I know that they are, Genosaurer...But so are a few that currently are ingame. The PCL's,
for instance. And the KM/IJN CV6's are. As well as ALL of the BB6's. Really, it's bad
enough that a large portion of the KM shipline is made of 'paper' ships. As well as a few
RN, and IJN ships as well.

"Tosa - I could see this beauty as a refit to one of the IJN BBs - probably Nagato."

It's my impression that the ONF testers did a lot of level shuffling just to put all ships
into a fixed tier. There aren't any more like Vanguard that fall between. With that in
mind I'm not sure how Tosa on the Nagato line could work - would Nagato get bumped down to
a BB2.5?

"IIRC the #13 featured a sleeker hull profile to Yamato's bulked out beam and similar
profiles"

What is known about No. 13 are the rough design requirements: approximate displacement,
main gun size, approximate speed, and intended role. We know that Warships No. 13, 14, 15
and 16 were to be the last four Battlecruisers of the last iteration of the Eight-Eight
fleet (although by that point in time, the distinction between Battlecruiser and
Battleship was becoming less meaningful).

Beyond that, it's all conjecture. The length and beam, the gun layout, even the number of
guns carried, secondary battery, director placement - all of it is just guessing, and
completely unsubstantiated guessing at that.

It really wouldn't be much better than any of the made-up ships SDE used, in my opinion.

"For those of you wondering about alternative BB's (and some CV's as well) Give this site
a peek:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/furamain.htm"

Err, do keep in mind that many of the ships on that site are entirely fictional.

For those of you wondering about alternative BB's (and some CV's as well) Give this site
a peek:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/furashita/furamain.htm

Geno:

Just read over page 4 - I kinda skipped that the first time around. You make some
interesting arguments, as to why not in some cases, and I have some counterpoints:

Tosa - I could see this beauty as a refit to one of the IJN BBs - probably Nagato. The
two of them would then comprise somewhat of a difference in the line - Speed vs Power. If
the alternate line of the IJN BB Series features ships like Fuso, Nagato, Tosa and Yamato,
then realistically they aren't precisely Fast, but they deliver a Lot of punch. Tosa
would be a ten-gunner, with a decent ammount of displacement for armor and ammunition -
something that lacks in later IJN layouts.

#13 - true enough, conjecture it is in some cases, but the principle is in its own way
somewhat sound to include it as a comparable BB4 beside Yamato - the edge it might gain
would be Speed, as IIRC the #13 featured a sleeker hull profile to Yamato's bulked out
beam and similar profiles - she wouldn't have the range of some of the other heavy BBs,
but she could make up for it with her speed and capacity in that way.

Iron Duke/Canada - interesting point you make, though as a BB1/1.5 (Canada as Refit?) you
might notice she would have a somewhat different spread/punch compared to her compatriots,
being a ten-gunner as she is, which in that situation makes her somewhat comparable to the
USN's Standard BB lines with regards to firepower.

G3 - you make a good point in that case as well, and I am fully behind you that the G3
would have been a much better version had they done research to provide an actual basis
for the class that would be Lion II. This demonstrates even then that at times they
didn't do as much research as they could have. Similarly with the BB6's they could have
done a tiny bit more and come out with something truely demonstrative - heaven forbid, a
True H44 instead of Kaiser (the megalithic monster with the 20" beastcannons), a properly
laid out Ten-gunner Amagi, the TillMax Battleship instead of Nebraska(15x18" guns), and...
I'm pulling a blank for a real-basis UK BB6.

I like it with a lots of documentation.

Recc, got my interest already. I would like to see more BB.

Sauragnmon:

I'm not sure if you saw, but I there's a short post on page 4 listing some of the period
ships I did not select, and my reasoning for leaving them out.

Crap, if I'd read this before a couple others I would have Recc'ed this one. This is
AWESOME. Just a couple of thoughts on the matter...

KM - you've got the lining somewhat upset here, and I would consider the Ersatz Yorck's
perhaps first on the line, and the Badens probably second - let's remember, Bismarck was,
in essence, a somewhat upgraded re-do of the Baden/Bayern sisters, which were for their
time quite advanced bruisers at the time.

IJN - I like the Amagi actually being in, heaven forbid they actually put it up right.
Though I have to wonder at your Kii - It's arguable whether Kii would have been a 10x16
like that, or if the Tosa/Kaga were somewhat of the end of that line of thinking on the
Battleships. I fully agree that whovever designed the Amagi in game was really Not
looking at a proper diagram, and got it backwards (though who would mess up the bow/stern
with an IJN Pagoda Tower in there is just beyond me) let alone the fact they named it in
convention with a Battlecruiser, not a Battleship - that should be Tosa, not Amagi.
However, I would propose instead of Kii as a Tosa Follow-on, Kii as a #13 style Hull -
more conventional style, with four twin 18"/45 gun turrets, which would put it in a
similar bracket to the Yamato, and still keep with the 8-8 plan. Of course the irony is
you're also not grazing the surface of other IJN concepts that were out there like the
A-129 and similar, but they aren't on the timeframe.

RN - Love that you included the G3, gods I love those designs. Agincourt would be nice,
so would Iron Duke, some of the multi-gun battleships the RN had. I would love to see the
N3 as an alternate to the Lion II, as I look at the 1/700 model of the N3 I have sitting
on my desk. The RN had such promising designs, and it's a shame what happened to them.
For those not following, the G3 post-washington became the sad case that we know as the
Nelson. Interestingly enough, IIRC, the G3 included support for a seaplane as well
potentially, though it certainly wouldn't have supported something like the Walrus. Let's
remember, the G3 actually had about 270 degrees of fire or so, since the blank for the
stern was maybe a 45 degree slice, and the bridge tower was another 45 degrees. That
said, the full broadside was easily covered along the swing stretch.

US - BB-49 would be nice to see, definitely. I would wonder what to call it, potentially
the Indiana. Interesting you didn't mention Tillman, I wonder if a TillMax might make a
good alternate Montana, one of the smaller ones. Of course, a TillMax IV would be perfect
for the BB-6 but they already have Nebbie for what she can do.

would be great to have other bb4 options since the end result is only one ship in the
bb4-bb5 class except UK

highly recommended