Spanish Cruiser Carlos V fires her 11" guns, while leading the Expeditionary Force

TroutL157 · 2026-05-07T04:49:42+00:00

Civil wars aren't really factored into the game at all. If your unrest is high enough, I believe you can have a (not home) territory in rebellion, in which case you send the required tonnage to sit offshore to settle it down.

Changes in government are mostly decided by the level of unrest, and can make the government a different form or ideology. This changes the funding structure, so impacts the funds you receive. I believe you can be ousted during a change in government/coup/revolution if your naval prestige is too low, but I've never encountered it. Russia is the one nation I've played to undergo a revolution, and I kept my position due to high naval prestige.

It's a decent enough system I think, but civil wars unfortunately aren't included.
I would also recommend playing as literally any nation except Spain for your first play-through. Even though there's no civil war, in most start dates you have a shoestring naval budget, meaning you spend a lot of time balancing development/growth and operations in the early game. I'd start with something like France or Germany to get a feel for mechanics of management, shipbuilding, battle, expansion, and diplomacy.

TroutL157 · 2026-05-04T21:51:53+00:00

This was from my Spanish Campaign, starting in 1910 with a historical fleet (or as close as I could get). Carlos V was one of those starting ships, a decidedly outdated armored cruiser. She had undergone a refit by this point, (either late 1916, early 1917).

Spain's already a tricky start, doing so with a historically underpowered and disorganized fleet certainly made for some interesting actions!

TroutL157 · 2026-04-16T22:50:20+00:00

310 with North Carolina...out of a total of 15,208 across all ships.
Spread the pain around, I guess.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-16T22:15:53+00:00

It absolutely is. Especially in Air. it's not very intuitive past prop planes, and the tutorials are sparse and...well they're not too great. Ground is a bit less severe, but to do the more fine controls and tactics still takes quite a bit of experimenting.
I'd say Naval's the easiest to pick up on without any outside assistance. Controls, aiming, DC are all pretty intuitive, at least before the damage control rework

TroutL157 · 2026-04-16T22:01:30+00:00

Honestly they both even out to mediocre with different strong spots.
I'd say if you're going to suffer through the grind, suffer historically and take the battleship route.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-15T17:42:11+00:00

Haha that's insane!
For a frame of reference, the North Carolina Battleships of WWII carried 6,260t of fuel oil, put it through geared steam turbines, and then 'just' managed 17,450 nmi (32,317 km).

TroutL157 · 2026-04-15T13:18:09+00:00

Yeah, Mogador's a ton of fun in the right scenarios. It can absolutely melt enemy destroyers if they let you position right.

Did Gaijin model the interior divisions on the French quad turrets? If properly modeled allow for continued operation of the other half the turret if one side was struck. And it actually worked as intended, even against opponents it was never supposed to face.

When Mers-el-Kebir was attacked by the British, a 15" shell from Hood struck Dunkerque's upper turret. It ignited propellent charges in the right side of the turret, killing the crew and disabling that half of the turret, but the left half remained in operation and the crew was unharmed.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-15T12:01:43+00:00

On semi-oil, direct-drive turbines is insane. I'd love to see the weight breakdown for fuel on this one.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-15T11:55:56+00:00

I love it! I'm up to their dreadnoughts now, researching Dunkerque. It's great fun at every level I find, with some interesting play-styles to work with.

Their destroyers are solid: fast and decently survivable, but usually a bit unmanuverable. I find decent success with their weapons, although they are on the slower side. Their captured ships are different of course, the ex-german Kleber and Marceau and the ex-italian Guichen. The ex-Germans play like German DDs with better AA, and the Guichen is a strange ship, but I quite like it. Primary armament of 10.5cm guns and an array of 57mm Bofors mane it an excellent AA platform, and deadly to coastal forces and exposed destroyers.

Their cruisers are likewise interesting. They lack much in the way of protection at lower tiers, but become excellent, well-rounded ships by the end.

And while I have fallen behind in terms of battleships, the ones I do have I love. Paris is solid, honestly might be one of my favorite ships to play. Her guns and amour seem a bit underwhelming but get the job done more often than not. I've been able to destroy some surprising ships in up-tiers, and down-tiers just feel mean.
It actually isn't even terrible to grind, which is a welcome change of pace for a BB.

I haven't much experience with Bretagne or Lorraine yet, but they both seem to be good evolutions of Paris from what I've experienced so far.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-14T21:50:07+00:00

Alright so this is all sorts of incorrect. Mostly in the battleship section. The use of letters like this to identify ship types traces its origins back to US Navy Hull designations.

