|
|
Post by akizuki on Sept 8, 2017 23:00:32 GMT -6
I know the game uses threshold technologies that give you a significant boost once you have them. For one, steam turbines make fast ships much cheaper, to the point where a 24kn CL can now jump to 27-28kn with the same tonnage. For another, some technology removes the 23kn speed limit on BB designs, which has the annoying side effect of no longer allowing well-armored battlecruisers. Does anyone have the full list of these, or know a few to contribute to the list? I'd like to gather them all here for easy reference. Edit: Thanks for all the replies everyone  ! I also noticed that you get a huge boost to real penetration values when you research Ballistic Caps, which gives the following list: MAJOR TECHS - so critical you'd be smart to plan research around getting them
Tech Lv. Name Effect
Machinery 5 Steam Turbines Good CAs are Possible (@27knots, it's ~1500t less than before)
Fire Control 11 Director Fire Long Range Duels Possible
Fire Control 17 Imp.Director Allows Director on DDs
Damage Control 4 High Cap.Pumps I Can often survive 200 Flooding
Damage Control 6 Torpedo Prot.II Can often survive 2-3 Torpedo Hits
Ship Design 3 3+ Centerlines T. BBs Possible
Ship Design 5 Crossdeck Fire Allows quality BBs (1st economical 8 or 10 gun broadside)
Ship Design 14 AON Armor Decent BB Armor now possible (@30kt it saves ~2kt, or +1 Turret)
AP Shells 4 Ballistic Caps Armor Penetration is almost doubled
Light Forces 3 900t Destroyers The first truly effective destroyer (can use Director later)
Torpedo Warfare 9 Wet Heater Torp. Torpedoes are now a threat even during the day
Submarines 9 Medium Subs Unrestricted Submarine Warfare now works!
USEFUL TECHS - these are good thresholds, but situational or depend on playstyle & taste.
Tech Lv. Name Effect
Machinery 7 Oil Firing Stokers no longer get tired. Great IF you have oil
Turrets 9 Imp. Triple Turs. Iowa-style 3x3 is now effective instead of jamming all the time
Ship Design 6 Superimposed X T. \ Together, these give you much better damage Fore & Aft
Ship Design 9 Superimposed B T. /
Ship Design 13 Superimposed CAs Great if you like late-game "Supercruisers"
Tactics 3 Imp. Signaling Ships stop acting like idiots so often in large fleets
Tactics 4 Scouting Force 2 Flagships - GREAT in Admiral, mediocre in other difficulties
Tactics 5 Mine Rails Mine Cruisers! Except mines aren't so hot overall
Protips:
- All Fire Control advances are pretty awesome, I single out director because it's most noticeable.
- If you're a weak nation, you can pick Refit Nation, select the UK, and always have the best Fire Control
- To keep building armored BCs after 1915, limit them to 6 or 7 guns on 2 turrets. If they're A/B, it's an 'All Forward' layout that grants a small weight bonus.
|
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Sept 8, 2017 23:21:48 GMT -6
Here's my list:
Oil-Fired Engines: no more exhausted stokers: Can maintain top speed longer
Steam Turbines (already on your list)
Fire-Control Directors: remove accuracy penalty on fire-control systems
Scouting Force: allows you control over your own eyes/ears
AoN armor: enables much more armor due to the lack of a need for extensions.
|
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Sept 8, 2017 23:37:24 GMT -6
I know the game uses threshold technologies that give you a significant boost once you have them. For one, steam turbines make fast ships much cheaper, to the point where a 24kn CL can now jump to 27-28kn with the same tonnage. For another, some technology removes the 23kn speed limit on BB designs, which has the annoying side effect of no longer allowing well-armored battlecruisers. Does anyone have the full list of these, or know a few to contribute to the list? I'd like to gather them all here for easy reference. You can still make well armored BCs if you keep the gun count low. In my last game I had ships with 15" belts, 18" turret armor, 7" TT, and decks somewhere in the 5-7" range. |
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Sept 9, 2017 12:42:58 GMT -6
Director fire. Improved Director. Advanced Director. Secondary Director.
|
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Sept 9, 2017 13:49:31 GMT -6
Central Firing and Improved Signalling allow fleet engagements that can be decisive and not devolve into clusterf**ks.
Superimposed B/X turrets (along with 4 centerline turret tech). I will often try to stall building dreadnoughts until I have this tech, as it allows much more efficient main armament layouts. Triple turrets also.
Torpedo Protection II. I will often not bother putting in III or IV in my ships, as II is usually enough to protect a ship from up to 2 torpedoes from sinking.
