|
Post by dizzy on May 24, 2019 8:03:40 GMT -6
Well, when someone builds a Yamato, post the pic. I'd love to see if this game can do it. I don't think it can.
|
|
|
Post by wknehring on May 24, 2019 8:23:40 GMT -6
Well, I have something similar with an Iowa-Class design, I tried yesterday.
3x3 AB/Y 16"Qu1 (105 shells), 10x2 5"Qu1 DP (non autoloading), 20 light AA, 48 medium AA, 33 knots, Oilfiring, TDS4, AON 12" belt inlined, 6" deck, 18"/6" turrets, 2,5" secundaries, 18" conning-tower (should be 20").
She was 65000ts tall instead of 57500ts with maximum tech-level.
|
|
|
Post by namuras on May 24, 2019 8:34:30 GMT -6
Well, I have something similar with an Iowa-Class design, I tried yesterday. 3x3 AB/Y 16"Qu1 (105 shells), 10x2 5"Qu1 DP (non autoloading), 20 light AA, 48 medium AA, 33 knots, Oilfiring, TDS4, AON 12" belt inlined, 6" deck, 18"/6" turrets, 2,5" secundaries, 18" conning-tower (should be 20"). She was 65000ts tall instead of 57500ts with maximum tech-level. Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
|
|
|
Post by dizzy on May 24, 2019 12:04:25 GMT -6
Well, I have something similar with an Iowa-Class design, I tried yesterday. 3x3 AB/Y 16"Qu1 (105 shells), 10x2 5"Qu1 DP (non autoloading), 20 light AA, 48 medium AA, 33 knots, Oilfiring, TDS4, AON 12" belt inlined, 6" deck, 18"/6" turrets, 2,5" secundaries, 18" conning-tower (should be 20"). She was 65000ts tall instead of 57500ts with maximum tech-level. Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
And what's the Yamato's immunity zone supposed to be? If this is true for the immunity zone, it might allow for a true in game build of the Yamato and Iowa. I doubt it tho. I think the math is off. Edit: Why is it so difficult to build real world ships in this game? Can we have it so that the armor size we choose matches the weight historically and then the protection of said armor is reflected in penetration charts? I don't understand why it isnt that way.
|
|
|
Post by abclark on May 24, 2019 13:42:22 GMT -6
The weight of the armor should be able to be matched up pretty well. All the different armors weigh virtually the same per volume of armor. The issue may lie in the calculation for the SUPPORTS for the armor. The structural materials used got a lot stronger over time, and that meant less supporting material could be used. That part may be an issue. Unfortunately I can’t experiment with that at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on May 24, 2019 13:46:00 GMT -6
Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
And what's the Yamato's immunity zone supposed to be? If this is true for the immunity zone, it might allow for a true in game build of the Yamato and Iowa. I doubt it tho. I think the math is off. Edit: Why is it so difficult to build real world ships in this game? Can we have it so that the armor size we choose matches the weight historically and then the protection of said armor is reflected in penetration charts? I don't understand why it isnt that way. Mostly because real life armour have very varied protective qualities besides thickness. As pointed above, Yamato’s armour plating have rather serious quality problems that rendered them less protective than they should be. Also I believe with technological advance, same thickness of armour no longer weighs the same. Rtw1 used a “less weight” progression for armour, but this resulted eventually in ship having unrealistic thick armour belts like 18in for late game. Rtw switched instead to “protection value”, so 12in at 1940 tech is probably far more protective than 1900 12in armour, but unless I’m wrong, this have replaced the weight system, and thus they probably still weigh the same, all else being equal. Thus very early and very late period ships may end up with slightly skewed stats compared to real life. However I have very little problem building ships similar to their real life counterparts in the 20s and 30s, like Nagato and the proposed Amagi Class for example. It’s only when you want to go to the very top end that things starts to get a little iffy.
