Japanese Ships and their Long Lance

[Amelia]

This is a looong (but very important and informative) post so buckle up...

While I gave the Momi and company a hard time for being too tanky, it's high time they get some love concerning their most potent weapon; the Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedo.

Now the most important thing to address here is the range of the Type 93. On it's highest speed setting, (the one currently reflected ingame) the Type 93 possesses a range of 21,900 Yards (according to Navweaps, the source used by Killerfish), over 25% more than the current value of 16,404 Yards. Someone pointed out to me that the torpedo data used corresponds to the Mod 3 variant of the Type 93 which trades some of its range for a 1,700 lb warhead compared to the 1,080 lb one used on the Mod 1.

After doing some extensive testing comparing the Type 93 to the Mk 14 and Mk 15's damage output, I have come to the conclusion that the warhead on the Type 93 is the 1,080 lb one, as the damage is only slightly more than the Mk 15 used on American Destroyers, which possesses an 800 lb warhead. On average, the Mk 15 destroyed 2-3 compartments on heavy cruisers with 55% torpedo protection, with the Type 93 destroying 3-4. I would have expected a 1,700 lb warhead to destroy at least 5 compartments as that's more than twice the power of the Mk 15 concentrated in a single blast.

So it seems like the ingame Type 93 is getting the worst of both worlds, a smaller warhead and lower range. However the Mod 3 variant of the torpedo was only developed in 1944, and produced in 1945. By the time it was ready to be deployed, the war was over, meaning it could never fit the timeframe of the current campaign. I'd absolutely love to see it used in a late war/alternate history (maybe 1945-1946?) Pacific campaign alongside awesome things like the Montana Class Battleship, Super Shimakaze Class Destroyer, De Moines/Oregon City Class Cruisers, Ibuki Class Cruisers, etc... This game has a lot of potential!

Tangent aside, the bottom line is the Type 93 Mod 1 torpedo has a 21,900 yard range at 49 knots, and it's not getting that, which is unfair.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The other thing that needs to be discussed is the ability of some types of Japanese destroyer to reload their torpedoes, something not reflected in the game. Because of the fact that torpedoes play a big part of Japanese naval power both ingame and in real life, this feature should be implemented. Interestingly enough you can tell on certain Japanese destroyers where the reloads are stored, (it's pretty cool to see how they managed this) proof they are already modeled. A well trained crew could reload the full salvo of torpedoes in as little time as 3-5 minutes, which is a reasonable amount of time given how long sea battles last.

List of Japanese ships and torpedo info, bold text means something needs to be fixed unless stated otherwise:

-Momi & Wakatake Class: 4 Type 96 (533mm) Torpedoes in 2 double launchers, no reloads

-Minekaze & Kamikaze Class: 6 Type 96 Torpedoes in 3 double launchers, no reloads

-Mutsuki Class: 6 Type 96 Torpedoes in 2 triple launchers, no reloads

*Mutsuki is erroneously given only 4 torpedoes ingame despite having triple tubes modeled, needs to be fixed

~This has been fixed as of Version 1.08d5~

-Fubuki & Akatsuki Class: 9 Type 93 (610mm) Torpedoes in 3 triple launchers, 9 reloads (3 per launcher, 18 total onboard)

*Fubuki and Akatsuki mistakenly has 3 quadruple launchers carrying 12 torpedoes ingame, which needs to be fixed

~Fubuki's torpedo values (not models) have been fixed as of Version 1.08d5~
~Akatsukii's torpedo values (not models) have been fixed as of Version 1.08d5h1~

-Hatsuharu Class: 6 Type 93 Torpedoes in 2 triple launchers, 6 reloads (3 per launcher, 12 total onboard)

*Hatsuharu mistakenly has 2 quadruple launchers carrying 8 torpedoes ingame, which needs to be fixed

-Shiratsuyu Class: 8 Type 93 Torpedoes in 2 quadruple launchers, 8 reloads (4 per launcher, 16 total onboard)

-Asashio, Kagero, and Yugumo Class: 8 Type 93 Torpedoes in 2 quadruple launchers, 8 reloads (4 per launcher, 16 total onboard)

-Shimakaze: 15 Type 93 Torpedoes in 3 quintuple launchers, no reloads
*I am including this solely because it is eligible to be ingame and despite there only being 1 in its class it is one hell of a fighting ship, I hope it gets added soon!

-Akizuki Class: 4 Type 93 Torpedoes in 1 quadruple launcher, 4 reloads (4 per launcher, 8 total onboard)

Despite the "nerf" to Fubuki, Akatsuki, and Hatsuharu, they are currently deprived of what comes out to more total torpedoes because they have no reloads ingame, making them stronger in the end.

