Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
- General
- Posts: 2544
- Joined: Dec 08 2007
- Location: Tipton, UK
Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
I've been playing the '36 sandboxes quite a bit recently and have noticed how wobbly some of the firing range stats are.
Some Battlecruisers armed with 12in + guns, have a range of only 29km (such as the Alaska Class), whereas other cruisers with only light guns have ranges of 54km. This can be quite inconsistent as some of these actually outrange a fair number of battleships too!
Here's some examples with real calibres of guns:
Alaska Class, 12in guns, 29km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska-class_cruiser
CA-33 Portland, 8in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland-class_cruiser
Cleveland, 6in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland-class_cruiser
North Carolina, 16in guns, 46km (without the indirect boost) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Car ... battleship
Iowa, 16in guns, 51km (without the indirect boost) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa-class_battleship
Renown, 15in guns, 38km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renown-cl ... tlecruiser
Emerald Class, 6in guns, 27km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald-class_cruiser
Nurnberg, ~6in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Nürnberg
Tone, 8in, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone-class_cruiser
Chikuma, 6in, 5km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chikuma-class_cruiser
C Class, 6in, 5km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-class_cruiser
Some cruisers seem quite reasonable in comparison. You wouldn't be expecting a 6 or 8in gunned cruiser to outrange that of a 16 or even 12in set of guns with a equivalent fire control system.
Some early cruisers do have a range of only 7 or 11km though, but this could be put down to fire control given in the earlier era, these we're individually aimed, rather than via a central fire control system like a battleship would. (cruisers of that era typically had many single guns, with just shields and maybe 1 or 2 turrets) This is also represented in designs such as the "Pre-Century Cruiser".
Some destroyed do have an attack range of only 11km, whilst others can go up to 30km in this era, but you could put this down to fire control advancements as most of the 7km range ones are from ww1, with the 23+km range ones being from ww2. Although Japan seems to only get destroyed of 7km for a while despite having a similar calibre of gun.
Some Battlecruisers armed with 12in + guns, have a range of only 29km (such as the Alaska Class), whereas other cruisers with only light guns have ranges of 54km. This can be quite inconsistent as some of these actually outrange a fair number of battleships too!
Here's some examples with real calibres of guns:
Alaska Class, 12in guns, 29km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska-class_cruiser
CA-33 Portland, 8in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland-class_cruiser
Cleveland, 6in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland-class_cruiser
North Carolina, 16in guns, 46km (without the indirect boost) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Car ... battleship
Iowa, 16in guns, 51km (without the indirect boost) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa-class_battleship
Renown, 15in guns, 38km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renown-cl ... tlecruiser
Emerald Class, 6in guns, 27km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald-class_cruiser
Nurnberg, ~6in guns, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Nürnberg
Tone, 8in, 54km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone-class_cruiser
Chikuma, 6in, 5km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chikuma-class_cruiser
C Class, 6in, 5km - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-class_cruiser
Some cruisers seem quite reasonable in comparison. You wouldn't be expecting a 6 or 8in gunned cruiser to outrange that of a 16 or even 12in set of guns with a equivalent fire control system.
Some early cruisers do have a range of only 7 or 11km though, but this could be put down to fire control given in the earlier era, these we're individually aimed, rather than via a central fire control system like a battleship would. (cruisers of that era typically had many single guns, with just shields and maybe 1 or 2 turrets) This is also represented in designs such as the "Pre-Century Cruiser".
Some destroyed do have an attack range of only 11km, whilst others can go up to 30km in this era, but you could put this down to fire control advancements as most of the 7km range ones are from ww1, with the 23+km range ones being from ww2. Although Japan seems to only get destroyed of 7km for a while despite having a similar calibre of gun.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22082
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
-
- General
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Jan 11 2016
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
Quick note. Disable enhanced ranges in military settings. They mess up numbers when you want to compare the numbers the game uses with say navweaps.
E.g. Alaska has a range of 20km (yes way too low) in the datafiles not 29km. Those last 9 is added by Enhanced ranges. Vessels like Tone also gains around 14km from it. On low range vessels like Chikuma it make up a large percentage of the listed range. The datafile range of Chikuma is just 1km.
Not saying 40km is right by standard but it does make it easier to argue stats when everyone uses the same standard.
Also yes the stats are broken. It is not just ranges either. Whenever I see a gun only heavy cruiser that can compete with some of the largest guns ever put to sea (e.g. US 16in mk 7 and Japanese 18in Type 94) I have a hard time trying to not laugh.
