Hull Points, how are they worked out

[Renko]

I’ve been trying to work out stats for some boats not in the game, but so far Im struggling at the first hurdle, Hull Points. The problem is there seems to be no correlation between displacement or length and Hull points. For instance some ships get around half a hull point per ton, but others get 1.2 hull points per ton. These are all mtbs or eboats not large or huge ships. Can John Stallard or someone informef please explain what yardstick we can use when creating ships?

Thanks

[Vincent]

Me too. I’d like to see some general rule for calculating Hull points. I want to launch a Kriegsfischkutter. Definitly a small vessel (about the size of a Vosper). I took the Hull points similar to the Vosper as both vessels would have been made of wood. As for speed I found out that the max speed ratio was about 1:4 compared to the Vosper, so I took a quater from the Vospers speed.

A general rule would be very much apreiciated.

[invisible officer]

A KFK had a much stronger hull than a Vosper. Displacement 110 t compared to ca 37.
Based on Reichsfischkutter design Model G they had been intended to serve a long time post war in fishery. Strong joints and everything following merchant standards.
Some still serve today. Famous for being strong. A Vosper or Schnellboot colliding with one…..

So displacement or length are no perfect base. I guess they used an over the thumb system.

[Vincent]

Thanks for your reply invisible officer. All the more reason for an official guide form Warlord on how to calculate Hull value, even if it is in general terms.

Furthermore, what would you suggest for Hull value for a KFK?

[invisible officer]

Hmmm. A wild guess ;-).

They give the 310 ts Strath class Trawler 70 Hull pts. Being built with similar ideas behind design. (Built around 1918 many served as fishery vessels in the 60’s, some serving two times in war) So a 110 ts KFK should have less. But the S-100 has 65. 40 hull pts for the 73ft late Vosper.

Hmmm, 60??? In fact I think 70 is too low for the Trawler compared to S-100.

[elcee]

I.O. already poited out, that we have no easy way to calculate hull points. So far I compared the ships with those in the rulebook and then I just guessed what seems ok for me (with the help if ship size, crew strength, general build quality).

[Bill Smith]

I think subdivisions and damage control capability have much more to do with survivability than tonnage. Accordingly I would expect true naval vessel such as a minesweeper to be more capable of staying afloat than a converted trawler of the same tonnage. I don’t know how that gets factored in.

[Renko]

Rich Carlisle said he had a speadsheet but I was not sure if he was pulling my leg. I was initially pretty certain there is a divisor at work based on size and tonnage, even if it is subconscious but that may equally be my incomprehension and sheer disbelief that there is no system in place – ie they just made stuff up.

That being said, Occams Razor does point that way.

[CScholti]

There are so many factors — hull material (wood, steel, aluminum), compartmentalization, armor thickness, damage control and more — that it would take a lot of research. Too much maybe.

I have two ships — a British Type I Hunt Class DD (Berkeley) and a German Type 39 Elbing Class Fleet Torpedo Boat (T22) — that I need to cost out so I can play with them.

The rulebook has stats for a Type III Hunt Class so maybe I can use that as a basis for my Type I. And maybe the Z-Class DDs can provide insight to the T22.

[Bill McGill]

Type II Hunt DE as a guide for a Type I is fair enough (though the Type 1 was a bit smaller).

But using the Z Class as a guide for a T class isn’t so simple. It would be a bit like using a Tribal as a guide for a Hunt.

[invisible officer]

Exactly. It is difficult to compare.

Flottentorpedoboot 1939 and Zerstörer Amtsentwurf 1934 are both built with Stahl 52. Following similar calculations by Reichsmarineamt.
But in the destroyers the “Längsfestigkeit” was reported as bad so they got extra supports inside the hull post launch.

The Flottentorpedobbote had been very good. But German destroyers had been bad seaships.

German officers rated ZG 3 ex Vasilefs Georgios as best German destroyer. Built at Yarrow & Co Glasgow following H-class plans. Oooops.

The twin 15 cm turret was the worst design possible. Making the Zerstörer bow heavy. The weight putting stress to hull.

—

Hmm, a nerd’s word to the English naming of German vessels. There was no Z class. And no M-Class. The Z and M are just for a type, Zerstörer and Minensucher, not for a class. There are some very different classes under the labels Z or M.

Kriegsmarine also did not use Elbing in class naming. Schichau in Elbing town built different classes of Torpedoboote and Flottentorpedobboote. T 11/12 built in Bremen by Deschimag are identical to Schichau T 9 and 10.

For class name they used the year of “Entwurf” / design. Sometimes in sub classes with an A. Like 1934 A Zerstörer Z 5-16 following 1934 Z 1 – 4.

[elcee]

Well we could try to build a formula to extrapolate ship HP by multipling factors with a base value.

-> base * factor = HP

The factors will determine how the base value is multipiled, those factors have already been mentioned, but in general we should pick those, that can easyly be found, like material, armor, crew (just to name a few, but the researchabilty is important here).

-> base * factor1 * factor 2 *…* factor N = HP

The base value could be the displacement, in this case the factors should be < 1. But in general huge ships in Cruel Seas have fairly low HPs. For example a Z1936A destroyer has “only” 3 times the HP of a S-38 class E-boat, while beeing ALOT larger.

So another approach in game terms might be using the size (small, medium, …) as a base factor. This base factor will then be multiplied by factors > 1 to get the HP.

The second approach is, what i would go with. Just create some size brackets based on the displacement like small = 0-50, medium 50-200, large 200-1000, huge 1000+. Those size brackets will get a (HP-)Base assigned.

The factors then could be material (wood = 1.1, steel,welded = 1.5 … but more refinded after we collect some input), crewfactor (1+crew/tonnage, examples are S100=1.3, Vosper 73ft=1.26, Type 1936A= 1.1, MAS = [about] 1.33)**. And other factors that are to be determined.

Just as an example:
S100 = 65 in the book so when testing this is what we should come close to.

base(medium)*material(wood/composit)*crewfactor(1.3)*…=65

If all of those factors work for the boats we know the numbers should be good.

Just something i thought about during the lunch break. I think we might get this to work, at least for smaller craft. Huge shups might be hard to balance this way.

**i like the crew factor because the it works in favour of the Hull values in the rulebook. Small boats in general have a fairly high factor (1.3ish), huge boats are lower (1.1ish) and this is reflected in the numbers for the hull…

[Author]

Posts