Certain Light and Heavy cruisers of the IJN also posses reloads for their Type 93s;

-Tenryu Class: 6 Type 95 Torpedoes in 2 triple launchers, no reloads

-Kuma & Nagara Class: 8 Type 95 Torpedoes in 4 double launchers, no reloads

-Sendai Class: 8 Type 93 Torpedoes in 4 double launchers, 8 reloads (2 per launcher, 16 total onboard)

-Agano Class: 8 Type 93 Torpedoes in 2 quadruple launchers, 8 reloads (4 per launcher, 16 total onboard)

-Oyodo does not carry torpedoes

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-Furutaka & Aoba Class: 8 Type 93 Torpedoes in 2 quadruple launchers, 8 reloads (4 per launcher, 16 total onboard)

*Aoba's torpedo tubes are misaligned, I think this is an issue with the 3D model which needs to be resolved

-Myoko Class: 16 Type 93 Torpedoes in 4 quadruple launchers, 16 reloads (4 per launcher, 32 total onboard)

*Myoko currently carries 12 torpedoes in 4 triple launchers ingame, needs to be fixed

-Takao Class: 16 Type 93 Torpedoes in 4 quadruple launchers, 8 reloads (4 for the 2 rearmost launchers, 24 total onboard)

-Mogami & Tone: 12 Type 93 Torpedoes in 4 triple launchers, 12 reloads (3 per launcher, 24 total onboard)

Since a vast portion of the playable ships in the IJN get reloads for their Type 93s, they are lacking some of their most significant firepower without them, and as a result they should be added.

I got the ship data from Imperial Japanese Navy Destroyers 1919–45 and Imperial Japanese Navy Heavy Cruisers 1941-45, both are by Mark Stille.

Edit: It is now easier to read

[Hans Bessler]

Holy cow this is incredibly detailed, way to bring attention to an overlooked issue

[Sinjen Blackstar]

good info.

[jotabe1984]

i feel you...

The current state of the game presents a very "nerfed" version of IJN while at the same time gives a buffed version of USNavy ships.
why?

Some USNavy Buffs:
- you get the entire Fletcher's lineup, which is unfair since most of the class ships were finished AFTER Guadalcanal's end
- Summer class DD model is Allen M. Summer-class actually. Summer had 2 x twin 5'/38 while Allen M. Summer had 3 x twin 5'/38.
- Not all the Gato-class submarines were avaiable by 1942, and while USNavy had a large su fleet, the subs avaiable had lesser test depth and slower dive depth
- The Mk 14 and Mk 15 torps are way more reliable in the game (30% fail rate) compared to real life (80% fail rate by 1942)
- South Dakota and North Carolinas are cherrypicked from the entire USNavy BB stock despite some of them being escorting convoys in the Antlantic/Artic, any of these is far superior ship when compared to Kongos but not that much if compared to Nagatos
- far larger stock cannon ammo for the USNavy ships
- Wildcats are (historically accurated) tankier than Zeros but (unhistorically) equally maneuverable, giving them a massive dogfight advantage.

Some IJN (mostly unhistorical but also unbalanced) nerfs:
- The aforementioned unrealistic Type 93 lesser Range + lack of torp reload for most ships
- Far smaller IJN Sub stock compared to USNavy, despite historically having a sub fleet 3x as large as the current in-game stock and (by 1942) closer to 2/3 of the USNavy Silent Service size. (now sits at around 1/3).
- ship ammo (in general for all classes) is quite limited, not only compared with USNavy alone, but for general in-game usage. You are forced to micromanage a lot more in order not to waste ammo which also forces constant replenish trips. Furutaka and Aoba are the worst, their main guns being almost useless for more than a single battle.

It is (not) fun how the historical inexactitudes tend to buff USNavy on one side but at the same time inexactitudes for IJN are allways on the nerf side. And all of that considering IJN was (historically) on the short side of the naval power stick and the (historically) defeated side of the Guadalcanal campaign.

Why give the already larger USNavy ship stock more than what they historically had + better (than historic) torps + 2x to 3x more ammo on ships + way better fighters than accurated... while at the same time giving IJN less subs than historically, less ammo for their ships, worse fighters than historically AND reduce the massive torp advantage.

The game is almost intentionally made this way like if there was a fear that spoiled childs were about to blame devs because IJN is too powerfull and not letting them win with USA

Really hope some of this unhistorical, unfair and one sided balance issues change soon... if not i will be dissapointed for the hard earned money i paid for this product

[Strawberry Dragon]

Both sides are supposed to have advantages, whatever they may be.

[Amelia]

Originally posted by coolpiggy50:

Both sides are supposed to have advantages, whatever they may be.

This is true, but it does feel like the IJN is getting the short end of the stick when it comes to their torpedoes

[jSheep]

And you have the IJN light cruisers which are glorified DDs that cost the same CP as a Brooklyn with 15x6" guns (>2x the firepower of IJN CL). The only way to win IJN is to rush CV, BB, and the new CAs (Takao, etc). Don't bother with the IJN CLs as they are not worth it.

[Amelia]

Originally posted by JungleSheep:

And you have the IJN light cruisers which are glorified DDs that cost the same CP as a Brooklyn with 15x6" guns (>2x the firepower of IJN CL). The only way to win IJN is to rush CV, BB, and the new CAs (Takao, etc). Don't bother with the IJN CLs as they are not worth it.

