|
Post by akosjaccik on Aug 20, 2019 2:43:21 GMT -6
aeson : Thank you for the addition! This did give me the idea of looking for a (non-overwhelming) method to chart the changes in penetration capabilities of available calibers if I won't forget about it; could be interesting to visualize the scissors opening. While I am currently not certain about how and when exactly will I replace the legacy vessels, a fair amount of arguments I have in my head (proportionally smaller and smaller "economic footprint" as the time goes on, tonnage to prevent blockades, overall realities of budget-to-task ratio etc.) seem to point at me not outright replacing them extremely fast, so the potential longevity of 100% of my battleship force in 1900 and ~67% (still 100% if I am more strict with the calibers) by late 1901 is a center issue. Purely on an "RP standpoint" it's a thing as well, as once A-H openly joins the naval contest, 9" is simply not sufficient. With the data at hand for now I can only "legally" conlcude that I seemingly have no tools to even semi-reliably defeat an armored ship, or to be more precise the combination of the currently used methods with the tools in service are not suited for this task - at the same time, competing navies have even 13" guns on their vessels. The immediate steps will be the examination of high explosive - focus, and producing these things with 11" rifles as a stopgap: Even right now ditching the main belt from the discussion the difference could mean the penetration of belt extremities or casemate-plates which alone might worth the caliber. I do have to say though, I extremely enjoy walking around these issues with you guys! And it did not ease my fears of going into basically any conflict with the current roster at all.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Aug 20, 2019 11:09:30 GMT -6
Its definitely great to try to RP in the reason for development within your navy, having to somehow come up with a half-credible explanation goes a long way in helping us curb the use of hindsight when trying to do an AAR. Sometime having something you just wants to model probably goes a step further to help shake things up a bit. It might be too early in the AAR to discuss foreign policy, but I do think that getting on boat with some major power and fight a war with a strong ally is a good way to help the navy develop early on. There is no need to fear about the inadequate roster if GB got your back . If the Canada Class survived all those years at 16 knots, Im sure the AH pre-dreads will do just fine ..... I hope.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Aug 20, 2019 16:19:51 GMT -6
With regards to gun caliber, while it's true that very early on the difference in penetrative power is more or less irrelevant, that usually ceases to be the case by the mid-1900s. While the main battery gun caliber might not have a big immediate impact at the time of commissioning, it can be quite important for the longevity of the design - 9" and 12" battleships might be similarly effective in 1900 or 1901, but around 1905 the 12" battleship is becoming decidedly superior and by 1910 there's hardly any contest. Unless you're scrapping ships very aggressively, your legacy battleships are probably going to remain in service to at least 1910 - especially as an economically-weak power like Austria-Hungary, which is likely to have budgetary problems pursuing a fleet construction plan that involves rapid turnover of warships to keep everything as close to the cutting edge as possible.
For example, the penetration tables for my Britain AAR game in mid-1904:
My own legacy battleships have 8" belts and according to the Almanac a number of foreign battleships have 7" or 7.5" belts, and fire control isn't really good enough to support engaging at much over 5kyd yet. There's fairly clearly a nontrivial performance gap opening up between the 10" and lighter guns, which can nominally penetrate a ~5.6" belt at 5kyd, and the 11" and heaver guns, which can all nominally penetrate the lighter battleship belts at the same range.
Yes, but this doesn't make those early wars any more fun. Let me give you an example.
In the game I mentioned earlier (playing as Germany, fighting Britain), it is currently December 1904 (specifically, the 22nd; I'm in a battle).
There are 80 Battleships in the world, excluding mine and excluding ships under construction. Of those, 39 (nearly half) have sufficient belt armour to protect them against my 12"/Q- guns (for reference, my 12"/Q- guns can penetrate 8.16" of belt armour at 5kyd). Here's a breakdown of the ones I can penetrate, by country:
BRITAIN: Ships in service: 24 Ships I can penetrate: 9
Britain has 2 classes of ships I can penetrate. The Collingwood-class (6 ships) have a 7" belt, 4x12" guns and can make 18 kn. The Aboukir-class (3 ships) have a 6" belt, 2x10" guns and can make 20kn; they're basically armoured cruisers, and not very good ones at that.
