|
Post by phoenix on Jul 22, 2015 3:10:31 GMT -6
Sorry to ask what is no doubt a daft question that I could answer by reading the manuals properly, but does anyone know if you can move (coastal) submarines? You can shift ships between theatre but I can't see a way to, for instance, put submarines in the med, from the north sea? I have only coastal submarines. It's 1905, I'm GB. I'm at war with Italy and would like to put 6 subs in the med, but don't seem to be able to do it. My subs do keep getting kills, though (and getting killed) - so maybe it's automated?
As I said, it's 1905, I'm GB, my first try at a campaign in the game. Nothing happened at all for 4 years!!!! But I still enjoyed building up the Navy and messing around. It was very easy to play, clicking through the options. I decided to build some 'fast' BCs and now, in 1905, I have 6 of them. I engineered a nasty little war with Italy, to test them, moved them to the med, but every time they get near the Italian fleet it runs, so I never get to use them! There have only been several small (and very enjoyable) raider actions so far. Really enjoying it though. It's a nice simple design. The more options get put in the better, I think (the more dialogues, I mean - since you can spend a lot of time just clicking through the months without a fight).
So this is my no doubt ineptly designed battle cruiser (below). Can anyone give me any tips on its design, since I can't seem to get to test it on the Italians!
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Jul 22, 2015 3:35:56 GMT -6
Submarines are not moved, they are handled abstractly. At present they can show up anywhere you have possessions, but in 1.1 coastal subs will be largely confined to home areas.
Real wars were not all that frequent, but if you are itching for a war, there is plenty of opportunities to provoke them via your event answers.
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Jul 22, 2015 3:45:25 GMT -6
Thanks Fredrik. I did provoke one with Italy, quite easily, by the event answers and by shifting tonnage to the med. But the Italian fleet won't accept battle with my BCs. So whilst their deterrent value (against Italy) is assured, I haven't got to test them live!! I'm really enjoying the game though. I didn't think I would, as it's 'hypothetical', but it's so close to history as to make it really interesting, in fact. Great job! Thanks!
Peter
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 22, 2015 4:02:11 GMT -6
They look like a fast predreadnought. I would expect them to be obsolete fairly quickly, but they are obviously doing the job atm. I would have upped the secondaries to about 12x 6". I'm a little surprised you don't have the 3rd centreline turret or wing turrets yet. I have noticed that the AI will build up to the limit of it's shipyard/tech allowances, so expect ship sizes to grow exponentially.
Cheers
Bruce
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 4:34:07 GMT -6
As I said, it's 1905, I'm GB, my first try at a campaign in the game. Nothing happened at all for 4 years!!!! But I still enjoyed building up the Navy and messing around. It was very easy to play, clicking through the options. I decided to build some 'fast' BCs and now, in 1905, I have 6 of them. I engineered a nasty little war with Italy, to test them, moved them to the med, but every time they get near the Italian fleet it runs, so I never get to use them! There have only been several small (and very enjoyable) raider actions so far. Really enjoying it though. It's a nice simple design. The more options get put in the better, I think (the more dialogues, I mean - since you can spend a lot of time just clicking through the months without a fight).
So this is my no doubt ineptly designed battle cruiser (below). Can anyone give me any tips on its design, since I can't seem to get to test it on the Italians!
Hmm, the main issue I see is speed - 23 knots is rather slow in the grand scheme of things, and while it will be enough to run down the 20-22 knot cruisers around at the start of the game, by 1910 everything will be able to run from it. Add to that the fairly mediocre firepower (4 main guns, 2 secondary guns per side) and it will end up being unable to outrun or outshoot much in a few years. I would consider trading the 13in guns for 12in or even 11in guns, adding a few thousand tons, and adding as much speed as you can get - 25 knots is a good starting point. A heavier secondary battery would also go a long way - atleast 10 x 6in for 5 guns per side. Alternatively, if you're willing to downsize the guns a little more, you can make a very good fast-AC on around the same tonnage. I built a pair of these in a recent game as Japan, completed in 1905/1906; They were very useful out to around 1915, after which I moved them to colonial duty.
|
|
krawa
Junior Member
Posts: 90
|
Post by krawa on Jul 22, 2015 4:48:19 GMT -6
Not sure about the submarines as I didn't have the opportunity to test them myself.
The first thing to note on your BC is that it lacks a sufficient secondary battery. I mean what are those two 6" guns per side supposed to do? They will not stop rushing DDs from launching torpedoes nor will they make any difference when engaging cruisers, as they are just too few. If you don't want to enlarge the design I would decrease caliber to 4" or 5" and increase the number to at least 8, better 12 secondary guns. Second thing is why did you choose the 13" main battery? When you say you have built 6 by 1905 I guess the design is from 1902/03 and the 13" main battery is -2 Quality? The advantage of the 13"/-2 gun over the 12"/-1 is Penetration, the downside is higher weight and much lower ROF and about the same range. Your BC doesn't have enough armour to fight a 12" armed B and for chasing enemy CA the 12" is more than sufficient.