They should definitely be cheaper than they are right now, but I know some of that cost comes from the fact that they have torpedoes as well as a speed advantage. Still I do agree with you here.

[jotabe1984]

Originally posted by JungleSheep:

And you have the IJN light cruisers which are glorified DDs that cost the same CP as a Brooklyn with 15x6" guns (>2x the firepower of IJN CL). The only way to win IJN is to rush CV, BB, and the new CAs (Takao, etc). Don't bother with the IJN CLs as they are not worth it.

They are Indeed glorified DDs but they are the only ijn ships (along with BBs) who actually have a decent ammo stock for their guns, so You still need them despite not being a Match for Brooklyn, and despite the fact that tenryu and Kuma only have Type 96 short Range torps which are close to useless

[Valmorian]

This game WANTS to be Historically Accurate but does an extremely poor job at even trying, the US navy is by far more powerful in every single aspect.

Some people above already mentioned the IJN short commings but i'd like to add on that.

Dual-purpose, a lot of the DD's and Cruisers had dual purpose weapons, ingame NON of them are except 1 DD class (Akizuki) Now granted they wernt as usfull but they were definitely capable, so why not just give them dual-purpose guns.

Zero's ingame dont get their agile advantage whilst the US planes get their "tanky" advantage this means youre always in a disadvantage when youre flying IJN planes.

Many IJN ships are missing their actual arnament, mainly the AA, then again AA is been done extremely poor in this game, you cant even see how many AA placements are on your ship just where theyre about to shoot.

IJN bombs feel a lot less strong then the US counterparts, especially their 800kg bomb which is definitely capable of sinking ships with 1 good placed bomb.

(This is for both sides) This could be intentional but im pretty sure a type 93 is able to sink a DD with 1 hit, meanwhile DDs ingame can tank 2 and ive even see 3, which is just ridiculous.


Now I have modified my files EXTENSIVELY to get more accurate representation of IJN bombs/torps, also loadouds when it comes to planes, dual purpose weapons, the game is way too foccused on the US side which is really annoying because not only is it a game, its one where youre meant to be able to change the "outcome of war" but the game clearly doesnt want the IJN side to win by any means, nerfing everything, the US getting twice the amount of ships in just Destroyers alone, over 100 subs whilst the IJN just get about 30 subs and the bare minimum fleet size.

And I havnt even started about the missing ships like almost every single battleship class for the IJN (Nagato, Ise, Fuso) And almost all their escort/light carriers that didnt get sunk.

Granted the US doesnt get these either, but they get the entire Fletcher line up that wasnt finished in august of 1942, they started building in march of 1941 and ended production on february 22, 1945 so there is no way the US gets all 175 Fletchers.

But I could go on and on about all these things because its just a huge mess, and then players are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ about the US torps getting a huge dub rate, well suck it up because that is actually one of the few accurate things portraied in the game.

Im all for things not being 100% accurate but this is just ridiculous to the point you have to modify the game fiiles to make it more fun on the IJN side, i've even allowed myself to get the 1945 Yamato at this point and gave myself 4 extra carriers to compete with the US navy.

[Cpl. Hicks]

They also should not have wakes. One of the main advantages of the Type 93 was that it had no wake, which made it hard to spot and dodge.

Some people say that it would be unfair for US players. But really, this is a singleplayer focused game. If you want a realistic singleplayer portrayal of WW2 naval strategy, then the danger of basically invisible torpedoes is simply part of the package. Do you want to experience what the USN went through during WW2 or not?

[jotabe1984]

Originally posted by Cpl. Hicks:

They also should not have wakes. One of the main advantages of the Type 93 was that it had no wake, which made it hard to spot and dodge.

Some people say that it would be unfair for US players. But really, this is a singleplayer focused game. If you want a realistic singleplayer portrayal of WW2 naval strategy, then the danger of basically invisible torpedoes is simply part of the package. Do you want to experience what the USN went through during WW2 or not?

Yea i can tolerate this as a balance tradeoff, but all the issues mentioned before is just bs

[the Baron]

"The other thing that needs to be discussed is the ability of some types of Japanese destroyer to reload their torpedoes, something not reflected in the game. Because of the fact that torpedoes play a big part of Japanese naval power both ingame and in real life, this feature should be implemented. Interestingly enough you can tell on certain Japanese destroyers where the reloads are stored, (it's pretty cool to see how they managed this) proof they are already modeled. A well trained crew could reload the full salvo of torpedoes in as little time as 3-5 minutes, which is a reasonable amount of time given how long sea battles last."

-I already suggested to the devs two weeks ago since atm is impossible to mod the files to add this feature. The devs mention they are interested to implement this feature in the future
so for now we need to wait or use the historical weapons mod which implemented a possible solution for this problem.

- The reload feature for ships is probaly not to happen in battle but between battles. Is more historical accurate. This was my suggestion and the Dev at the time agreed.

- Not only japanese ships had this feature. For the americans, the Porter class and last if i am not mistaken the Sommers class also had this feature.

- Thank you for the tip about the type 93. Going to research the values and update TTE.