|
Post by hardlec on Sept 3, 2018 7:44:02 GMT -6
I have been thinking about how I might deal with "Hidden Design Flaws."
A public investigation and trial
A Court Martial
A secret investigation
The results may or may not result in reducing the design flaws. It is frustrating to spend 30 months building a battlecruiser to have a turret flash fire cause it to blow it up when it first comes under fire.
There should also be a way, an expensive way, to solve the design flaws. The loss of ships in a single action should be sufficient to cause other ships to be refit or rebuilt to prevent it happening again.
|
|
|
Post by stelteck on Sept 3, 2018 8:55:31 GMT -6
Maybe more armor to the turret could mitigate the problem ?
The turret flash chance probably need penetrating hit.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Sept 3, 2018 10:32:36 GMT -6
Yeah, turret flash fires only occur when turret armor has been penetrated. Depends a bit on what stage of the game you're at and how close you like to fight, but heavily armoring your turrets can go a long way towards preventing flash fires.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Sept 3, 2018 12:07:45 GMT -6
I don't think that's the cause. My turrets have thicker armor than the main belt, and a medium gun is not going to penetrate 10 inches of armor.
Just as Beatty had so many Battlecruisers sink, I am not surprized about the design flaw. I do want to eliminate the flaw with a rebuild. That seems reasonable to me.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Sept 3, 2018 13:06:28 GMT -6
I don't think that's the cause. My turrets have thicker armor than the main belt, and a medium gun is not going to penetrate 10 inches of armor. Just as Beatty had so many Battlecruisers sink, I am not surprized about the design flaw. I do want to eliminate the flaw with a rebuild. That seems reasonable to me. This is feature of British ships as other nations has corruption (Italy) etc. As some of ships blew up your chance in next battle is decreased as Admiralty fight this issue on background but not diminished completely. So it is done in background automatically but not with 100 % efficiency. In my last campaign as UK no of my capital ships blew up. aeson has right your only chance to decrease the chance to ship blows up is that your main turrets do not penetrate so often so have a lot of armor. This game is not about micromanagement of all naval aspects. I can see it clearly as advantage. If you look on different games it seems you have a lot of options but in reality there are not and only force you something to do. It is not the case of RTW. Just think there is possibility you offer in the game, so everybody does it all time. What advantage would it be having it in game if everybody chooses it.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Sept 3, 2018 13:34:55 GMT -6
I don't think that's the cause. My turrets have thicker armor than the main belt, and a medium gun is not going to penetrate 10 inches of armor. How close are you, what caliber exactly are you being hit by, and at what stage of the game are you having this problem? "Medium guns" can be anything from 5" to 10," and by the mid-game 9" or 10" guns can penetrate 10" armor at short range while by the late game 8" guns can penetrate 10" armor at short range (out to about 5,000 yards), 9" or 10" guns can penetrate 10" armor at moderate ranges (8,000-10,000 yards), and 7" and maybe 6" guns could probably penetrate 10" armor at very short ranges (somewhere below 5,000 yards, though with 7" it's probably not much below since penetration at 5,000 yards is listed as 9.7"). Also be aware that actual armor penetration varies; the performance listed in the gun data window is a nominal value which approximates optimum performance.
One last thing that bears mentioning - I don't know if it's modeled in the game or not, but realistically speaking even shells which are completely excluded by the armor can compromise the integrity of the armor and allow subsequent hits in the same general area to penetrate.
If you look in your ship's logs after the battle (click on 'Details' in the post-battle results, double-click on a ship, and click on the 'Logs' button), it'll tell you the caliber of the shell, the range at which it was fired, the ship which fired it, and the type of shell (HE, SAP, AP) which was fired. The ship's logs might also tell you some of that information during the engagement, though I don't recall specifically if they do or not.
|
|
|
Post by cuirasspolisher on Sept 3, 2018 15:05:02 GMT -6
I don't think that's the cause. My turrets have thicker armor than the main belt, and a medium gun is not going to penetrate 10 inches of armor. How close are you, what caliber exactly are you being hit by, and at what stage of the game are you having this problem? "Medium guns" can be anything from 5" to 10," and by the mid-game 9" or 10" guns can penetrate 10" armor at short range while by the late game 8" guns can penetrate 10" armor at short range (out to about 5,000 yards), 9" or 10" guns can penetrate 10" armor at moderate ranges (8,000-10,000 yards), and 7" and maybe 6" guns could probably penetrate 10" armor at very short ranges (somewhere below 5,000 yards, though with 7" it's probably not much below since penetration at 5,000 yards is listed as 9.7"). Also be aware that actual armor penetration varies; the performance listed in the gun data window is a nominal value which approximates optimum performance.
One last thing that bears mentioning - I don't know if it's modeled in the game or not, but realistically speaking even shells which are completely excluded by the armor can compromise the integrity of the armor and allow subsequent hits in the same general area to penetrate.
