|
|
Post by konstantinua00 on May 20, 2019 16:14:21 GMT -6
You know the deal. Some designs are just too weird not to brag about. What monstrosities have you created? What has AI managed to think up? What's the story behind them? To start it up, a picture from discord:  Perfect carrier, ideal for planes to spot their home from afar |
|
|
|
Post by joebob1337 on May 24, 2019 20:08:06 GMT -6
I present the monstrosity of the Stonewall Jackson |
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on May 25, 2019 6:25:06 GMT -6
I present the monstrosity of the Stonewall Jackson
I do appreciate that even the monstrosity has the decency to abide by the '14 guns in the secondary battery' rule. |
|
|
|
Post by cogsandspigots on May 25, 2019 8:12:31 GMT -6
I present the monstrosity of the Stonewall Jackson I get what you’re going for, but you really need to armor those secondaries with like 6” or 7” of armor. Those 7” guns are just as liable to brew up the ship as the main battery. |
|
|
|
Post by tordenskjold on May 25, 2019 12:48:10 GMT -6
Back in RTW1, I had cruisers shaped like this:
This would obviously make even more sense today for some magnificent hybrid CVs...  |
|
|
|
Post by yemo on May 25, 2019 14:54:53 GMT -6
I present the monstrosity of the Stonewall Jackson
I get what you’re going for, but you really need to armor those secondaries with like 6” or 7” of armor. Those 7” guns are just as liable to brew up the ship as the main battery. Afaik the risk of flash fire now scales with the gun caliber. So 7'' should be less of a gamble than 9'' secondaries. |
|
|
|
Post by cogsandspigots on May 25, 2019 15:34:58 GMT -6
I get what you’re going for, but you really need to armor those secondaries with like 6” or 7” of armor. Those 7” guns are just as liable to brew up the ship as the main battery. Afaik the risk of flash fire now scales with the gun caliber. So 7'' should be less of a gamble than 9'' secondaries. Well, I'd still be afraid of flash fires. I always put serious protection on my 7" guns. |
|
|
|
Post by lukasdietrich on May 25, 2019 16:40:18 GMT -6
Focus all your firepower on that star destroyer! |
|
|
|
Post by marauder on May 26, 2019 8:28:26 GMT -6
This is directed at anyone who might think that "asymmetric funnels are only good for carriers". Behold, the battleship NotNavarin! |
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 26, 2019 8:43:18 GMT -6
This is directed at anyone who might think that "asymmetric funnels are only good for carriers". Bah! Those funnels are clearly symmetric about the centerline of the ship and therefore are not asymmetric.
If I recall correctly, there's some historical precedent for truly-asymmetric funnels; I think there was at least one class of ships where the funnels were arrayed so that the line on which the funnels were arranged was at a slight angle to the centerline of the ship, the idea being that it might confuse an observer trying to identify the ship's course, at least for a brief time.
|
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 26, 2019 8:43:50 GMT -6
Back in RTW1, I had cruisers shaped like this:
This would obviously make even more sense today for some magnificent hybrid CVs... I just have to say it: That's the most beautiful ship design I've seen in RtW thus far XDDDDD |
|
|
|
Post by rhetoric on May 26, 2019 11:22:23 GMT -6
Well mine feels a bit boring by comparison; and at first glance, it might appear relatively conventional, but it's weirder in context.
First of all, the main armament sort of triggers my OCD, with the twin turret behind the two quads, and secondly it actually outguns my battleships by one barrel. I built this alongside a similar uparmoured/downengined design as a kind of G3/N3 type pairing.
As for the armour, I didn't realise I'd set it to Magazine Box; I had a slight panic attack when I realised, but I'd already built some examples. Shortly afterwards, they ended up in combat, and have proven bizarrely resilient to enemy heavy calibre fire - which I can't get my head around, given that in reality it only has 6" of belt armour... I can only assume that either 1) There's a bug somewhere, and the game thinks the belt armour is thicker than it really is, or 2) the armour is so thin that capital ship fire just passes straight through it without exploding
|
|
|
|
Post by thesovietonion on May 26, 2019 18:42:00 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 19:21:55 GMT -6
What about reverse dreadnought? Like literally reverse HMS Dreadnought. Its not that strange like the other desings here, but still its the first time I ever used something like this. I got the B turret tech from USA, so I decided that the front half of the ship would be like on a super dreadnought. However I cant build X turret and I wanted more than 6 barrels, so I used aft port/starboard together with Y. so in the end it looks like this: Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by cosmicspear on May 31, 2019 10:06:09 GMT -6
I present my, uh, "solution" to only having 3 centreline turrets and not wanting to build a dreadnought with less than an 8 gun broadside. This isn't even the first time I've built ships like this, either.  |
|
