fishy
New Member
Posts: 43 
|
Post by fishy on Feb 28, 2018 17:13:52 GMT -6
Fishy, out of interest, when you say you put your CL's on Foreign Stations, do you actually give them the FS order from the orders tab or do you base them in the colonies manually?
I normally do it manually but in my current game as the UK its pretty onerous task, especially when you need to rebuild and refit your colonial cruisers. Do cruisers marked as FS still participate in wars like a cruiser manually placed in a colonial region of Active Fleet duty would?
I'm the same in that I primarily design/use CL's for screening and foreign stations. On medium fleet size I try to maintain 4 of the newest CL's in my home waters and have as may as required in the colonies to satisfy foreign tonnage. It does seem that the game prioritises cruiser engagements though and so you can quickly accrue VP's from catching raiders so your CL's can't be too small/cheap.
Yes I just give them the FS order now. I used to put them in place manually, but got lazy. I think my cruisers marked FS do participate in battles sometimes cause I remember them getting damaged in battle and I have to send another CL to fill the foreign service tonnage requirement. But since their role is FS, I am ambivalent about whether they participate in battles. On the one hand I design them to be able to win against other CLs and want them to destroy enemy CLs. On the other hand I don't like the risk of them getting destroyed (I have seen significantly weaker ships destroy my stronger CLs in gun fights or with torpedoes) and I don't like having to deal with missing tonnage in foreign stations. |
|
fishy
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by fishy on Feb 28, 2018 17:28:08 GMT -6
I can see the advantage of building CLs with 8" guns to take down other CLs. But I vaguely remember Tortugapower saying in one of his videos that there is a penalty to hit DDs with anything bigger than a 6" gun. Before secondary directors, I just feel that a CL is so much better than DDs at screening enemy DDs. And to give it up for the ability to kill other CLs seem to me like giving up your primary role for a secondary role. I use 8" legacy protected cruisers quite often. You can have 5-6" secondary guns which can handle destroyers pretty well and use your 2x2x8" against enemy protected and armored cruisers. This large protected cruisers with 2x2x8" guns are able to even fight small armored cruisers of AI designs, especially the ones with only 6-7" guns. Maybe I'll try them out one of these days. I just don't think I have the budget to justify building them. The 5000-6000ton CLs I build with 6" guns can already beat the AI's early/mid game CLs. And 6" secondary guns are going to miss a lot more than 6" main guns with fire control which makes me suspicious about their ability to screen. Even if I have a CL with 8" guns, I would run away from a CA. The CA has better armor so there is a good chance you will lose the fight. I built some 19000 ton CAs with 6x15" guns mid game and had them fight BCs before and lost. I had bigger guns and better fire control, but they had better armor. |
|
fishy
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by fishy on Mar 2, 2018 1:30:47 GMT -6
I just want to add that I am not sure whether or not ships that are in foreign station participate in battles. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can answer that one.
Cause I remember assigning my ships to foreign stations but they never made it there. They had joined a battle in home waters (Northern Europe) where I (Germany) was fighting the GB. I think they couldn't go to foreign station because GB blockaded me. But that made me think that ships on FS can participate in battles.
Ok I just had a cruiser battle where 2 GB CLs fought my 2 CLs on FS duties. So its confirmed, ships on Foreign station do engage in battles.
|
|
|
|
Post by hogzkrieg on Mar 2, 2018 3:28:11 GMT -6
I just want to add that I am not sure whether or not ships that are in foreign station participate in battles. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can answer that one. Cause I remember assigning my ships to foreign stations but they never made it there. They had joined a battle in home waters (Northern Europe) where I (Germany) was fighting the GB. I think they couldn't go to foreign station because GB blockaded me. But that made me think that ships on FS can participate in battles. Ok I just had a cruiser battle where 2 GB CLs fought my 2 CLs on FS duties. So its confirmed, ships on Foreign station do engage in battles. The only trouble I've found with using the Foreign Station as an order rather than manually positioning ships is that when a war breaks out, I sometimes find that although my FS tonnage requirements are met, I don't actually have ships based in some of my FS sea regions. This then leads to the "Enemy Fleet dominates seas around (insert your most beloved colony here) which can then lead to invasions.
Saying that, when playing as GB I do still find the order very handy to do away with some the micromanagement.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on Jan 31, 2019 16:03:06 GMT -6
Bit of a thread rez here but i've got a question for you all.
What's the largest vessel you've every designed and built with a protected cruiser armor scheme? I built me first three BCs, one of 18kt and the other two of 23kt, using a rather heavy version of this style of armor. They didn't see much action so I can't say how effective they were however. The worst one ever got damaged was the first time out in one of the 23kt designs which lost its forward turret. No detonation thankfully. The first design only had two main turrets but the other two had a pair of wing turrets(thus bypassing the 2 centerline turret restriction for that armor type.