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on May 24, 2019 14:48:17 GMT -6
You have to understand that ships stats in game are generated as result of several functions (essentially mathematical way to describe curves). Those have to cover realistically wide range of ship sizes so as the result they are approximations. They would never produce realistic result at all points - they may do in most, but top ends of the scale are the biggest problem as functions tend to flatten from some value. That's why there was a hard cap of 52k ton in RTW1 (and calculations started to act weirdly above 50-51k ton). Now we have ability to build bigger ships, but calculations may still need some tweaking.
Besides, there is another problem. Various countries and shipyards had different construction methods resulting in differences in overall weights. The fact that average Japanese man at game time period was shorter than average man from US was important too (in the same way soviet tanks were made smaller deliberately and then shorter than average recruits were sent to tank units). If we take into account that Japanese sailors and troops also accepted conditions US sailors would consider unbearable (they still do - remember "honeycomb" hotels in Japan?) we could safely assume Japanese ships could have been a bit smaller then average an save a lot of tonnage (smaller and cramped gun houses may save you a lot of armour weight for example) while game calculates averages.
|
|
AiryW
Full Member
Posts: 183
|
Post by AiryW on May 24, 2019 15:57:12 GMT -6
Wasn't better armor more dense? So the Yamamoto might be 18 inch armor but it was a pretty crude metallurgy which would presumable be low density. So 18 inches of armor with 1950s tech might be vastly more weight then 18 inches of armor with the 1920s vintage stuff. Does the game represent that?
|
|
|
Post by deeznuts on May 24, 2019 22:06:50 GMT -6
Game does represent this, some armour techs also reduce armour weight as well as increase armour quality
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on May 24, 2019 22:29:28 GMT -6
Wasn't better armor more dense? So the Yamamoto might be 18 inch armor but it was a pretty crude metallurgy which would presumable be low density. So 18 inches of armor with 1950s tech might be vastly more weight then 18 inches of armor with the 1920s vintage stuff. Does the game represent that? It's not the metallurgy that was really the problem AFAIK, but it omitted the carburization period. It was not cemented. And beyond that the alloying elements are often less dense than iron, with notable exception of nickel which substantially all armour used. Even then with the amounts used I think fraction of percent is about most you could except for weight difference between different armour steels. By the way, for much of this period (all of it for Royal Navy) armour thickness was indicated in drawings in it's weight in pounds per square feet. E.g. Invincible had a 240 pound belt, while Kongo had 320 pound belt. 40 pounds comes to about 0.98 inches, though often rounded to 1.
|
|
|
Post by namuras on May 25, 2019 0:49:53 GMT -6
Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
And what's the Yamato's immunity zone supposed to be? If this is true for the immunity zone, it might allow for a true in game build of the Yamato and Iowa. I doubt it tho. I think the math is off. Edit: Why is it so difficult to build real world ships in this game? Can we have it so that the armor size we choose matches the weight historically and then the protection of said armor is reflected in penetration charts? I don't understand why it isnt that way. I have looked for it, but couldn't find any readily available source. I know i read it somewhere...
And it isn't all that difficult to reproduce real life ships in game, depending on techlevel you might be off 5% in weight, but always keep in mind that what we see in RtW 1+2 is an abstraction. The AP pen changes due to improvements in technology. It either goes up (better AP tech) or down (better armor quality). But as others have said: especially at the extremes you will get weird results as the calculation gets wacky.
