Japanese Ships Which Should be in SHIV

[AG124]

Since Japanese warships will be the targets in SHIV, I think that a good variety should be included. In SHIII, the lack of warships was not too great a problem to the average campaign player (although it hurt historical scenarios) but in SHIV there needs to be a greater number.

Japanese ships which should be included

Battleships:

- All five classes. If one class needs to be sacrificed, it should be the Ise class.

Carriers:

- Kaga
- Akagi
- Ryujo
- Soryu
- Hiryu
- Shokaku class
- Zuiho class
- Junyo class
- Taiho
- Taiyo class
- Shinano
- Unryu class

It would be nice to have the Hosho but we can live without her. Same goes for the escort carriers Kaiyo and Shinyo. The Ryuho and the Chitose class aren't important enough, IMO.

Heavy Cruisers:

I'd like to see them all included. But if two classes have to be sacrificed, then drop the Aoba and Furataka classes.

Light Cruisers:

The Katori class can be ignored. The rest should be included.

I'm not going to discuss destroyers right now.

Also, there should be a better variety of merchant ships. (and smaller ones, which should be especially true in the PTO.) And there should be a separate class for whale factory ships.

Any thoughts?

[DeepSix]

It may be spitting in the wind, but I vote to include Hosho in that list, since I think there were several boats specifically ordered to attack her based on Ultra intelligence.

Also (and it may have been mentioned elsewhere): tenders and auxiliaries, if possible.

My only other thought at this point is, why would any classes of warships have to be left out?

[Torplexed]

I remember I-Boats were included as possible targets in the original Silent Hunter. I wouldn't mind seeing them again. However, such encounters should be relatively rare. I also hope you don't end up sinking the same warship(s) 3 or 4 times as was also common in Silent Hunter.

[CCIP]

I agree, unlike SHIII, the warships in SHIV should be a high priority.

I hope they'll all get in!

[GlowwormGuy]

They should just make a darn good ship editor available so we can include ALL of them.

Mountbatten

I agree with all of the above, and would also like to make sure that the escorts include Kaibokans.

[Wulfmann]

OK, we all agree we want everything and why not, theses were great looking ships and hard to choose.

But, what if we had to choose?
Point, saying we want it all and not showing our priorities means we might get the lesser of what we like best (what ever that is)

So, if we were limited to 4 carrier models 3 battleship classes and 3 heavy cruyiser classes, what would you prefer.
So, respond with your desires but listed in order of preference.

For me, it would be
1 Shokaku (These 2 were the Scharnhost and Gneisenau of the Pacific!)
2 Hiryu (Soryu had the island on the other side so would be in this and Unyru's are enlarged Hiryu's)
3 Taiho
4 Zuiho (third ship would be similar Ryuhu)
5 Shinano

1 Kongo
2 Mutsu
3 Yamato

1 Takao
2 Mogami
3 Nachi
4 Tone

The likelyhood we would have the entire fleet is a pipe dream and would make for a 2009 release so what are the more important ones IYO

Then, what ships would be most important in the US Navy and in list of preference.
Besides the most obvious USS Sacramento at Pearl Harbor!

Wulfmann

[AG124]

My only other thought at this point is, why would any classes of warships have to be left out?

Lack of development time/money, lack of space on installation disk...hopefully these potential limitations will not be serious.

As Wulfmann said, some classes of carriers are very similar. This applies to other classes of warships too, although to a lesser degree. Therefore, it is almost definite that someone will kitbash some more after the game is released, even without a SDK.

Anyway, limiting myself to 6 CV's, 3 BB's, 4 CA's, and 4 CL's, and in order of personal preference:

Carriers:

- Shokaku.
- Akagi (Kaga could be kitbashed)
- Hiryu (Soryu and Unryu class could be kitbashed)
- Shinano
- Zuiho (Ryuho could be kitbashed)
- Junyo

Battleships:

- Kongo
- Yamato
- Mutsu

(Both Ise and Fuso classes could be kitbashed, if we had good enough kitbashers).

Heavy Cruisers:
- Takao
- Tone
- Mogami
- Myoko/Nachi

Light Cruisers:
- Agano
- Kuma and either Nagara/Tenryu/Naka
- Yubari

[AG124]

And for US ships:

Carriers (6):

- Yorktown
- Lexington
- Essex
- Independence
- Casablanca
- Wasp

Battleships (3):

- Iowa
- South Dakota
- Pennsylvania

Heavy Cruisers (4):

- New Orleans
- Baltimore
- Northampton
- Portland

Light Cruisers (4):

- Cleveland
- Brooklyn (including subclasses)
- Atlanta
- Omaha

[Torplexed]

Since the models for them already exist thanks to SH3 maybe throw in the odd U-Boat or German armed merchant cruiser. There was one German merchant raider...the Michel I think...which was sunk by the US sub Tarpon off Yokohama in 1943 after refitting in Kobe, Japan. The Germans were rather annoyed that she hadn't been given proper escort.

[AG124]

I think they would need a new Commerce Raider model, as the one in SHIII is too big, and doesn't really look like any of the German raiders of which I have seen pictures (although I haven't seen pictures of all of them). But you are right - even if they don't include the SHIII raider, they should include a new one.

[DeepSix]

I know it's supposed to be about Japanese ships, but to the list of U.S. ships I'd like to add my personal preference for the North Carolina and the Washington (BBs 55 and 56), especially *if* playable Japanese subs are included in the game. North Carolina was torpedoed by an I-boat during... ah, I think, Battle of Santa Cruz Islands (at any rate it was during the early part of the Solomons campaign).

(I know, I admit it, I want to have it all.)

[Wulfmann]

I agree on the Washington class as number one (sorry Uncle George((Served on the USS Missouri)).
Remember. What starts in 1944 (Iowas) is not in for 2 full years.
So after the W and NC I would want the South Dakota class and more US cruisers and carriers built than BBs.
There is a limit on what they will be able to do.

Important to note. With Rodney's turrets and South Dakotas super structure the Tennessee and California BBs were rebuilt using a similar super structure to SD. If the SD is made the devs would only need to make the hull to have those as later ships (are you taking notes here devs?)

Wulfmann

[JU_88]

Im with Torplexed, I want other subs around on both sides, I hated being the only U-boat in SH3, its like all the worlds submarines crawl ashore and hide in the bushes when I set out for my patrols.

[Skubber]

Just on a random check of US submarine sinking records, I counted 5 or 6 Japanese subs sunk. (And one German.)

I think if SHIV is going to include aircraft carriers as targets, it should certainly include Japanese subs as well.

(I'd like to play the Japanese subs, too. But that's probably asking too much.)