Basically there are two ways you can alter the design to make it more efficient (secondary battery Needs to be increased in any case!) 1) Classic cruiser killer Replace 13"/-2 guns by 12"/-1 (or even 11"), use freed up weight to increase secondary battery. You could even reduce turret armour by 1-2" as 9" is Overkill versus cruisers
2) Super BC / Fast Battleship Keep 13" guns but increase belt armour by 1-2". Together with the increased secondary battery this ship would be very expensive but could be used to fight B's (asuming 12" gun and ~10" armour). Not sure those ships are worth the Investment...
Edit: elouda
I notice you're using the 10" guns, while I most of the time use the 9" as they have almost the same Penetration for less weight. Is there any advantage of the 10" beside damage done per shot that I'm missing? Regards, Krawa
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 5:25:20 GMT -6
Edit: elouda
I notice you're using the 10" guns, while I most of the time use the 9" as they have almost the same Penetration for less weight. Is there any advantage of the 10" beside damage done per shot that I'm missing? Regards, Krawa
A few reasons; Firstly, as these ships jobs is to kill cruisers as fast and reliably as possible, I went with the 10in for the better punch, and the slightly better penetration and range. Secondly, as using twin turrets >8in on the wings requires atleast 16,000t displacement (even 8in requires 15,000t), using 9in guns leaves a lot of free weight - the 10in guns are a better 'fit' in my opinion. As the game progresses and I get centerline turrets, I often move to 9in or 8in as I can shrink the whole thing down a few thousand tons. This particular game I got +1 quality 10in guns by 1910, so the second generation of these were 4 twin 10in on the centerline, 15,800t, and 27 knots.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 22, 2015 5:47:50 GMT -6
Edit: elouda
I notice you're using the 10" guns, while I most of the time use the 9" as they have almost the same Penetration for less weight. Is there any advantage of the 10" beside damage done per shot that I'm missing? Regards, Krawa
This particular game I got +1 quality 10in guns by 1910, so the second generation of these were 4 twin 10in on the centerline, 15,800t, and 27 knots. That would be a beast of a CA for 1910. Effective as a patrol ship till game end.
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 6:43:45 GMT -6
This particular game I got +1 quality 10in guns by 1910, so the second generation of these were 4 twin 10in on the centerline, 15,800t, and 27 knots. That would be a beast of a CA for 1910. Effective as a patrol ship till game end. Yeah, they've been really good value. Its now 1920 and I just gave them a refit (just firecontrol updates); The original pair with the wing turrets were finally retired and replaced with a new pair with superfiring turrets, turreted secondaries, and oil-burning engines; Despite being only 2 years old, Izumo is already a contender for one of the most successful ships of this particular game. The only downside, apart from being very expensive (about 50% the price of a 30kton BB/BC), is that they often get thrown in as a 'core' after my BBs in fleet engagments, which is a place they absolutely do not belong.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 22, 2015 7:06:08 GMT -6
That would be a beast of a CA for 1910. Effective as a patrol ship till game end. Yeah, they've been really good value. Its now 1920 and I just gave them a refit (just firecontrol updates); The original pair with the wing turrets were finally retired and replaced with a new pair with superfiring turrets, turreted secondaries, and oil-burning engines; Despite being only 2 years old, Izumo is already a contender for one of the most successful ships of this particular game. The only downside, apart from being very expensive (about 50% the price of a 30kton BB/BC), is that they often get thrown in as a 'core' after my BBs in fleet engagments, which is a place they absolutely do not belong.And this is what I was talking about before the game was launched. The player NEEDS a way to tell the scenario generator that ship A doesn't work with ship B. Or at least a fleet organiser. Cheers Bruce
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 22, 2015 7:21:01 GMT -6
Can't you reassign them? I've reassigned heavy cruisers from SCOUT to CORE. Can you reassign them from CORE to SCOUT? Or do yo not want them in Fleet Engagements at all?
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 7:36:46 GMT -6
Can't you reassign them? I've reassigned heavy cruisers from SCOUT to CORE. Can you reassign them from CORE to SCOUT? Or do yo not want them in Fleet Engagements at all? You can reassign them, but the bigger problem is they have to be somewhere in the main body, whereas I'd rather they be with the BCs in the scouting force - this is not possible, as you can reassign divisions from one force to another.
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 22, 2015 7:40:42 GMT -6
ah, I see
|
|
krawa
Junior Member
Posts: 90
|
Post by krawa on Jul 22, 2015 8:00:47 GMT -6
Very interesting designs. I have the game only for a couple of days and haven't played that far, but what are the typical opponents for these cruisers? If they are used as patrol cruiser / commerce raider aren't they at risk being caught by a BC (like old ACs would have been)?
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 8:11:09 GMT -6
Very interesting designs. I have the game only for a couple of days and haven't played that far, but what are the typical opponents for these cruisers? If they are used as patrol cruiser / commerce raider aren't they at risk being caught by a BC (like old ACs would have been)? These are intended for fleet duty, not raiding. Their main opponents are cruisers (either raiders they catch or straight up cruiser engagements), though as BC's become more common, you do occasionally bump into those too, though usually its as part of a cruiser engagement or a fleet battle where I have my own BC's along, and these get tasked with dealing with lighter forces and cripples. Worst possible scenario would probably be a 1 on 1 with an enemy BC, but thankfully that hasn't happened, and even then, as Japan is far away and not the core region for any of the other powers, chances are the ships assigned here would be second rate and thus either slower or weak enough to risk fighting. Thankfully the AI does not seem to raid with cutting edge BCs...
|
|