FRANCE: Ships in service: 15 Ships I can penetrate: 4
France is the toughest nation; they only have one class of ships I can penetrate at all; the Magenta-class (4 ships) has a 7.5" belt, 4x12" guns and can make 17kn. Also of note is the Friedland-class (6 ships), with a 10" belt, 4x13" guns and 18kn. Finally, there is the Lille-class (1 ship). As she is still under construction, her stats aren't known, but the Lille was the first example of a battlecruiser to be laid down anywhere in the world. At 20kt, she is the second-largest ship currently under construction anywhere in the world. I should also mention that I already fought a war against France, back in 1902.
ITALY: Ships in service: 14 Ships I can penetrate: 6
Italy has 2 classes of ships that I can penetrate: the Dante Alghieri-class (5 ships), with a 7" belt, 4x12" guns and capable of 18kn, and the Marco Polo-class (1 ship), with a 6" belt, 2x10" guns and capable of 20kn; another poor-man's CA, like the Aboukir-class. Also of not is the Lombardia-class (5 ships). These ships are currently under construction, so their characteristics aren't known, but at 8000t, they aren't expected to bring much to the table.
RUSSIA: Ships in service: 11 Ships I can penetrate: 10
Russian ships are mostly very vulnerable. The Imperator Nikolai I-class (7 ships) has a 7.5" belt, 4x12" guns and can make 17 kn. The Bogatyr-class (3 ships), with a 5.5" belt, 2x10" guns and capable of 20kn are the worst battleships in the world, even worse than the Aboukir- and Marco Polo-classes. However, the one well-armoured Russian ship is notable: the Tsesarevich-class (1 ship) is slow at 17kn, and has the standard 4x12" guns, but is the toughest ship in the world, with an 11" belt.
JAPAN: Ships in service: 7 Ships I can penetrate: 2
The Fuso-class (2 ships) has a 7" belt, 4x12" guns and can make 18kn. Also of note is the Suwo-class (1 ship). This ship is still under construction, but, at 17,700t, is the second-largest battleship class, and third-largest class of any type, in the world.
USA: Ships in service: 11 Ships I can penetrate: 11
American battleships are the least well-protected of any country in the world, on average. Every American battleship has nearly identical capabilities: 18kn, 7" belt and 4x12" guns.
GERMANY: Ships in service: 12 Ships I can penetrate: 0
I figure I should probably describe my own capabilities as well: the Schwaben-class (12 ship) has a 10" belt, 4x12" guns and is capable of 19kn. In addition, the are 2 more under construction, as well as the (currently) 6-ship Schlesien-class. The Schlesien-class is the first (and currently only) dreadnaught class in the world, and, when completed, will be the largest warships in the world, at 23kt, even larger than the French Lille-class. They will have a 12" belt, and 6x11" guns (because I still don't have 12" guns; the Schwaben-class were built in French yards)
Incidentally, for anyone who's wondering, in my first war (with France), I felt that I was lagging behind in battleship numbers (especially after I tried building some Schwabens in French yards... during a war with France... not my best moment), so I started a construction program to make up numbers. Shortly before the present day, I unlocked 3 centreline turrets, so I (naturally) cut back on my pre-dreadnaught building program (scrapping several ships that had only been laid down a few months before) to fund the Schlesien-class. However, 2 Schwaben-class ships were only a few months from completion, hence why I still have 2 pre-dreads building alongside my dreadnaughts.
While I'm here, a couple of notes for the Devs: first, I realised how odd it is that there's no way to convert ships while they're under construction; in particular, converting battleship hulls to carriers, as was done during WNT restrictions IRL.
