I made this info to have evtually upcoming discussions about the naval part of the AHOI-Mod more organized. Below is the initial draft of the new naval units.
New unit line up for the next version:
(I want to mention that this design also had in mind that it’s possible to maybe add later an earlier timeline as WWII.)
All from early to late. One unit counts for some subs in HOI3.
Early Torpedo Boats to later E-Boats/Schnellboote. Maybe also the secret developments of late war?
Also one unit includes some boats in HOI3.
Fleet Destroyer/Large Destroyer will be Techs that affect this unit as it is not only one ship but some(~5) in HOI3 terms.
From “Kleiner Kreuzer=Small Cruiser” around 2-5k tons max. to later ww2 designs.
From “Großer Kreuzer=Big Cruiser” (like SMS Yorck) around 5-10k tons max. to later ww2 designs.
Around 15k tons max.(Like Deutschland Class) to later ww2 designs(P-Klasse.)
It is slightly bigger as a heavy cruiser and has more firepower(~”6*28-33cm” or fictional ~”8-9* 24cm”).
Like SMS Von der Tann, Invincible to later ww2 designs.
Around 20k tons max. to later ww1 ~30k tons and later early ww2 designs ~35k tons(“light” fast Battleships like Dunkerque, Scharnhorst, Alaska).
Maybe I will also count the Hood under BB’s as she had a tonnage ~47k!. It is stated that she had a comparable armor like the QE-class. (Just some parts not well designed..) And its often also called the first fast BB of all time.
The German initial planned “counterpart” was Ersatz-Yorck-Klasse with ~37k tons but also ~4knots slower, wich could give a hint how big the engine parts of Hood must have been in comparison..
Queen-Elizabeth had 33k tons..
The planned N3 ships of UK with 9*18″ and ~50k tons and 23knots in 1918(!) and of course the Yamato/MOntana/H-44.
All that is exeptional big in their specific timeline.(And does not fit into the Panama canal..)
Just because ther were some few.
Maybe also used for some Hybrid-Cruisers(Lexington could be a special one with her 8″ guns, she would then of course have more then one CAG..).
Can carry 1 CAG.
Just because ther were many build by US. Like the workhorse of the Pacific War.
Maybe also used for early WWI carrier.
Can carry 1 CAG.
Starting with Colossus class. Carriers that could carry 60+ planes.
Maybe also early fleet carriers.
Can carry 2 CAG’s.
Starting with Yorktown-class. Carriers that could carry 90+ planes
Can carry 3 CAG’s.
Starting with Midway-class. Carriers that could carry 120+ planes
Can carry 4 CAG’s.
Will consist early out of ~20 planes.
With technology “permanent deck park” that will raise to ~30, so we got the right numbers of planes for the carriers.
(For having planes on board. I read that the overall more planes on USN-carriers where just because the USN used a permanent deck park. It is noted that the UK adopted that doctrine and had just only some planes less on their carriers then, wich had bee before 20-30 planes less. So maybe a tech will increas the size of CAG’s to simulate this “doctrine”.)
From normal Transports to Special Landing Crafts.
Also some event activated auxialry cruisers..
The “tricky part” in this area are maybe the Battlecruisers / Pocket Battleships and the amount of CAG’s carriers can use.
Intially carriers had ~20 planes, then as the ships grow, ~40/50/60 while f.e. the US Lexington is quoted for having already 90 planes in the mid 20ies..
To have enough models to better represent all these different ships, I came up with 4 carriers classes.
The CVE will be used for the initial and later CVE’s that helped all the convoys and in the pacific war by the US, at least ~150 of these were built by US alone..
Then we have the CVL’s wich incorporates all the ships that could carry ~40-60 planes, like the initial Zeppelin or UK/ designs early “fleet carriers” and late war real CVL designs.
The CV’s are the main fleet carrier. Like Yorktown/Soryu/Ark Royal and so on.
And finaly the CVB’s wich are the supercarriers wich could carry 120+ planes and later also much jets due to their sheer size.
Wich the jet technology the CAG’s will get smaller again to represent the needed additional space.
I’m not fully sure yet how to implement that. As the jets should be much more powerfull then the piston engined planes. Due to the game mechanics of HOI3 that will be highly abstracted, as we can’t ensure that CVE’s can’t use jet-CAG’s then.(Normally CVE’s were to small to use jet-CAG’s..)
The Pocket BB’s have their own class as CB’s now.
The whole BC’s and BB’s types of late WWI are somehow merging into the new fast BB and into a smaller BC like the Renown-class with its 6*15″ guns. (Preceded BC ship classes had 8*13,5″..)
So the BC went to fast little BB’s to fight CA’s and CB’s.
For the new CB’s, the planned P-class(6*12″) was never built and also later planned to get 4*15″..
And of course you can argue that without the naval treaty of Washington, the normal CA’s would have get bigger guns then 8″ and also would have exeeded 10k tons like they did later.(Still 8″ but 20k tons..) But as we have this historic treaty, and it is somekind of hard to represent all possibilities with only the CA’s unit class. Sure I could include the Deutschland Class with an event as a modified CA, but noone would be able to build some more..
I find it an interesting option for smaller countries to have at least a Pocket BB that could fight the CA’s of bigger navies. It just fits into the weight and armament list of all ships.
Average numbers in 1000 tons from WWI to WWII:
And I also disagree for the ones who claim that the Yamato was only the more modern version of a fast BB, and that there is no place for a BBB.
Again, for gameplay reason(building, teaching the AI etc.) and from my point of understanding, a ship like the Yamato or the N3 in 1918 would have get similar designs build by other navies but also in limited amount. These ships were much(!) bigger then any other vessel of that time and required a very big amount of ressources alone for the building(dockyard and harbour/logistics). We also know that the other navies did not choose to build comparable big ships like Yamato for several reasons(not only that carriers were seen superior to BB’s..).
In general and Imho, that is if someone would claim that CL’s were obsolete with the building of CA’s.
Both had their place and usage..
You have now for nearly each ship class a practical and an overall theoretcial for each main class(naval/sub/carrier).
These practicals helps in not spamming intially ships of another sizes and simulates “retooling/needed dockyard facilities” etc..
Doctrine wise, I went with the main tasks a navy had to do. Overall naval experience, battlefleet(surface action), submarine, carrier, convoy, amphib landings..