Remove ads

Belated Battleships (KanColle) [REHOST]

Reader mode
Kiyone4ever said:
A few personal opinions, if I may?

Frigates... That is to say the Knox class and FFG-7 Perry class and what they seem to try to be doing with the LCS are akin to destroyer escorts. Frigates as in the old DL types are probably closer to Nagara. Nagara was a CL but no one would suggest that Nagara was interchangeable with the as built Mogamis which were also technically CLs until their turrets were swapped out. Nagara was functionally a large destroyer and was used as a DD flotilla leader.

With the Ticos, Kidds, Spruances, and Burkes, we have an evolution of the same basic (Spruance) hull form. The Kidd class was originally going to be classed as cruisers by the Iranian Navy before the fall of the Shah and the US Navy taking them over. Then the Ticos ARE cruisers but still based on the same basic hull. And from there we move on to the Burkes... not cruisers but clearly Tico's designated successor. I'd have to opine that these ships all fall into being in the range between Fletcher class DDs and Atlanta class CLAAs. The only modernish era ship I can think of which would group with say a Northampton would be Kirov class
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Pretty much any ship built after WW2 inteded for the escort role was called either a frigate or a destroyer based on role. Destroyers were multirole, while frigates were more ASW specced. This includes the Ticos, which were originally laid down as destroyers. (Designed as a Spruance with the AEGIS radar system.)

The only reason we have called cruisers today, is that someone realised that the Soviets had more cruisers than the US did. So the Navy renamed a bunch of destroyers and frigates as cruisers.
The ships and their designs never changed, only the designation.
 
Has Momma Gale been told that Wash is a ship yet? I reread the relevent parts but I can't tell ether way.
 
Simon_Jester said:
Very possibly yes in the first case, not necessarily in the latter- because some aircraft carriers did have 6" or 8" guns. The idea of a carrier with cruiser-weight surface attack capability isn't unheard of (Sister Sara says hi).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The last ones to have armament that could be called Cruiser-weight were the Midways (At least in the US), which had two more 5" guns than an Atlanta.
 
Simon_Jester said:
Very possibly yes in the first case, not necessarily in the latter- because some aircraft carriers did have 6" or 8" guns. The idea of a carrier with cruiser-weight surface attack capability isn't unheard of (Sister Sara says hi).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Jimmy Carter: When did I trade my diving planes for a flight deck???

And asking because TASM (or the new Block IVs being coded for Anti-Maritime work) is way more lethal and capable than a Harpoon, just more spendy.

But we should get back to the writing.
 
Last edited:
Always Late said:
Graf Zepplin, Akagi, and Kaga are glaring at you. :V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why glaring? Saratoga was just the first I thought of, far from the only one.

Kiyone4ever said:
Am confused on how this applies to the Jimmy Carter, a Sea Wolf class attack submarine?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
...Because I done bleeped up, and assumed a ship named for a modern president was an aircraft carrier. That's how.

That said, an attack ship firing a cruise missile isn't going to level-effect like a destroyer or cruiser firing shells. It's going to level like a submarine firing torpedoes. Seawolves are quite modern, although Harpoons are kind of mediocre, so think in terms of, oh... midwar submarine performance?

Star_Trekker said:
Lex, too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Dame Not Appearing In This Fic I can deal with. I am sorry to Akagi and Kaga, though; no slight was intended.
 
Simon_Jester said:
That said, an attack ship firing a cruise missile isn't going to level-effect like a destroyer or cruiser firing shells. It's going to level like a submarine firing torpedoes. Seawolves are quite modern, although Harpoons are kind of mediocre, so think in terms of, oh... midwar submarine performance?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So get the Carter and those black hole quiet SSGN conversions we made out of the Ohios, load them up with 1000#, 1000 mile range TASMs and new build Block IV Tactical Tomahawks, and do a Macross Barrage? War's over.
 
LudicrousSpeedGo said:
So get the Carter and those black hole quiet SSGN conversions we made out of the Ohios, load them up with 1000#, 1000 mile range TASMs and new build Block IV Tactical Tomahawks, and do a Macross Barrage? War's over.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Those would likely nuke the island bases humanity will have to rebuild post-war. That said, Abyssals mess with modern tracking systems so much you practically have to take manual control of each missile, while dodging incoming shellfire and torpedoes.
 
@LudicrousSpeedGo : Uh... no.

I suspect that a missile attack fired from that long a range would probably not translate as submarine torpedoes but as... something else. I don't even know what. V-1 buzz bombs? Given that Abyssals tend to not show up on radar or satellite imagery when they don't feel like it, how would you even target an attack like that?

Look, I don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend, but the leveling effect does not run on physics. To quote my past self:

Well, there's stories where the breaks from reality are inherently consistent and exploitable through cleverness.

The trouble is, this isn't one of them. The fundamental break from reality isn't that demonic ships from the past are jamming our radar, or that they don't show up properly on computerized sonar data analysis, or that GPS doesn't home in on their ships' location, or anything specific like that.

If it was, then there would be a lot to be said for Thor's basic approach of trying to analyze everything and figure out the One True Weakness that the enemy's highly specific protections don't help against.