Anyone done similar?
I plan on running a second game with such designs...hopefully i'll get more data this time around.
|
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jan 31, 2019 18:35:00 GMT -6
No, I've never used the protected cruiser scheme for anything other than early game CL. I know the British built some massive First class cruisers (11,000-14,000 tons) using the scheme in the late 1800's but as far as I know they were never put to the test of combat.
It's hard for me to see an armored deck only battlecruiser standing up to a peer opponent. Of course you can make them smaller and faster for less money so if you wanted to try a BC raider strategy that might be what I would do. Even though I wouldn't try it myself I'm interested to know how they work out if you get you get a chance to test them.
|
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jan 31, 2019 18:58:12 GMT -6
I can't recall ever building a protected cruiser larger than 8000 tons. As with bcoopactual, I suspect that such a vessel would not do particularly well against its peers with more traditional capital ship armor schemes.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on Feb 1, 2019 0:23:24 GMT -6
I only got to seriously test the three I built twice. Once in a small fleet action and once in a squadron action. The fleet action incident involved the BC(the 18kt variety) as a one ship "flying squadron" that chased down and sank its opposite number which was a 11kt AC. Took minimal damage. The second time involved one of the larger vessels against a fellow BC(larger and just as new) of a more conventional design with larger guns. My BC lost its A turret but didn't explode. By battles end it had only taken something like 20% damage before losing sight of its target in the dark and disengaging.
I've started another game, first was as CSA and this new one is as Japan, in which I will attempt to document things more carefully.
|
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Feb 1, 2019 11:24:50 GMT -6
I suspect with careful use it will be viable. I had a game (still have the save cause I keep meaning to post about it here on the forum) where I made only British style BCs with 6" armor the entire game and saw a fair amount of action with no losses.
The key was to be very careful with them and they (6" bcs) do not do well at all with only lighter guns. I very quickly scrapped the 2 I built with 12" guns but retained the 14" gun armed ones all game.
|
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Feb 1, 2019 11:47:06 GMT -6
I suspect with careful use it will be viable. I had a game (still have the save cause I keep meaning to post about it here on the forum) where I made only British style BCs with 6" armor the entire game and saw a fair amount of action with no losses. The key was to be very careful with them and they (6" bcs) do not do well at all with only lighter guns. I very quickly scrapped the 2 I built with 12" guns but retained the 14" gun armed ones all game. Who were you playing as? I think that Fisher style BCs are more justifiable for Britain than for most nations, as it can afford the luxury of capital ships which do not need to contribute to fleet battles, and needs a cost effective method of countering enemy cruisers on foreign stations. Nevertheless, as far as specialised 'cruiser killer' BCs go, I still don't feel that the 'speed is armour' philosophy is justified. Why put vessels of such great value at such dire risk by giving them so little armour, for the sake of an armament which vastly overawes the targets they are meant to engage? Much better, in my opinion, to have fewer and / or smaller main battery guns and armour that befits the size and importance of the vessel, thus enabling the ship to engage its equals as well as its inferiors. Nevertheless, I have never tried it for myself, so perhaps I'd be pleasantly surprised. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Feb 1, 2019 14:33:44 GMT -6
Bit of a thread rez here but i've got a question for you all. What's the largest vessel you've every designed and built with a protected cruiser armor scheme? I built me first three BCs, one of 18kt and the other two of 23kt, using a rather heavy version of this style of armor. They didn't see much action so I can't say how effective they were however. The worst one ever got damaged was the first time out in one of the 23kt designs which lost its forward turret. No detonation thankfully. The first design only had two main turrets but the other two had a pair of wing turrets(thus bypassing the 2 centerline turret restriction for that armor type. Anyone done similar? I plan on running a second game with such designs...hopefully i'll get more data this time around. I'm currently running a game where I got a battleship mandate just as I was starting to build out my heavy cruiser fleet. I didn't want to divert money from the heavy cruiser program, and trying to build three full capital ships would have bankrupted me, so I designed a heavy cruiser, gave it 11-in guns to classify it as a BC and a protected cruiser armor scheme to reduce the ruinous expense, and presented the president with "battle"cruiser USS Kearsarge. |
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Feb 2, 2019 0:30:17 GMT -6