Second, I noticed a slightly odd naming Scheme for French ships while writing this post: the French navy also has a "Schwaben-class," which is the name of my battleship class. In addition, while I'm not sure, the "Friedland-class" sounds more German than French. I think the Dutch navy had a Friedland-class destroyer?
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Aug 20, 2019 16:59:23 GMT -6
AdseriaDo bear in mind that the game makes no armor impenetrable, and considering BE of most AI ship do not go beyond 3-3.5 in, at close range with 1-2 level of AP tech you will score some hits. While some of these end up doing nothing, some can lead to quite deadly progressive flooding. In my Russian AAR at least half my predreads were sunk by close range gun fire that landed multiple BE pen. Furthermore, HE shells are effective against predread as many haven't mentioned on the forum, while not something I've dared to attempt, it does seem like another way to kill pre-dreads. If you go to brawling range then you will notice damage, although it is true that torpedo ends up being the most deadly thing in that range. As a result, even with penetration asisde, large guns have the advantage of making larger holes with BE hits and being more powerful with their HE hits. The poor accuracy and slow rate of fire are probably still a problem, but might be resolved with engagement at close range. Ofcourse, for that purpose one may always argue that a large secondary battery will serve you better, but it is something to keep in mind that large caliber guns still have some early game advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Aug 21, 2019 10:06:38 GMT -6
Adseria Do bear in mind that the game makes no armor impenetrable, and considering BE of most AI ship do not go beyond 3-3.5 in, at close range with 1-2 level of AP tech you will score some hits. While some of these end up doing nothing, some can lead to quite deadly progressive flooding. In my Russian AAR at least half my predreads were sunk by close range gun fire that landed multiple BE pen. Furthermore, HE shells are effective against predread as many haven't mentioned on the forum, while not something I've dared to attempt, it does seem like another way to kill pre-dreads. If you go to brawling range then you will notice damage, although it is true that torpedo ends up being the most deadly thing in that range. As a result, even with penetration asisde, large guns have the advantage of making larger holes with BE hits and being more powerful with their HE hits. The poor accuracy and slow rate of fire are probably still a problem, but might be resolved with engagement at close range. Ofcourse, for that purpose one may always argue that a large secondary battery will serve you better, but it is something to keep in mind that large caliber guns still have some early game advantage. Well, I read it, but there didn't seem to be much point, because none of what you said changed the fact that the entire German fleet blazed away at the entire British fleet for the better part of four hours, and the entire British fleet blazed away at the entire German fleet for the better part of four hours, and the result was 2 British armoured cruisers and a few destroyers (from both sides) sunk, plus all battleships at least lightly damaged, and a few moderately damaged (none heavily damaged, and definitely none even close to sunk). You can tell me all you want about "bigger guns make bigger holes," but that's only true if they make a hole in the first place, which they don't; I've had multiple battles where I unloaded literally every shell my battleships had against enemy battleships, to no significant effect.
Oh, and don't forget that, in 2 wars (Germany vs France, then Germany vs Britain), despite multiple battleship engagements and (at least) 2 fleet engagements, the grand total of capital ship losses was those 2 British cruisers and a single French battleship that got isolated and torpedoed. In fact, the only capital ship kills I've ever scored in RTW2 were with torpedoes; even against protected cruisers, I think I have more kills with torpedoes than with guns (although I suspect that, in many cases, this was just a case of finishing off ships disabled by 6" gunfire).
