MNF Dunkerque French WWII BC
- Thread starter GeneralMatt
- Start date
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
First post!
Damn fine ship Matt!
P.S.
What does "Monday Night Football" have to do with the Dunkerque?
Damn fine ship Matt!
P.S.
What does "Monday Night Football" have to do with the Dunkerque?
avain
(key)
Jolly good work, Matt!
Nope, it's the Royal "Matt's Navy Fleet" !
P.S.
What does "Monday Night Football" have to do with the Dunkerque?
Nope, it's the Royal "Matt's Navy Fleet" !
Joe Harker
1st in the Premiership!
Great ship GM! 
BTW i have finished my ship should you want to take a look.
BTW i have finished my ship should you want to take a look.
GeneralMatt
Emperor
Thank you guys!
I would love to Joe! Post it up in an attachment!
I would love to Joe! Post it up in an attachment!
GeneralMatt
Emperor
Thank you.
A new Version was uploaded with a couple extra things. 07/03/08
A new Version was uploaded with a couple extra things. 07/03/08
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
Neither... that's the problem... it's a Battlecruiser, and so I can't include this in my mod (I don't have a Battlecruiser class in my mod).Great unit, Wolfshanze, does this qualify as a Destroyer or as a Battleship ?
I know it is a battlecruiser, my question was more along the lines of 'is it closer to a destroyer or a battleship'
Apparently you do not consider it sufficiently close to serve as either. I guess I'll put it in as the french destroyer then, seems to be more appropriate (than battleship) to me
GeneralMatt
Emperor
Your trying to be annoying aren't you mamba. 
Your trying to be annoying aren't you mamba.
If I wanted to, you wouldn't need to ask
Actually I had the same problem as Wolfshanze, the ship is neither a destroyer nor a battleship, it is somewhere in between. I just wanted his opinion on which one it is closer to since I still want to include it as either, Wolf is more restrictive in that regard
GeneralMatt
Emperor
It would be more closer to a Battleship than a destroyer, as Wolfshanze would argue, they were used in a BB role..
ok, battleship it is then. Battlecruisers were less heavily armed and armored but faster (and cruisers got replaced by destroyers), so that is why I didn't like it that much as battleship.
Otoh it looks more like a CIV battleship than a CIV destroyer
Otoh it looks more like a CIV battleship than a CIV destroyer
GeneralMatt
Emperor
Well yes, see what had a big discussion on it in my Creation thread. Sorry for saying you were trying to be annoying, see I though you were making light of that discussion.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
See... the PROBLEM, is that people get hung-up on the word "cruiser", without taking any other statistic into consideration. If ships didn't come with class-names attached and you just went by tonnage, guns, firepower and ability, nobody would quesiton using a BC in a Battleship role. Throw in the word "cruiser" and everybody starts questioning whether or not it can put-up a fight for some reason.
The term "Fast Battleship" is probably a much better designation to use then "Battle Cruiser", simply because it's a more accurate measurement of the ships use and role.
The Dunkerque class weighed-in at 26,500 tons... they sported eight 13inch guns and sixteen 5inch guns.
A typical WWII Destroyer weighed roughly between 600-1,500 tons and carried three to five 4 or 5inch guns.
I'd say the Dunkerque is a little closer to the role of a Battleship then a Destroyer!
The term "Fast Battleship" is probably a much better designation to use then "Battle Cruiser", simply because it's a more accurate measurement of the ships use and role.
The Dunkerque class weighed-in at 26,500 tons... they sported eight 13inch guns and sixteen 5inch guns.
A typical WWII Destroyer weighed roughly between 600-1,500 tons and carried three to five 4 or 5inch guns.
I'd say the Dunkerque is a little closer to the role of a Battleship then a Destroyer!
The_Coyote
Emperor
Again a great ship 
one question, how you link the ship to the animation (especially the turrets)?
and to give my five cents to the discussion, the battlecruisers are lesser amoured battleships, so i would handle them in game as BB. They should be faster than a battleship, but have the same punch (=> Fast BB). The main disadvantage of this designs was the armour (for an example, the quick destruction of the Hood was caused because of the insufficient armour coverage)
one question, how you link the ship to the animation (especially the turrets)?
and to give my five cents to the discussion, the battlecruisers are lesser amoured battleships, so i would handle them in game as BB. They should be faster than a battleship, but have the same punch (=> Fast BB). The main disadvantage of this designs was the armour (for an example, the quick destruction of the Hood was caused because of the insufficient armour coverage)
Similar threads