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on May 25, 2019 1:06:43 GMT -6
You have to understand that ships stats in game are generated as result of several functions (essentially mathematical way to describe curves). Those have to cover realistically wide range of ship sizes so as the result they are approximations. They would never produce realistic result at all points - they may do in most, but top ends of the scale are the biggest problem as functions tend to flatten from some value. That's why there was a hard cap of 52k ton in RTW1 (and calculations started to act weirdly above 50-51k ton). Now we have ability to build bigger ships, but calculations may still need some tweaking. Besides, there is another problem. Various countries and shipyards had different construction methods resulting in differences in overall weights. The fact that average Japanese man at game time period was shorter than average man from US was important too (in the same way soviet tanks were made smaller deliberately and then shorter than average recruits were sent to tank units). If we take into account that Japanese sailors and troops also accepted conditions US sailors would consider unbearable (they still do - remember "honeycomb" hotels in Japan?) we could safely assume Japanese ships could have been a bit smaller then average an save a lot of tonnage (smaller and cramped gun houses may save you a lot of armour weight for example) while game calculates averages. I'll add to this that the Yamato class was a single data point at the very tip of the curve of all the battleships ever built, that the Japanese were very secretive about them, that the Allies still thought they had been 45kton with 16" guns *after they were sunk*, that the Japanese destroyed most of the documentation regarding the ships before the Allied occupation forces arrived to take possession, to the point that until 1948 the only photos of the ships known to exist were taken by the Allied aircraft that sank them, and that what we do know about them comes from either Allied interrogations/interviews of Japanese officers after the war, or from the report back to Berlin of a single German officer that was allowed to inspect one of the ships during maintenance in WWII. Given all of this the Yamatos are not only a single data point, but a shaky one at that, so it is difficult to extrapolate what a "realistic" battleship looks like beyond the 50-60 kton range. I'll also note that while we have data for the Yamatos' turret faces, we have none on the sides or tops (though the latter were almost certainly as thick as the deck or thicker). Now, RTW does not have a separate field for turret sides, or for barbettes, so it has to have some built-in assumptions about the average ratio of faces to sides to barbettes. If Yamato violated these assumptions significantly, RTW may very well grossly over estimate the weight of her turret armor, and I think it's likely that she did violate those assumptions, given that he turret faces were exceptionally thick, not only in absolute terms, but relative to the caliber of her main armament. Iowa's turret faces were ~25% thicker than the caliber of her main battery. Yamato's were *50%* thicker. So 26" T armor in RTW might correspond to significantly more turret protection than she actually had, if her turret sides and barbettes were not much thicker, in absolute terms, than Iowa's, despite the heavy faces. (OTOH, a hit from 90° to the direction the turret is currently facing in RTW might glance off in game , even with only 20" of turret armor, but penetrate the turret side of the actual ship without trouble (because she might only have had 12" turret sides)).
|
|
|
Post by wknehring on May 25, 2019 1:35:37 GMT -6
Well, I have something similar with an Iowa-Class design, I tried yesterday. 3x3 AB/Y 16"Qu1 (105 shells), 10x2 5"Qu1 DP (non autoloading), 20 light AA, 48 medium AA, 33 knots, Oilfiring, TDS4, AON 12" belt inlined, 6" deck, 18"/6" turrets, 2,5" secundaries, 18" conning-tower (should be 20"). She was 65000ts tall instead of 57500ts with maximum tech-level. Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
Sounds legit. But if I remember it correctly, I had immunity from 20-28k yards. As said- AP and armour level was 27.
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on May 25, 2019 1:52:59 GMT -6
Yamato was 20-30km against 18"/45. And that Iowa immunity of 18-30kyards is vs. Colorado.
|
|
|
Post by namuras on May 25, 2019 2:04:23 GMT -6
Regarding this and the Yamato problem:
Armor in game does not neccesarily transfer 1 : 1 from real life. What both of you might want to look at is the immunity zone each ship had against their own guns and fit accordingly.
The Iowa is supposed to be immune to her own guns from 18k - 30k yards.
Sounds legit. But if I remember it correctly, I had immunity from 20-28k yards. As said- AP and armour level was 27.
Seems pretty close to what it "should" be to me. Also AP pen and Armor quality have some techs that provide continual improvement tho i am not sure of these go on forever.
In my first game in 1955 i was actually impressed how good armor had become, since i would get imunity to my 16" +1 guns from 18k to max. thanks to deck pen capping out at 6.6 it seems.
|
|