For reference, my first game I ever played of RTW2 was as Japan; I sank 2 armoured cruisers and 2 battleships (they had one other battleship and one armoured cruiser that I didn't manage to get, IIRC) in a surprise attack on Russia in the very first war. In the same attack, almost all of my destroyers were sunk, largely during the initial torpedo attacks. If my destroyers could only sink two thirds of the enemy fleet in a surprise night attack while they're at anchor and I lose most of my own ships in the process, they're never going to be much help in a true battle, at sea. And, as already established, battleships aren't much use, either. In fact, the most success I've been having is using my colonial protected cruisers with massed 6" guns to beat up enemy colonial cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Aug 31, 2019 11:41:56 GMT -6
Currently, I am w the committee tasked with analyzing the data of the past exercises is working on editing and handing over their recommendations, so I do not have 1901 at hand just yet, but soon™. Ish.™ Probably.™ Next week.™ ...then why I am disturbing the air over here? Well, I acquired some new software, none of which I am proficient at obviously, but screwed around with them to produce some results. You know that feeling when you get a hammer and suddenly everything seems suspiciously like a nail, right? Anyway, in case some of you might want a new, hand-crafted and free range, gluten-free wallpaper or something, here they are (fingers crossed the forum downsizes the pictures, otherwise you gents don't get any pictures and I get royally banned) - it all started with this:
I downloaded a new modeling software for personal use (SE 2020), to which I automatically got a rendering software. Huh. Neat. So I started experimenting with it, and everything just kind of went downhill from there. But who knows, maybe you can salvage something.
As you can see, the "optimized for 3D printing"-approach starts to bleed out once I try to make close-ups, but oh well, these pics still have some sort of charm I believe.
Weaponry! Not my best work, but this is a new kind of 10cm/L50 Škoda (not yet developed in my game):
The earlier version, the Škoda 10cm/L40, as a legacy gun. Currently in service in a pretty widespread manner, but so far nothing uses this exact shield: (...yet)
In case you'd like it in black....okay, just a bit of a spoiler for the upcoming year(s)!
The battleship squadron in a trendy, ominous dark color (the three Wien and the Erzherzog):
Again, not a tech that's researched in my timeline just yet, but might as well share it with you. (Now it will be really pathetic if I lose the game in 1903 or something...!)
Finally, I noticed that every cool face has a golden AK, or pistol or something, and I am really afraid to slip into obscurity when it comes to fashion, so naturally, here's a golden destroyer.
Because having good taste is not a requirement to sketch up imaginary warships! Fortunately. You know, we are nearing to the point where I should rename the topic to "things you can do, but you should not do". ...and I am at 1902 in the game. My heart is filled with dread if I think about the things yet to come.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 2, 2019 9:07:35 GMT -6
In this year: - Can we remodel the Donau-class for them to have a crystal clear role they excel at? (not likely) - Does the repeated fleet exercise answer our questions about defeating enemy armor? (not exactly) - Does anything important even happen at all? (not quite)
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Sept 2, 2019 11:20:22 GMT -6
I have to say I smirked quite hard when the Budapest class turned out to be 17 knots XD, feel my pain. Still the statistic based approach to naval planning with excercise being used to collect data is both fun and very informative, and it was very interesting to read up the difference between the AP and HE school of pre-dread battles. I look forward to what future AH exercise can reveal
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 3, 2019 17:10:18 GMT -6
It's a very elite club I have to say. I can't remember a single instance where without any modification or refit simply the first ship of the same exact "batch" achieves 18kts on the trials, and then the sister ship(s) 17 knots. Maybe it was a standard feature of RtW, maybe patching the game did it's magic - either way, it did occur historically so I can't really complain, but come on now! Someone is about to be sacked.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 6, 2019 7:24:58 GMT -6
In this year: - Skoda presents us what we deserve, but not what we need right now. - The world seemed to avoid ships so far that tend sink. This seems to change. They call it "submerging". - Warped hulls, destroyer studies and massive, massive profit.
Noshur Viverse was kind to bring to my attention that the page looks on mobile like the Mutsu looked on 9 June 1943; so I grinded it a bit and now it looks better. Not good, mind you (for example, lists are still fubar), but reading on mobile now is possible after consuming just the right amount of alcohol to do so.
|
|
|
Post by ewaldvonkleist on Sept 6, 2019 8:05:20 GMT -6
Website still looks odd on Android phone with big screen and latest chrome browser.