But as noted, the key break from reality isn't a specific thing that you can bypass in a specific way. The key break from reality is that naval warfare doesn't actually run on logic anymore.

The ships are girls. The girls are ships. Ships that aren't, in some sense, girls simply do not and cannot compete anymore.

[shrugs]

That's just the basic fact of the story, and you can't exploit it, except by getting some ships who are girls and having them start whaling on the enemy ships. Which are, presumably, also in some sense girls.

So get used to your ships eating pie, and saying "poi," and falling in love with their admirals, and wandering the base at five in the morning dispensing coffee. It's just the way naval warfare works now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

...

I mean, seriously...

LSG... can you please explain why you've decided that we desperately need another person doing this in this thread? It's getting tiresome. We already had one guy get banned because he just would not shut up about trying to think of ways to gimmick or out-think his way past Abyssal resistance to modern weapons. He had other defects, but that was one of the two or three most annoying ones.
 
Short lecture time ho!

A Flight IIA Burke is basically an amalgamation of the WW2 DE, DD, CL, and CA. It does the roles of all those ships, and calling it a destroyer is still accurate today because it is the workhorse of the fleet, and destroyers were the workhorse of the fleet, and I love destroyers and Arleigh Burke loved destroyers so there. (Also the US has more Burkes than many nations have ships.) Now, in terms of ASuW and ASW, the Flight IIA Burkes are less capable than the original Flight I Burkes, because they lost the two quadpack Harpoon launchers and the towed array sonar to fit in the helo hangar (otoh Romeo Seahawks are ASW hotness so that's been mitigated somewhat). As a result, a Burke's only missile options for ASuW are to use the SM-2 and SM-6 Standard Missiles as short range ad hoc antiship missiles. This is not as bad as it sounds given that 1) modern ships have jack and shit for armor and 2) a one ton missile hitting you at mach 2 has a shitload of kinetic energy, and 3) unlike every other Navy in the world, the USN's primary antiship platform is a carrier-based fighter. Carriers launch Hornets to kill ships, Burkes put up a wall of SAMs to guard the carrier.

As Break said, this is changing, given the USN's pivot to asia, and with a number of AShMs in competition to be selected to replace Harpoon (Block IV Tomahawk, LRASM, NSM, modified Harpoon).

(The Japanese and Korean Aegis DDGs retain their helo hangars and AShMs by going "fuckit" and lengthening the hull. The Korean Sejong the Great-class has 128 VLS cells and 16 Korean Not!Harpoons.)

Everything I said wrt Burkes applies to the Ticos, which were literally Spruance-class DDs with Aegis, but I'd add that the CL or CA equivalency is stronger with the Ticos because 1) larger ship and more weapons, and 2) flagship fittings for a Commodore. Ticos serve as flotilla leaders, shepherding Burkes, so that should put them into CL or CA equivalence. The same argument can be made for the Japanese Atago-class DDGs, as they're 2 decks higher than Burkes because of the flagship fittings to be flotilla leaders.

Sir_Braazmiir said:
Those would likely nuke the island bases humanity will have to rebuild post-war. That said, Abyssals mess with modern tracking systems so much you practically have to take manual control of each missile, while dodging incoming shellfire and torpedoes.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Can we not be talking about casually throwing nukes around, ayy.

As a general rule, nuking a place that you intend to capture is not a good idea.
 
Last edited:
Plus, Abyssals who run on evil magic probably have less problem with occupying the radioactive ruins of their own base than humans who run on things like 'metabolisms' and 'cell replication' will garrisoning the radioactive ruins of their own base.
 
Well that brings up a question about Abyssal ichor/leftovers/etc. Is the clean up after Abyssal occupation hazardous enough that glassing it over is the more environmentally friendly option?

edit: do we even know?
 
A reminder that SSGNs, unlike SSBNs, carry conventional, not nuclear, warheads.

Seemed needed.
 
Simon_Jester said:
@LudicrousSpeedGo : Uh... no.

I suspect that a missile attack fired from that long a range would probably not translate as submarine torpedoes but as... something else. I don't even know what. V-1 buzz bombs? Given that Abyssals tend to not show up on radar or satellite imagery when they don't feel like it, how would you even target an attack like that?

Look, I don't understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend, but the leveling effect does not run on physics. To quote my past self:



...

I mean, seriously...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

As I've stated, the leveling effect is neither hard and fast nor consistent. There are posters who've claimed (and would like to believe) otherwise, I'm just putting up my proof.

It serves the narrative, but is majorly arbitrary to rule of cool / WoG.


Also, on a professional level I'm a big fan of getting in range of your weapons while staying outside range of the enemy's weapons.
 
Last edited:
MagisterAurelius said:
Well that brings up a question about Abyssal ichor/leftovers/etc. Is the clean up after Abyssal occupation hazardous enough that glassing it over is the more environmentally friendly option?

edit: do we even know?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Well, if there's a problem, there's always fire.

Shame that TBX would do very little. I think we've talked about that before, or is my memory playing me a trick?
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top