E.g. Alaska has a range of 20km (yes way too low) in the datafiles not 29km. Those last 9 is added by Enhanced ranges. Vessels like Tone also gains around 14km from it. On low range vessels like Chikuma it make up a large percentage of the listed range. The datafile range of Chikuma is just 1km.
Not saying 40km is right by standard but it does make it easier to argue stats when everyone uses the same standard.
Also yes the stats are broken. It is not just ranges either. Whenever I see a gun only heavy cruiser that can compete with some of the largest guns ever put to sea (e.g. US 16in mk 7 and Japanese 18in Type 94) I have a hard time trying to not laugh.
-
- General
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Jan 11 2016
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
Okay I checked a bit and actually cruisers like Tone does have a reason for its 40km range
The Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedo when running at low speed can run out to around the 40km mark.
This torpedo was in service in 1936 and given that most of these ships where added for SR 1936 chances are that is the reason for their range.
It does not explain US navy cruisers like USS Cleveland as US navy torpedoes had significantly shorter range. Not that Cleveland class even had Torpedoes...
Naturally I think it is fairly safe to say that chances of hitting something out 40km after a travel time of over 30 minutes is somewhat low but it is fitting with how the game implements torpedoes.
Heck I find it unlikely for modern acoustic torpedoes to hit at their maximum range and they have far, far better odds than the Type 93.
Then again all cannons are using their maximum range which also tends to be greater than their effective range.
One issue though. If you actually carry through with this setup then basically every Imperial Japanese Navy destroyer "also" needs this range as yes they also carried the Type 93 torpedo. Please say hi to Shimakaze and its 15 Type 93 torpedo broadside each with a nearly 800kg explosive charge (for comparison that is basically the same as the total weight of 15in AP shells fired by Bismarck). Yes it is going to be a battleship murderer with a 40km range.
Lets not forget the Kuma class cruiser Kitakami post conversion to torpedo cruiser either. 40 Type 93 torpedoes with a broadside of 20.
The Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedo when running at low speed can run out to around the 40km mark.
This torpedo was in service in 1936 and given that most of these ships where added for SR 1936 chances are that is the reason for their range.
It does not explain US navy cruisers like USS Cleveland as US navy torpedoes had significantly shorter range. Not that Cleveland class even had Torpedoes...
Naturally I think it is fairly safe to say that chances of hitting something out 40km after a travel time of over 30 minutes is somewhat low but it is fitting with how the game implements torpedoes.
Heck I find it unlikely for modern acoustic torpedoes to hit at their maximum range and they have far, far better odds than the Type 93.
Then again all cannons are using their maximum range which also tends to be greater than their effective range.
One issue though. If you actually carry through with this setup then basically every Imperial Japanese Navy destroyer "also" needs this range as yes they also carried the Type 93 torpedo. Please say hi to Shimakaze and its 15 Type 93 torpedo broadside each with a nearly 800kg explosive charge (for comparison that is basically the same as the total weight of 15in AP shells fired by Bismarck). Yes it is going to be a battleship murderer with a 40km range.
Lets not forget the Kuma class cruiser Kitakami post conversion to torpedo cruiser either. 40 Type 93 torpedoes with a broadside of 20.
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
All these ranges have been corrected in my mod, together with most of destroyer gun ranges.
Please teach AI everything!
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Oct 10 2018
- Human: Yes
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22082
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
We have taken some of his changes in the past. But it takes time to ensure merging didn't cause any conflicts/corruption/cascading impacts.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Oct 10 2018
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
That's great to hear - many of his changes really improve the Cold War era (my favorite ) and keeping the mod up-to-date is probably very time consuming, so it usually isn't done..
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
Since updating and merging mod is indeed very time consuming and BGs are very active in updating unit database, I have stopped updating my mod untill the next big, official update they anounced.
Please teach AI everything!
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Oct 10 2018
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
That's understandable.. It would be best if all the fixes were actually merged into SRU database.. Question is how did you come up with those numbers - are they based on real world stats or are they more about how they "feel" and work gameplay-wise?Zuikaku wrote: ↑Nov 13 2019Since updating and merging mod is indeed very time consuming and BGs are very active in updating unit database, I have stopped updating my mod untill the next big, official update they anounced.
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Cruiser/battlecruiser Stats
I try to make them "real world" without any balancing in mind. I basically compare "new" unit with the old one in the unit database and try to figure out new values (at least concerning attack and defense).arakan94 wrote: ↑Nov 13 2019That's understandable.. It would be best if all the fixes were actually merged into SRU database.. Question is how did you come up with those numbers - are they based on real world stats or are they more about how they "feel" and work gameplay-wise?
Please teach AI everything!