The text is displayed in a very narrow column.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 7, 2019 15:48:50 GMT -6
Website still looks odd on Android phone with big screen and latest chrome browser. The text is displayed in a very narrow column. Even a refresh won't solve it? It should show up with a 20-20% margin left-right. "Odd" is okay as long as it is readable. Truth be told, I am very far away from being a programmer, so my "skills" are rather limited in this regard.
|
|
|
Post by ewaldvonkleist on Sept 8, 2019 12:44:59 GMT -6
It is 45% margin left and right and maybe 10% text in the centre. Refresh or trying or asking the browser to display the PC version of the site does not help.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 8, 2019 15:43:47 GMT -6
Hm. If so, I guess as a workaround I'll try to post the next year here in the topic as well, let's see how that goes.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Sept 28, 2019 15:23:48 GMT -6
For the sake of the gentlemen who were trying to read the webpage on mobile devices in vain, I'll paste the AAR into this topic as well! Further information about ships, logs and more will still be exclusive for the homepage for technical reasons (read: I'll get myself banned if I paste all of that trash right into here).
In this year: - Piping in that sweet, sweet british industry! - Making the best in what we arguably need the least - Shell selection: a lot of fuss over no decisive results
JANUARY
The fleet will begin the new year with a different shell loadout. ...this statement actually radiates far more confidence than it has any right to have. While the Navy managed to collect as much data and evaluation as it was reasonable to get a hold on for the money at hand, a clear answer for the problem still does not exist. Apparently, common shells do seem to work - especially with the new ecrasite bursting charge -, but by what margin is debated. The other issue is that it's almost impossible to predict the amount and ratio of armored plates a given armament has to go against in the future.
State of the armor-piercing capabilites of A-H weaponry in 1903
Ultimately, large calibers - for what little we can field of those - do not experience large changes in their magazines, but smaller calibers will be alloted with gradually larger percentages of shells with larger explosive mass and contact fuzes, especially when utilized as intermediate battery. Nominal shell type distributions as of 1903
Interesting to note that the changes did not affect the official doctrine in the way that the 1903 edition of the Almanach für die k. und k. Kriegsmarine keeps the same exact recommendations for shell selection for a given target as a year before - artillery officers are expected to know about this and deal with this issue in situ - which might not be a wise approach on an organizational level, but as long as their decisions especially regarding the situational extremities are correct, there shouldn't be a massive gap in shell performance statistically speaking anyway.
FEBRUARY We've been advised that due to recent political occurences the german Kaiserliche Marine organized a wargame in which our navy was acting as the opposition. If they've managed to construct an operational plan against us, that's exactly one plan more than how much we have against them. Better remember to not speak about this loudly...
MARCH The good news is that we've managed to export a fair few of our Mannlicher repeating rifles to the Balkans. The bad news is that they are very clearly Mannlicher rifles (well, having the factory markings on them also helps...), which did not go over too well with Italy, considering they have territorial demands regarding these areas.
S.M.S. Sankt Georg in her new, somewhat sluggish form.
APRIL Turns out the italians did take our arms shipment to their hearts. We have firsthand evidence of this, for we have managed to capture an italian spy. Issue is, word got out about the incident, at which point the government could not handle this on diplomatic channels anymore and had to publicly take a hard stance. Now the guy is in chains, the italian intelligence is no doubt doing damage control, their government is reeling, and our people are content in their prudence. Everyone likes to stand tall until blood starts to flow - then they tend to duck for cover. Let's hope that this case will not spiral out of control.
MAY ...but to avoid that, almost immediately arresting a british spy in short order after the italian gentleman certainly does not help! What could we possibly have that they need or fear?! Fortunately, this time the press did not seem to get an anonymous hint, so noone had to be involved except for professional diplomats - luckily for us. The trend is, however, still alarming.
JUNE Finally, some good news! This month marks the birth of our Third Destroyer Division! It's five Tiger-class Torpedoboot-zerstörers began their trials and in a couple of months, if all goes well, they can begin their active service, mitigating our lack of small craft to a fair extent.