Wet Heater engine torps (4,000 yard high speed range) & double/triple TT mounts. This is around where DD's really become deadly. Lord knows I love me some Flotilla Attacks.
|
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Sept 9, 2017 16:33:25 GMT -6
I personally would add CDF to the list as it allows the first truly effective dreadnought layouts prior to 4 centerline.
|
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Sept 9, 2017 16:59:16 GMT -6
Superimposed turrets for CAs: Often this comes near the end of the game, and everyone has their own opinion about late-game CAs. However as far as CAs go the ability to have super-firing turrets on them is pretty big.
|
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Sept 9, 2017 19:54:23 GMT -6
I personally would add CDF to the list as it allows the first truly effective dreadnought layouts prior to 4 centerline. Yeah, it's easy to overlook this because of the brief period of time that it matters but it's definitely a big jump from two turrets. Superimposed turrets for CAs: Often this comes near the end of the game, and everyone has their own opinion about late-game CAs. However as far as CAs go the ability to have super-firing turrets on them is pretty big. Just bump your CA guns up to 11 inches and they will become BCs. Saves you a 10 year wait. I'm honestly pretty confused on why superimposed CA guns are so late a technology, it seems that should be easier not harder then superimposed on battleships. They aren't earlier historical examples but that's just because CAs stopped being built before superimposed turrets. So the superimposed turret tech is really just marking when the Washington Naval Treaty lead to construction starting on heavy cruisers. If CAs are going to be nerfed in this way they should at least be able to combine A turrets with 1 and 2 casemates in order to increase the forward firepower a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Sept 9, 2017 21:19:27 GMT -6
That's definitely a point. The Naval Treaties effectively reinvented the CA as a ship class due to the 6 inch gun definition. The Pensacola and Northampton classes were originally considered light cruisers, but due to the Treaty restrictions, were listed as CAs
|
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Sept 10, 2017 7:40:24 GMT -6
The Naval Treaties effectively reinvented the CA as a ship class due to the 6 inch gun definition. Do you mean 8 inch or was there an additional definition based around 6 inch guns? |
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Sept 10, 2017 8:33:36 GMT -6
The Naval Treaties effectively reinvented the CA as a ship class due to the 6 inch gun definition. Do you mean 8 inch or was there an additional definition based around 6 inch guns? There was an additional definition. The Washington Naval Conference established that a cruiser (they did not differentiate between CAs and CLs) could have a maximum displacement of 10,000 tons and 8 inch guns (anything larger would have been considered a capital ship). The London Naval Treaty added a further caveat when it defined the difference: A light cruiser could only have 6.1 inch guns, anything with bigger guns was considered a heavy cruiser. The Hawkins-Class of the Royal Navy (designed as CAs) were armed with 7.5 inch guns. The 6-inch gun definition is just my way of stating the differentiation between CA and CL, which did not exist as a binding principle until 1930. In practice, most CAs were armed with 8 inch guns because navies wanted as much firepower as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by oaktree on Sept 10, 2017 9:10:10 GMT -6
I personally would add CDF to the list as it allows the first truly effective dreadnought layouts prior to 4 centerline. Yeah, it's easy to overlook this because of the brief period of time that it matters but it's definitely a big jump from two turrets. Superimposed turrets for CAs: Often this comes near the end of the game, and everyone has their own opinion about late-game CAs. However as far as CAs go the ability to have super-firing turrets on them is pretty big. Just bump your CA guns up to 11 inches and they will become BCs. Saves you a 10 year wait. I'm honestly pretty confused on why superimposed CA guns are so late a technology, it seems that should be easier not harder then superimposed on battleships. They aren't earlier historical examples but that's just because CAs stopped being built before superimposed turrets. So the superimposed turret tech is really just marking when the Washington Naval Treaty lead to construction starting on heavy cruisers. If CAs are going to be nerfed in this way they should at least be able to combine A turrets with 1 and 2 casemates in order to increase the forward firepower a bit. I am not sure the CA to 11" guns trick works in the latest version. I tried to take a CA with quad 10" to 11" turrets and the designer said it was illegal. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Sept 10, 2017 9:22:31 GMT -6
Yeah, it's easy to overlook this because of the brief period of time that it matters but it's definitely a big jump from two turrets. Just bump your CA guns up to 11 inches and they will become BCs. Saves you a 10 year wait. I'm honestly pretty confused on why superimposed CA guns are so late a technology, it seems that should be easier not harder then superimposed on battleships. They aren't earlier historical examples but that's just because CAs stopped being built before superimposed turrets. So the superimposed turret tech is really just marking when the Washington Naval Treaty lead to construction starting on heavy cruisers. If CAs are going to be nerfed in this way they should at least be able to combine A turrets with 1 and 2 casemates in order to increase the forward firepower a bit. I am not sure the CA to 11" guns trick works in the latest version. I tried to take a CA with quad 10" to 11" turrets and the designer said it was illegal. I think what Johnw said was to build battlecruisers with 11" guns |
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Sept 10, 2017 9:25:00 GMT -6
I am not sure the CA to 11" guns trick works in the latest version. I tried to take a CA with quad 10" to 11" turrets and the designer said it was illegal. Was the displacement about 10,000 tons or lower? If the ship is too small to be a battlecruiser but too heavily armed to be a CA that might cause a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Sept 11, 2017 3:08:51 GMT -6
That's definitely a point. The Naval Treaties effectively reinvented the CA as a ship class due to the 6 inch gun definition. The Pensacola and Northampton classes were originally considered light cruisers, but due to the Treaty restrictions, were listed as CAs No, it did not reinvent the CA (meaning armored cruiser) as a ship class. The US just happened to use the hull symbol CA for both its heavy cruisers and its legacy armored cruisers, and RTW happens to classify both types as "CA" as well. But the heavy cruiser of the treaty era was a development of the CL, not the armored cruiser. |
|
! I also noticed that you get a huge boost to real penetration values when you research Ballistic Caps, which gives the following list:
