Revised Ship dp's.

[demorier]

It seems very clear to me now that I need a revised set of Damage Profiles for ships. I know some were altered a long time ago by clever designers of the past.

Just wondering if there was something more concise and updated out there for the default ships ??

[Seagull V]

Hello demorier

Pen32Win did an excellent package:-
http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/page.php?lloc=downloads&loc=downloads&page=info&FileID=8532

Regards SGV :wavey:

[demorier]

Thanks seagull....will check them out. :running:

[demorier]

Bit of a pity....not many of the stock ships in that pack...files seem to be for a lot of custom made ships.:frown:

[Seagull V]

Hello again demorier,

Simviation has a few others, don't know if they are exactly what you are after, maybe a complete revised set of ships with paint-schemes, moded models, and DPs is another project for the future. :wavey:

Simviation:-
http://simviation.com/1/download-file?file=AF_ShipDPPackage-1.zip&fileId=33684
http://simviation.com/1/download-file?file=FireSHIP.zip&fileId=31420

Regards SGV

[demorier]

Thanks SG. Your help is appreciated.

I have been sniffing and found a set of revised aircraft carriers at SV. Just resetting a bit of that stuff now. Working better...now when I smack a carrier with a couple of 500 pounders I'm at least getting a fire on deck.

[Jagdflieger]

Make a search for Blue Devil in the archives sections. He did quite a bit of work with the stock ships a few years ago.

Here's a link to BD's uploads:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/page.php?lloc=downloads&loc=downloads&page=downloads&FileUploadName=Blue Devil

[bobhegf]

Things such as oilslicks will need to be added to the DP file.

[Shadow Wolf 07]

I spoke with Collin about his carriers but he disagreed with my ideas. It is my opinion that his Essex class carriers are too "soft". One bomb or 1 Kamikaze can sink them. During the war, several of these ships took a lot of punishment but not one was sunk. Collin insists that additional, added equipment made them more top heavy and thus vulnerable to damage below the water line (torpedoes).

On the otherhand, some of his other ships, namely his recently released IJN Transport, are tough and put up tons of flak. I wish he would relook the hardness of his Essex carriers and perhaps even increase the flak from them. I could change them myself, but the changes wouldn't be standard throughout the "community."

What do you folks think?

[bobhegf]

The essex class carriers had torpedo blisters added to them which helped with the way they road in the water as well as helped protect them from torpedo hits.One carrier was hit by a kamikaze causing many explosions. One of the men on one of the other carriers said that after 50 explosions he stoped counting.That ship made it back to the states under its own power.The Essex class carrier was a hard ship to sink.The old Yourktown class was easer to sink but they were still tough and gould take alot of damage.Look at the damage the Enterprise took before she returned to the states for repair refit and having torpedo blasters added.

[sc7500]

...It seems very clear to me now that I need a revised set of Damage Profiles for ships. I know some were altered a long time ago by clever designers of the past....

What are you looking for ezzakly, De ?

Harder to sink ? :icon34:

More Flak ? :icon_eek:

More effects ? :pop4:

This is easy to do with DPEdit - and I will show examples here if you define what you want..... :jump:

SC
:kilroy:

[Collin]

I spoke with Collin about his carriers but he disagreed with my ideas. It is my opinion that his Essex class carriers are too "soft". One bomb or 1 Kamikaze can sink them. During the war, several of these ships took a lot of punishment but not one was sunk. Collin insists that additional, added equipment made them more top heavy and thus vulnerable to damage below the water line (torpedoes).

On the otherhand, some of his other ships, namely his recently released IJN Transport, are tough and put up tons of flak. I wish he would relook the hardness of his Essex carriers and perhaps even increase the flak from them. I could change them myself, but the changes wouldn't be standard throughout the "community."

What do you folks think?

Just quoting USN Beau of Ships 1945.

Defend them better or ask TR about the dp at http://forum.lwdesigns.com.au/

As for the multiple explosions suffered by a couple of them due to kamikaze attacks these were deck explosions which didn't penetrate the main/strength deck.

Please remember the more effects you tag onto a dp the less your FPS.

regards Collin:ernae:

[demorier]

I think effects SC. eg If I hit a carrier deck with 2 X 500lb bombs I would expect to see a damaged deck, blackened by the explosion and some fire blazing away. I have a bit of that happening now with the updates.

I wouldn't expect to see a capital ship go down after being hit with 1 x 1000lb bomb.

There is a way of stacking the deck with AI planes ready to take off....someone showed me how to text edit the 'mis' file ages ago...when you hit the deck close by with a bomb it goes off with a hell of a bang. I have an old one here, have to remember how to do it.:wavey:

[Pen32Win]

I really should put out an up-date to that package since it was issued in 2007.....

Since then I've done the same to just about every ship I've D/L'ed and improved many of the ones in the original package. I just finished doing a bunch of Italian and German ships to correct their AA suites too. Another project to add to the list.... LOL

[Jagdflieger]

Pen,

That would be great and most appreciated. I particularly like the work on the ship damage boxes as I've never understood the magic in that. I can generally fix the gun situation in my DP files, but much more than that needs the touch of an expert.

Here's my two cents on the weapons for WWII PTO ships:

As you know, in the CFS 2 world, the Japanese AA is always most effective (particularly on Usio's fine ships), but in the real world, it was notoriously ineffective on a round per hit basis or percentage in comparison to Allied equipment.

The Type 89 5" duel mount was the standard heavy AA equipment on most IJN ships and it had trouble tracking fast moving targets. As a result, it was generally used to provide barrage fire.

The Type 96 25mm (a French Hotchkiss design) in single, double and triple mounts was the close in weapon, but it suffered from a low rate of fire and inadequate sights and tracking speed. Without an intermediate weapon, like the 40mm Bofors of the Allies, the inadequate 25mm had to perform both roles.

The Japanese Type 94 director or predictor was equally challenged with fast moving carrier planes. While it could and did deal with level bombers and TBD Devastators, it was not up to mid to late war Allied aircraft and could not compete with USN fire control.

On a doctrinal and training basis, the USN trained to fire at individual planes and to maneuver the task force as one unit, thus keeping fire control integrity. As noted above, the IJN trained for barrage fire with their heavy AA and ship captains maneuvered individually, thus loosing much supporting fire from their accompanying units. This can be replicated to some extent by using the "Turn" and "Do Not Evade" commands at ship waypoints when making a mission with the Mission Builder.

In an attempt to deal with the increasing threat of USN carrier planes, the IJN developed AA shells for their ship's main guns all the way up to the massive 18.1" naval rifles on the Yamato and the Musashi.

Finally, the Allies had the marvelous proximity fuse from mid war on and this removed the complicated process of fuze time settings from the AA solutions.

[Shadow Wolf 07]

Great post Jagd. And yes Pen... please do!