The newly-formed Third Destroyer Squadron, based in Pola, lead by the S.M.S. Salamander In the foreground: the helm of the Turul
JULY With the arrival of our third Budapest-class battleship, the Babenberg and four additional minesweepers ongoing constructions have been successfully finished and the slips cleared up. Some technological adaptations were also in order, such as reliable pendulum mechanism for our torpedoes and safe fuze arming devices. Naturally, we don't address the previous practice as "unsafe" - at least not officially. Ultimately, the fleet's overall shape is commendable, even though there are legitimate criticisms about for example the way of keeping the minesweeper flotilla on the same level of readiness as the battleships.
AUGUST Some merry frenchmen yet again trawled their nets on our territorial waters - and they managed to catch 600 tons worth of weight. Unfortunately, said weight was belonging to the patroling warship Conte Mittrowsky - as a result, the fishing boat got confiscated until the judicial proceedings get to some point with the matter at hand. To the french objections the answer was esentially "Get used to it". God only knows what's with our mackerels and the french cuisine. Anyway, mackerels aside, it is time for us to invest our excess funds into taking the fighting capabilities of our navy to a level that is more in line with present day's standards. Hence, preliminary work has begun on the plans of a new, large protected cruiser with a strong emphasis on fighting against hostile cruisers of similar category.
SEPTEMBER The british Vickers was kind enough to sell us the technology for an improved steel alloy for about two million Crowns which displays better tensile strength than our current materials. This translates to better energy dissipation and the potential for a structural element capable of taking up higher loads before breakage. Just in time for our new cruiser! The name Ersatz Zenta is somewhat misleading in the way that it isn't actually and directly aimed to replace the current Zenta-class. While the small, ~3000t Zenta is expected to defend trade routes, go on diplomatic missions and screen the fleet against torpedoboats and destroyers with it's 10cm battery, the Ersatz Zenta is expected to fight and - with a reasonable chance - defeat the opposition's protected cruisers of similar build and either operate on it's own as for example raider interceptor, or as the leader of a light squadron. Finalization of the plans will take about a month probably.
OCTOBER It seems to be true that opening the door is the hard part, but once it's done, what follows is easier. After the successful technology transfer of the past month, now we managed to buy the licence for the british 4"/40 quick-firing gun for roughly one and a half million Crowns. A fairly friendly price considering how good the design seems to be! No doubt the design will find it's way into active service soon enough; for now it was officially adapted as 10cm SFK L/40 (E) ['E' indicating it's origin as 'England'] and the work on the plans for the tooling began.
10cm SFK L/40 (E) Model 1903. The committe dealing with the ordnance filed some complaints about the "insufficient shielding".
NOVEMBER Four keels has been laid down - three at STT, and one at Ganz-Danubius. Each keel will belong to a yet unnamed Ersatz Zenta - it is a tradition in the navy that the ships won't get a name until they touch the water. As it stands now, once they are accepted into service we'll have the second most potent "light cruiser" force globally - after Great Britain, of course - on paper. Even then, tragedy could be just a shell away. However, this really isn't, or at least shouldn't be an occassion for lamentation and doubts, but for experiencing just a tad bit of complacency. In a year and a half we'll put 48 pieces of 15cm artillery on water capable of cutting trough the seas with 23 knots. That should count for something.
DECEMBER
Italy reached out in order to lower tensions between our states via granting mutual concessions. Unfortunately, accepting their exact proposal could be interpreted as weakness on our part on the international stage. The Monarchy has to walk on a very thin plank and use a careful mix of favours and threats if it wants to retain control of it's heterogeneous, volatile territories and people - including of italian origins. Both work only as long as the recipients perceive power behind our steps. Once they believe said power is gone... To cut this train of thoughts short, turning down their proposal seems ultimately like the safer bet. And maybe even the one resulting in less suffering for all of us in the long run.
|
|