I suspect with careful use it will be viable. I had a game (still have the save cause I keep meaning to post about it here on the forum) where I made only British style BCs with 6" armor the entire game and saw a fair amount of action with no losses. The key was to be very careful with them and they (6" bcs) do not do well at all with only lighter guns. I very quickly scrapped the 2 I built with 12" guns but retained the 14" gun armed ones all game. Who were you playing as? I think that Fisher style BCs are more justifiable for Britain than for most nations, as it can afford the luxury of capital ships which do not need to contribute to fleet battles, and needs a cost effective method of countering enemy cruisers on foreign stations. Nevertheless, as far as specialised 'cruiser killer' BCs go, I still don't feel that the 'speed is armour' philosophy is justified. Why put vessels of such great value at such dire risk by giving them so little armour, for the sake of an armament which vastly overawes the targets they are meant to engage? Much better, in my opinion, to have fewer and / or smaller main battery guns and armour that befits the size and importance of the vessel, thus enabling the ship to engage its equals as well as its inferiors. Nevertheless, I have never tried it for myself, so perhaps I'd be pleasantly surprised. Oh, sorry I thought I mentioned, but must have forgotten to put it in the post. I was playing France. I was going with the type as a thought experiment. I usually build German style and thought to myself, hang on can I make 6" armor bcs as a viable thing. And I suppose I should have specified, but by British style I mean solely big guns, speed, light armor not the intended role. No cruiser hunters were these, I built the with the intent to use against other bcs and in fleet battles. Worked surprisingly well too. It hinged I think on getting 14" guns early and always putting the biggest decent guns on them available paired with middling caution in their use. |
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on Feb 2, 2019 11:06:17 GMT -6
BCs I design tend to have their armor fall into the "decent against 12" and lower" in the belt and "maybe splinters?" In the deck...not a great combo...so I'm moving away from that. I'll give the British style a shot and see how things go.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawk on Feb 2, 2019 20:54:13 GMT -6
For my second experiment with protected cruiser style armor schemes on ACs and BCs I started a game as the Japanese. Medium size fleet, 100% research, and manual legacy fleet build. I am up to 1918 atm and thought i'd post about it. I started with the intention of producing the bare minimum amount of coastal style Battleships and, as I only ever produced the two I started the game with, I feel that went according to plan...so well done there. I started instead with the majority of my battle line in the form of a trio of ACs of the Asama class. These were followed by a single vessel of the Iwate class which was effectively just a 2kt larger and 2 knot faster Asuma. All four were designed with long range and reliable engines as I wanted them to be able to raid if able. Not long after finishing the Iwate I designed a super AC, the Ikoma, since things were progressing slowly enough and my guns were junk enough that I wasn't sure when I would start producing BCs instead of ACs. Of course shortly after I laid her down first Britain and then just about everybody else began building BBs and BCs of their own. Thankfully for me their development and production was short lived as a treaty came into effect that capped designs at 18kt and 12" guns...killing several early designs and forcing a soft reboots of several nations building programs. The Ikoma, sadly, was not able to keep to the Long range capabilities of her predecessors. Problems with first Germany and then Russia caused a flurry of reshuffling of priorities but thankfully no wars broke out. Ikoma was finished rapidly and my designers were finally able to put pencil to paper for the design of our first BC. With potential enemy nations already at least one design ahead of me I decided to build two smaller BCs to get my numbers up. I believed the protected armor scheme would lend itself well to these types of small early BCs. And since I was delayed in my own designs I was able to acquire both TPS1 and 0 quality 12" guns just before starting production of what would become the Kurama class which, my admiralty was happy to note, returned us to the Long range cruising style. I designed them specifically to hunt down enemy ACs and raiders. The lengthening of the first treaty through to completion of said treaty...followed by another of the same type several years later seemed to lock in the 18kt/12" designs for all nations even though several of them had the chance to build and design larger and better. Apparently the computer didn't deem it worth the effort. I followed up the Kurama's with a single improved Hiei class vessel with double the guns but, once again, was forced to sacrifice range. Shortly after the Hiei's completion war broke out with Russia...a whole 16 years into the game. Russia started the war with two modern dreadnoughts, two battleships, two BCs, and a host of smaller vessels in the waters around Japan. Following a surprise attack on Port Arthur in the pre-dawn hours they were reduced to two BCs, which apparently weren't in port that day, and some CLs and DDs. After that massive leveling of the scales the Russians never recovered the initiative. Our BCs met on several occasions...always to the detriment of the Russian ships. The first encounter left their lone BC sinking and its escort running for home after encountering the Hiei and a separate computer controlled squadron containing one of my two Kurama class vessels. Neither of mine took more than four hits each and those did nil in terms of damage other than temporarily jamming a turret here and there. Other encounters usually left at least one Russian BC limping for home with minimal damage to my own. Only once did the Russians drive me off. It was during a convoy raid near Vladivostok in which three Russian BCs thwarted the Hiei. No transports were lost though one of their BCs took heavy damage. Hiei escaped after multiple attempts and very little damage despite randomly being reduced to zero speed for a short time with no explanation given...in full view of all three enemy BCs. A second Hiei joined the fleet just as the Russian government collapsed. The most recent Russian BC produced joined our fleet as a war prize which brings our BC numbers up to 5. Nothing larger than a DD was lost on my side.   |
|
