"staple" ship designs per era

[thenewteddy]

Curious what your staple (IE standard/normal/regular/assembly line) designs are for ships by era?

Lets assume we break the game into 5 eras.

1900
1905
1910
1915, and
1920

and that the nation you are playing has been chosen randomly.

What ships are your staple designs for each type of ship based on the technologies "usually" available during these eras?

(basically, this is a similar thread to this thread: nws-online.proboards.com/thread/354/post-best-ship-designs where the "best" designs are posted; but with a bit more rigidity in terms of dates to make the designs easier to copy for newer players) 

[yemo]

When building my own legacy fleet in 1900, I have a Supercruiser design which will kill everything (with crew training), from lone battleships to escorting packs of destroyers (although it obviously is not fast enough to catch those).

Of course tactics are still needed, but a single one can win a war.

Though I rarely use that Supercruiser design, because the enemy AI can not really handle it (and it somewhat exploits the battle generator mechanics).

[thenewteddy]

how on earth do you get the game to recognize this as a CA? it often tells me I'm building a B. is it cause its only 6 armour?

[yemo]

The class differentiation is not easy (and of course does change, sometimes illogically).

But yes, 6'' belt armour is the reason this is not classified as a B.
And 22knots is the reason this is not classified as a BC.
You can alternatively go to 23knots but with just 3x12'' guns (eg 2 forward, 1 aft), but fewer guns for that main battery also reduces accuracy for the remaining 3 guns.

[JagdFlanker]

Apr 22, 2019 16:08:02 GMT -6 thenewteddy said:

how on earth do you get the game to recognize this as a CA? it often tells me I'm building a B. is it cause its only 6 armour?

i believe you can only design a CA like this early game before reaching ship design level 2 as long as the main battery is smaller than 11"

start game as Japan i'd build a B with 10" belt and 10" guns and it was labeled as a CA

[gornik]

For legacy fleet (1900) I usually build regular (auto or bit weaker) B and DD, while cruisers are more "creative".

Fast battleship/cruiser:



 In comparison with yemo 's design, this ship has much heavier medium battery, while 10 0 guns are nearly similar with 12 -1 ones. Squadron of such ships sometimes may cripple lone dreadnought!

and here are two protected cruisers:



First one is short-ranged minimal cheap scout, which may fight with most AI early ships (except modded 6" designs, copied from Russian Varyag and Oleg), second is "squadron anti-DD" ship and main "VP farmer", strong enough to deal with CA raider (except 10" designs)

[gornik]

At 1905  with medium wing turrets I build next generation of CA and sometimes - CL (B  and early BB/BC are quite standard)

CA - half-battlecruiser (at one battle she sunk two Bs - weak Bs of course. And all their escort as well)

CL  (after 3 centreline main turrets researched but before Light cruiser scheme, after it 1&2 or 3&4 guns will changed to A or Y at next series)

[gornik]

And for other dates - all depends from tech random. Usually I have only few "hard" parameters for them.

Speed: BB 21 knot before 1915, 24 after. All others: 25-27(28)-29(30)
Deck armour: BB/BC 2-3-3,5-(maybe 4); CL 2-1,5(after AON tech)
Turret top(BB/BC)=deck+1
Secondary turret armour (BB/BC): 2,5-3 (depend from free weight)
Secondary guns (BB/BC): 14-20 x 4"-6"(depend on which one has +1)
Main guns max caliber: 16"

[dorn]

gornik

Relating to your 1900 legacy armoured cruiser I do not use them. The main issue with them is they are just too expensive and do not give you any real advantage over foreign armoured cruisers vs. chepaer designs and this cruiser cannot face batteship in 1 to 1 combat as her armour is just too weak.

Another thing I suggest is use 6" secondary guns, not 7" as 7" secondary guns with just only 3" armour is risk of flash fire loosing ship by one lucky hit.

Your Zenta class protected cruiser is very nice, I use something similar.

I can see you use 2"  deck armour for your protected cruisers. I use minimal possible 1" of deck armour and it works just fine. 2" of deck armour for cruiser is just too heavy without significant increase of protection and the weight can be used elsewhere.

Relating to your "hafl-battlecruiser" in 1905 I do not use that. As usually it takes one more year to have 3x2x12" battlecruiser with higher speed, better armour and usually with similar costs. And such armoured cruiser is just overkill against AI armoured cruisers and it is probably only a little better than AI designs with 2x2x12" guns.

Later I usually use cheap cruisers around 15-17M costs as these cruisers are powerfull enought against AI cruisers and much cheaper to large cruisers around 20-25M.

I try always counter AI designs or expected designs as supercruisers has 2 weaknesses:

- AI cannot answer them making game quite easy

- there are just too expensive, cheaper cruiser can do same with lower costs

Do you use 1.34b version? As your design do not show weight of individual armour parts.

[gornik]

dorn

Seem that we have different philosophy of design - all my ships have "Moar Dakka!", as hit records in battle log improve MY moral  So I prefer more medium/light guns than less heavy. Your points are solid, but I think that my strategy have some advantages too...

