I have an increasing number of hulls. However, in time I will build and keep virtually all of them. I want to add another... I'm lining up a lifetime of ship building due to the fact that my build pace is VERY slow;-) My debate is this: Light or heavy cruiser version of a Mogami class? Format will be both Big Gun and MWCI. This will be accomplished via a common drivetrain, lightweight components, and modularity. How it will work is that due to the slower speed and low draw pump in Big Gun I will be able to use much lower capacity batteries. I will trade that weight for extra co2 and multi-shot torpedos. Also if I can pull it off a few QEV based cannons for convoy marauding. The MWCI components will be super easy to fit in and make weight. No worries there. I am indecisive because I would like the lighter tonnage (maneuverabilty/acceleration) and easier sheeting of the light version. However the heavy version presents more flexibility with component weights being that it is several thousand tons heavier. Also I would lose the higher ROF with switching versions in Big Gun. I know I also can add depth to the hull in either version of the ship in either battling format. This will increase stability and add tonnage however I am scared it will significantly reduce maneuverability. Can anyone provide evidence that added tonnage kills maneuverability in this class? Opinions welcome!
If your going to play Big Gun with it, you would probably want the heavier weight. Not that I've had any experience, but that is what I've been told. Beaver
I did Big Gun in '03-'05 before I joined the Navy. I am leaning toward a middle version that had small bulges but still had the triple turrets. Then I can add some depth to that hull.
Off-topic, herr Butts, but I was cleaning house and found a still-folded-nicely size Large T-shirt that I was to bring you from last year's Nats in Oakboro. It will be available for pickup at Steak'n'Shake when you get home
Light version is better-suited to Big Gun, despite its lighter tonnage. You still have torpedoes, and you can potentially fit a single rotating triple up front. The smaller caliber of .177" vs 3/16" is negligible next to the extra barrel. Don't try to over-complicate it, though. Torpedoes and one rotating cannon, nothing more. I have seen that combination used very successfully before.