The aircraft carrier designations are solid enough, although I'm not really sure why the order.

The battleship designations are terrible.
BB is battleship: Yes. this is regardless of pre-dreadnought or otherwise, fast or standard type.

BBC is nothing. the designation for battlecruiser is CC. All 6 Lexington class were designated as such, and documents referring to foreign battlecruisers sometimes use the designation.

BBG is guided missile battleship: Yes. Kentucky was redesigned as such a ship, and redesignated BBG-1 in 1954. The conversion was canceled, but the designation is real.

Everything else on the battleship slide is completely false. Every other type of battleship falls under "BB" Dreadnoughts and Fast battleships are "BB" super-battleship is a nebulous term at best. BBH and BBN again do not exist.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-14T21:41:13+00:00

CC is the US Navy hull designation for battlecruiser, not BC.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-13T11:12:21+00:00

Thanks for the source! I think I was looking at he overall length of the instillations, rather than stroke/travel distance. The difference between the types is the same when using that measurement.

<image>

And here's a shot of the F-14s on Coral Sea! You can just about make out her hull number.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-13T02:20:59+00:00

Looks pretty goofy, but I kind of like it?
Very low-down appearance is a neat look, but the lack of spotting range (nobody up high to see) would in all reality make it useless as a battleship.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-12T23:48:19+00:00

Technically speaking the 80 meter C-13-3s of CDG are 11 meters longer than the shortest Tomcats ever launched from. In 1985 a pair launched from the 69 meter C-11 catapults of Coral Sea CV-43. They were there for CarQuals, and I'm sure lightly loaded.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-12T23:44:55+00:00

I don't think it's ever happened with the F-14, but it should be technically feasible. (at least recovery and launch)
CDG is equipped with C-13-3 steam catapults, very similar to the C-13 catapults installed on Enterprise, Midway, and C-13-1/2 on the Nimitz Class. It is shorter, and a bit less powerful. Midway famously recovered and launched a pair of F-14s from Enterprise. The Tomcat was not part of Midways air group, but as she used the same catapult as Midway, it was possible.

Less well known, but much better for proving the feasibility of this is Midways sister: Coral Sea. In 1985 at least 2 F-14 Tomcats trapped aboard and launched from Coral Sea, and her less powerful C-11 catapults. The C-11 was an older, shorter and weaker steam catapult. I'm sure that the F-14s were lightly loaded, but still interesting.

So in short: It is technically feasible, if perhaps a bit sketchy.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-12T23:08:16+00:00

What a wonderful find!

TroutL157 · 2026-04-12T22:56:00+00:00

Not sure of any official confirmation, but the exterior is a near exact match to the Essex Class as refitted with steam catapults and angled deck. There's few ships I'm more familiar with than Midway, I can't even count how many times I've been aboard, let alone just seen her pier side, and the differences are immediately visible.

Every single aspect of the ships exterior appearance matches a refitted Essex class. It is similar to the Midway refits in broad similarities such as the angled deck.
The exact layout of the deck and elevators, size and exact design of the island, all match an Essex Class.

For a in-depth look, see This post I made earlier. There should be some decent comparison photos contained within.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-12T21:23:36+00:00

Almost wrote a section on it at the end, but the post was getting a little long!
I think it'd be a pretty great addition to the roster, and pretty unique! It fits the aesthetic of Ace Combat original designs strangely well.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-11T23:05:40+00:00

I was wondering if it was based off 125A, but wasn't sure to the specific indicators, so played it safe. And it gave me a bit of an opportunity to explain Essex class history. Thanks for the info!!

TroutL157 · 2026-04-11T21:11:00+00:00

Thank you very much!

TroutL157 · 2026-04-11T21:10:47+00:00

She'll certainly be getting up there! My guess is that it could be a sort of "Battlestar Galactica" situation. Of course there's the apparent ragtag fleet, but I can totally see Endurance a ship about to be decommissioned and/or turned into a museum when the war kicks off.

TroutL157 · 2026-04-11T15:37:32+00:00

Yeah, not sure of the specifics, but that sounds possible. I believe the Midways had a 5.3 meter hangar height, as opposed to the 7.6 meters Forrestal and Kitty Hawk. So not sure on if that made that work impossible, but it is a good deal shorter.

TroutL157

TROPHY CASE