being slightly lower at 345. That would be the heavy cruisers and guided missile cruisers build on said heavy cruiser hulls of the same period.
The exception being Alaska as that is a large cruiser which is basically just a fancy name for a roughly 30.000 tonne under-gunned battlecruiser but it still takes just 360 days (despite taking around 2,5 years in reality).

The first nuclear powered cruiser USS Long Beach also takes 360 days which is just around 1000 days less than the real ship...

Further 525 days is pretty close to how long it takes to build a treaty battleship like the King George V class. 15 days less to be specific. It should however be said that in the real world these battleships took like 4-5 years to build.

It is 21 days less than a Nimitz class nuclear powered aircraft carrier.
Again 546 days is fairly far off the typical build time for these carriers which was around 5-7 years.

It is 95 days less than a Yamato class battleship.
Like above however the 620 days the game says these take to build is far from reality as both Yamato and Musashi took just over 1500 days.

The Iowa class battleships also took nearly 1000 days to around 1250 days to complete which is fairly far from the 565 days the game says they took.

None of the 24 Essex class aircraft carriers where completed within the 380 days they do in-game. The best is USS Franklin at 421 days followed by USS Hancock at 446. Those two together with USS Ticonderoga and USS Hornet are however they only vessels completed in less than 500 days. 1/3 took over 660 days though technically that includes vessels like USS Oriskany which had construction suspended for some time (hence why it took over 2000 days to complete).

Note how many warships have taken more than 660 days to complete. I did not find a single post world war 1 battleship that took less than 660 days from keel laid to the vessel was commissioned though admittedly I did not look at all candidates. 660 days is worth setting as a comparison as the A-150 battleship is the unit design with the longest build time and it takes 660 days to build. Being most likely a modified Yamato class battleship it would probably also take over 1500 days though.

So really why should Atlanta class cruisers have realistic build times when warships in general do not?
Not that I object to the idea as I do find in general that unit build times are too short. I can also see some interesting situations arising from increased warship construction times. However if you want to go for it you should do it for all unit designs not just a few and honestly I doubt you (BG) want to commit the time that takes.

Posts: 1860
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: Unit Errata

#438 Post by SGTscuba » Sep 11 2019

^ that, I pointed it out as it seems the odd one out, rather than an issue with all of them.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:

http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040

BattleGoat Team
Posts: 6
Joined: Aug 29 2019
Human: Yes

Re: Unit Errata

#439 Post by Sumojoe118 » Sep 11 2019

Thanks for the insight, there are some great suggestions in this post. We will be changing the build time to 370 in the next update.

Post Reply

Return to “Issues and Support”