If you look in your ship's logs after the battle (click on 'Details' in the post-battle results, double-click on a ship, and click on the 'Logs' button), it'll tell you the caliber of the shell, the range at which it was fired, the ship which fired it, and the type of shell (HE, SAP, AP) which was fired. The ship's logs might also tell you some of that information during the engagement, though I don't recall specifically if they do or not.
Nonpenetrating hits sometimes give an "armor pushed in" message. I used to think that was just for flavor, but it might indicate armor degradation.
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Sept 3, 2018 16:35:20 GMT -6
for turret armour i go with belt +1, and for turret top i go turret/2
i'v never checked the 'reduced flash fire risk' checkbox and i'v had exactly 3 flash fires in the last 3 years - each time when i was experimenting with thinner top turret armour lol
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Sept 3, 2018 17:46:24 GMT -6
That's another point, yes - check to see where the ship was actually hit when it blew up. Inadequate turret top armor is just about as dangerous as inadequate turret face armor, and possibly more so at long range. Hardly matters that your turret face armor will exclude shells if the top won't.
|
|
tc27
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by tc27 on Sept 13, 2018 7:49:46 GMT -6
For the RN no investigation is needed if the admiral in charge of your battle-cruisers is a good chap who wears his cap at a jaunty angle and is well connected.
Infact he will soon get a promotion.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Sept 13, 2018 10:05:07 GMT -6
For the RN no investigation is needed if the admiral in charge of your battle-cruisers is a good chap who wears his cap at a jaunty angle and is well connected. Infact he will soon get a promotion. Just in time to be in charge when the after-war official history report is presented to him so that he can squelch it and have his own alternative fact history written instead. On the topic at hand, tactically another item to consider is I'm fairly certain the game models turret sides and rears as being significantly less well protected than the face (as they were historically). I have several anecdotal incidents from my game-play where a ship's turrets were facing one enemy and took a round to the turret from another ship 90 or 180 degrees off of the turret's current facing and went straight up in a ball of flame. It's important not to let the enemy fire at your turret sides or rears. My favorite anecdote was the Battle of Celtic Deep located between the islands of Ireland and Britain. The British lost 8 battleships and 2 battlecruisers. The two largest, 42,600 ton BB HMS Rodney and HMS Empress of India were lost to flash fires caused by the battlecruisers USS Yorktown and USS Saratoga when they crossed the British battleline's T. So the British battleline had engaged the American battleline to their south and got rolled by American battlecruisers first from the East and then the North as they turned to envelop the British survivors. The British Scouting Force was late arriving and so was unable to prevent the maneuver.
|
|
|
Post by fredsanford on Sept 13, 2018 14:02:30 GMT -6
I start games with the "Reduced Flash Fire Risk" box unchecked. After the first capital ship magazine blows up, I will check the box about 6-12 months after, in order to simulate the investigation and mitigation procedure. I found out after I've been doing this that the game does something similar internally, but that's my habit now.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Sept 13, 2018 23:33:04 GMT -6
I start games with the "Reduced Flash Fire Risk" box unchecked. After the first capital ship magazine blows up, I will check the box about 6-12 months after, in order to simulate the investigation and mitigation procedure. I found out after I've been doing this that the game does something similar internally, but that's my habit now. I think, game simulate this as every other cause has lower probability. I am not sure if it is in same battle but logically it should not.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Sept 15, 2018 9:05:27 GMT -6
The fun of this game is not so much the combat simulator as the dealing with the other events that make a navy possible.
Sometimes there is a golden BB that could not have been prevented.
There is also sabotage, criminal negligence, graft/embezzlement, and technological discoveries made the hard way.
I think the First Sea Lord should need to deal with these concerns.
I also think the AI should not be so quick to blow up capital ships. I'm losing 2 or three every war and 6 or more a game to "accidents." One per war seems about right.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Sept 15, 2018 18:00:23 GMT -6
The fun of this game is not so much the combat simulator as the dealing with the other events that make a navy possible. Sometimes there is a golden BB that could not have been prevented. There is also sabotage, criminal negligence, graft/embezzlement, and technological discoveries made the hard way. I think the First Sea Lord should need to deal with these concerns. I also think the AI should not be so quick to blow up capital ships. I'm losing 2 or three every war and 6 or more a game to "accidents." One per war seems about right. Do me a favor, post a picture of these capital ships that you keep losing so easily (preferably the design screen picture of the ship file since it has more information and include what the game year is and what nation you are playing. Without micromanaging your designs because I don't want to tell you you have to do things one way just because that's the way I (or the other forum members) play but there might be some fundamental flaw that you are missing that we can help with. I use the program Snip to take quick pictures of objects on screen. What do you mean by "accidents" specifically. We can't see your games so the more detail you include the better.
|
|