For CA, you are right, they are very, VERY expensive (for 2 of them I may build 3 regular B). But how many times B has chance to sink enemy? Usually - less than 5 fleet battles happen during war. And in many of them only two forward divisions are really engaged. So I need heavy vanguard to strengthen them. And such cruisers are ideal to this role (I play at rear admiral). Also they may won any cruiser battle, even against superior force. And with gunnery training, they can win battle with battleships. I've tried lighter ships, but they had too big chance of failing their duty (catch and sink). And they were not much cheaper!
About strength of such ships:
Armour: 6" is enough to face 12" -1 AP shell from 7000 yds. But - how many main hits are expected before invention of Director? Very few. And secondary guns may penetrate this armour only from point blanc range. And at such range number & caliber of her own guns weight more. 3" secondary protection looks tiny, but do it's work (gun protection from splinters). And unless I build them in Great Britain, I never see flash fires till 1910-th, when they are obsolete anyway.
Secondary caliber: 7" is largest possible secondary gun. And for such "ship-killer" any inch is significant. Sometimes I use 6" guns, however - trading this inch to reliable machinery or long range (Important for Russia and USA)

For CL. I've tried 1" deck in past, but those ships had too many (IMO) machinery damage from splinters. Maybe this was my aberration, but I prefer to be safe.

For CA-BC. I prefer not to build dreadnoughts before they may get at least 8-gun broadside, so those "in-between" ships fill the gap. Their rate of fire is better, as CA they are more often involved in small-size battles, and I sometimes I have 2 of them against lone enemy BC (which is more than enough to kill early designs - no one survive 100+ hits!). All elder designs are their prey as well.  And after major refit they serve as colonial protectors till the end of game. 

For AI weakness, I use modded legacy designs for game start, so I may meet better CLs (12x6"+12x4" for example) as well as copies of my legacy super-cruisers (one - had secondary battery of 14x8" in addition to 10" main guns). One day I'll try to mod mid-game designs, probably in RTW 2.

Yes, it's 1.34b1, I opened designs of existed ships (open to rebuild - to show their weights "as built", as I'm at 1911 now, there many weights are zero)

[dorn]

Apr 25, 2019 3:50:32 GMT -6 gornik said:

dorn

Seem that we have different philosophy of design - all my ships have "Moar Dakka!", as hit records in battle log improve MY moral  So I prefer more medium/light guns than less heavy. Your points are solid, but I think that my strategy have some advantages too...

For CA, you are right, they are very, VERY expensive (for 2 of them I may build 3 regular B). But how many times B has chance to sink enemy? Usually - less than 5 fleet battles happen during war. And in many of them only two forward divisions are really engaged. So I need heavy vanguard to strengthen them. And such cruisers are ideal to this role (I play at rear admiral). Also they may won any cruiser battle, even against superior force. And with gunnery training, they can win battle with battleships. I've tried lighter ships, but they had too big chance of failing their duty (catch and sink). And they were not much cheaper!
About strength of such ships:
Armour: 6" is enough to face 12" -1 AP shell from 7000 yds. But - how many main hits are expected before invention of Director? Very few. And secondary guns may penetrate this armour only from point blanc range. And at such range number & caliber of her own guns weight more. 3" secondary protection looks tiny, but do it's work (gun protection from splinters). And unless I build them in Great Britain, I never see flash fires till 1910-th, when they are obsolete anyway.
Secondary caliber: 7" is largest possible secondary gun. And for such "ship-killer" any inch is significant. Sometimes I use 6" guns, however - trading this inch to reliable machinery or long range (Important for Russia and USA)

Yes ,there are different philosophies and can work. Question is what is the purpose for such a cruiser. If it is sinking another armoured cruiser, she is too expensive as even cruiser 30 % cheaper can do the job. If you try to use it against battleships you need first to split enemy battleline. So such a ship can work as support adding firepower but still quite expensive. I expect you use that ship with nations without large colonial empire such as UK or France.

For CL. I've tried 1" deck in past, but those ships had too many (IMO) machinery damage from splinters. Maybe this was my aberration, but I prefer to be safe.

Have you some logs? When you get splinter damage to machinery?

For CA-BC. I prefer not to build dreadnoughts before they may get at least 8-gun broadside, so those "in-between" ships fill the gap. Their rate of fire is better, as CA they are more often involved in small-size battles, and I sometimes I have 2 of them against lone enemy BC (which is more than enough to kill early designs - no one survive 100+ hits!). All elder designs are their prey as well.  And after major refit they serve as colonial protectors till the end of game. 

I do the same with dreadnoughts but not for battlecruisers as they need to sacrifice something for higher speed and one turret is the easist choice especially at time where there is possibility to have only 3 centerline turrets.

What do you do with them as major refit? I cannot find any engine refit for capital ships as economical. New ship would costs slightly more but has much higher capabilities.

For AI weakness, I use modded legacy designs for game start, so I may meet better CLs (12x6"+12x4" for example) as well as copies of my legacy super-cruisers (one - had secondary battery of 14x8" in addition to 10" main guns). One day I'll try to mod mid-game designs, probably in RTW 2.

Yes, it's 1.34b1, I opened designs of existed ships (open to rebuild - to show their weights "as built", as I'm at 1911 now, there many weights are zero)

I think there will be more members trying mod RTW2 with updated designs. It could be good to share ideas and cooperate as doing everything by one person is just too time consuming.

[gornik]

Apr 25, 2019 5:43:16 GMT -6 dorn said:

Yes ,there are different philosophies and can work. Question is what is the purpose for such a cruiser. If it is sinking another armoured cruiser, she is too expensive as even cruiser 30 % cheaper can do the job. If you try to use it against battleships you need first to split enemy battleline. So such a ship can work as support adding firepower but still quite expensive. I expect you use that ship with nations without large colonial empire such as UK or France.

If I try to define purpose of supercruisers (both), there would be something like "battlecruiser of early time". All-around ship, less protected than battleships but faster. Their upper duty is to cross T or to cut off part of battleline (In battle both columns break a bit, and in this breach CA division should rush despite any fire). Ability to sink any CA without notable damage is important too - they all should be active next month! For France I used them as well - their carrier are often: main fleet till 1905 - reserve fleet till 1910 - colonial service (at least valuable zones) till 1915.

Have you some logs? When you get splinter damage to machinery?

That experiment was made more than year ago,  so no logs saved. As I remember, damage happen in CL vs CL battles, this damage allowed enemy cruisers to escape. Maybe, I'll build such ships in next game and post results.

I do the same with dreadnoughts but not for battlecruisers as they need to sacrifice something for higher speed and one turret is the easist choice especially at time where there is possibility to have only 3 centerline turrets.

What do you do with them as major refit? I cannot find any engine refit for capital ships as economical. New ship would costs slightly more but has much higher capabilities.

My ships usually have "less speed, more guns", so I may build BC with only 25 knots till 1915, but with 10-12 guns.
Refit of half-battlecruiser usually happens, when some kind of treaty is implemented. I add bulges, upgrade guns to +1 and change machinery, so sometimes I get even 27-knot refreshed ship for colonial service. If there are no treaties, they of course are utilized at nearly 1920.

[rimbecano]

Apr 25, 2019 5:43:16 GMT -6 dorn said:

Yes ,there are different philosophies and can work. Question is what is the purpose for such a cruiser. If it is sinking another armoured cruiser, she is too expensive as even cruiser 30 % cheaper can do the job. If you try to use it against battleships you need first to split enemy battleline. So such a ship can work as support adding firepower but still quite expensive. I expect you use that ship with nations without large colonial empire such as UK or France.

For 12" CAs, I tend to go with a 2x1 turret arrangement and an extra knot of speed over what he has, and the most I can use with that is 5.5" of belt. I've tried using such ships as my entire legacy battle line (no Bs), and I've generally found them capable of engaging enemy Bs. I don't expect them to hold up against dreadnoughts, but I relegate them to colonial duties once I have full pre-dread BCs in service and scrap them once I have a decent fleet of dreadnought BCs.

[klavohunter]

Legacy Fleet Battleships are something I find I can skimp on to a certain extent, mixing First and Second class Battleships, to save on cash and increase numbers.
I once saw someone play a USA game where they said they were making a 'historical' navy, and they had some fairly pathetic Battleships. I feel inspired by that, and a Germany game where someone had their Bs as short-range, single forward-turret-only 'monitors'...

They'll be obsolete soon anyways, but are necessary for a while to keep the politicians happy and your country from being blockaded.


What I believe Legacy Fleet and early game CAs need even more than a Battleship-like armament, is extra speed. That speed is the ability to close in and destroy ships you want to hunt, and extra ability to escape those you want to escape.

Cruiser Battles with well designed and handled ships reliably give you victories, while Fleet Battles are unpredictable in the early game.

[director]

I have two standards from game start: a CA with 23 knots of speed, 4x10" main battery and as many 7" as I can fit in, and a CL of large size (6500-7500 tons) with 23 knots of speed, 6" twin turrets fore and aft, 3" belt and turret armor and as many 6" single turrets as I can cram in. Those two ships will dominate engagements for many years, being fast enough to run down an enemy who doesn't wish to fight and powerful enough to sink one who does.

I have used a pair of those CAs to sink an enemy battleship; just manuever across the wake as it runs and pound it to pieces.

Late game, I have a standard CL of 8000 tons with 12x6" guns in 4 triple turrets, 28 knots of speed and at least 3" belt and 3.5" turret armor and a standard DD of 1400-1500 tons with 2x4 torpedo tubes, either 6x5" or 8x4" guns (depending on which is a +1) and as much speed as I can get. For capital ships I prefer a 12-gun battery of the biggest 0 or +1 caliber, with a 9-or-12 gun set for BCs.

In my current game I built some armored cruisers with six triple 6" turrets. One of those took an enemy CL apart in two broadsides... my current thesis is that volume of fire can at least partly compensate for caliber, and I've had good success with 6"-gunned CAs and 5"-gunned CLs once I get twin and triple turrets. I even once built a 'monster AA' CL with 18-4" in triple turrets; whatever came in range of the buzzsaw, died.