|
Post by cabusha on Dec 20, 2019 15:37:51 GMT -6
Playing as RU, and I've gotten into two very early wars with Germany (first was in 1902!!!). Initially I thought my Pre-Dreads (auto-Gen'd) were pretty good, but I discovered a fatal flaw. Every single B in the legacy fleet had a narrow belt! XD So my ships were constantly taking critical, penetrating hits. So much flooding was seen. Anyway, since my Pre-Dreads were struggling hard and the war seemed to be going on forever (ended up 36 or 38 turns?), I started laying down new ships as tech and dock yards allowed. It led to these designs coming out back to back, which amused me. Such deranged things! But when you're on very large fleet size, you can afford to build such monstrosities, where on smaller fleet scales, you just have to be choosier. Anyway, Germany, why you so angry? BB1 - 1905: In form an function, basically still a pre-dreadnought, just mounting our newly developed 13" guns and 8" secondaries. Three ships laid. BB2 - 1906: And of course, three or four months into laying the first ships, we get three center-line turrets! Dockyard size is limited, but the Admiralty is unwilling to yield the entire secondary battery for the additional guns. A compromise solution is found, and budget allows for one ship. While designed for 22knots, the experimental design only yields 21. BB3 - 1907: With the Aleksandr II class nearing completion, our engineers propose building ships with a layered hull to better counter the flooding issues that plague the legacy fleet. A double bottom, if you will (TDS1). The experimental Retvizan class is redesigned using this new hull and form. Two more ships laid, this time achieving 22knots. BB4 - 1908: "Cross deck fire is the future!" "NO! Superfiring rear turrets are!" "Why not both? What do you mean we can't have both?" "Dock yards are too small?" "I don't care, give me both!" Our engineers eventually found a compromised solution and drafted this ship. Two were immediately ordered. The Czar finally put his foot down, as the peasants were screaming for bread. We forced Germany to the bargaining table a second time, and after years of war and very rapid Battleship development, things are quiet in the dock yards. . . . Or is it?BB5 - 1912 (expected): After distracting the Czar with 15 new DDs to satisfy this "need for support ships" and "flexible fleet strategies", a new class of "Super Dreadnought" is quietly ordered under the disguise of "Destroyer Leader". A pair are still under construction.
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jan 12, 2020 6:25:50 GMT -6
A very interesting line of ships - and one very sexy looking destroyer leader! Can you give us any more details on how they fared in combat? It sounds like you got a lot of use out of them. They all look quite solid to me; my only criticism would be that the 3 x 8 inch broadside isn't sufficient for proper ladder shooting, so you're adding to the 'multiple batteries firing' penalty while also incurring the 'small number of guns' penalty. As far as I know you need 4 - 6 guns to be firing for optimal gunnery, so I generally try to ensure that a battery will always have that many guns firing at full strength, ideally with at least one in reserve.
|
|
|
Post by anthropoid on Jan 12, 2020 7:37:50 GMT -6
Where can I find a technical description of this "ladder shooting" concept? Slightly annoying that one has no control over secondary guns. I should be able to tell those crews "hey man, DON'T SHOOT, cause uh . . . you're right at the edge of your range and you're just going to **** up targeting on the big boys, m'kay?"
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 12, 2020 7:45:58 GMT -6
Where can I find a technical description of this "ladder shooting" concept? Slightly annoying that one has no control over secondary guns. I should be able to tell those crews "hey man, DON'T SHOOT, cause uh . . . you're right at the edge of your range and you're just going to **** up targeting on the big boys, m'kay?" You cannot, you are Admiral and this is not your task. This is task of captain and crews and they decide based on their experience. Experience crew are more likely to conserve ammution if range is extreme etc. However, if you play as Read admiral you can stop fire division based if you can control them. As captain (I have never used it) you can do it ship by ship but it applied on all your guns.
|
|
|
Post by anthropoid on Jan 12, 2020 8:06:42 GMT -6
Where can I find a technical description of this "ladder shooting" concept? Slightly annoying that one has no control over secondary guns. I should be able to tell those crews "hey man, DON'T SHOOT, cause uh . . . you're right at the edge of your range and you're just going to **** up targeting on the big boys, m'kay?" You cannot, you are Admiral and this is not your task. This is task of captain and crews and they decide based on their experience. Experience crew are more likely to conserve ammution if range is extreme etc. However, if you play as Read admiral you can stop fire division based if you can control them. As captain (I have never used it) you can do it ship by ship but it applied on all your guns.
If I'm an "Admiral" then give me a comfy chair back at Kiel or Wilhelmshaven and a stunning blonde secretary and just send me the AARs I do not buy it. Captain Mode allows a high degree of control over divisions, but does not allow for something as simple as a signal being sent out by semafore "All Sub Batt Hold" ? It does not make sense. Admiral Mode is not "Admiral Mode." Admiral Mode should be: NO control over ANY ships at all, and an option to either skip the battles entirely and simply read an AAR or the option to watch the battles unfold by instant replay. There could be an intermediate setting like "Vice Admiral" mode in which the player controls only one ship and if that ship goes down, game over man (unless the flag can be transferred to another ship). In this mode, the practical considerations of how to actually send signals from the command ship to other ships and how to improvise in conditions where communication breakdowns occur could really become an engrossing game play dynamic. At present none of these modes really capture, sorry to say. I love the game. It is a masterpiece, but ain't perfect yet, and constructive criticism and open-minded thinking about how it could improve are what it needs, not tired old recourse to the same diluted claims which do not hold up to scrutiny.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jan 12, 2020 9:32:30 GMT -6
You cannot, you are Admiral and this is not your task. This is task of captain and crews and they decide based on their experience. Experience crew are more likely to conserve ammution if range is extreme etc. However, if you play as Read admiral you can stop fire division based if you can control them. As captain (I have never used it) you can do it ship by ship but it applied on all your guns.
If I'm an "Admiral" then give me a comfy chair back at Kiel or Wilhelmshaven and a stunning blonde secretary and just send me the AARs I do not buy it. Captain Mode allows a high degree of control over divisions, but does not allow for something as simple as a signal being sent out by semafore "All Sub Batt Hold" ? It does not make sense. Admiral Mode is not "Admiral Mode." Admiral Mode should be: NO control over ANY ships at all, and an option to either skip the battles entirely and simply read an AAR or the option to watch the battles unfold by instant replay. There could be an intermediate setting like "Vice Admiral" mode in which the player controls only one ship and if that ship goes down, game over man (unless the flag can be transferred to another ship). In this mode, the practical considerations of how to actually send signals from the command ship to other ships and how to improvise in conditions where communication breakdowns occur could really become an engrossing game play dynamic. At present none of these modes really capture, sorry to say. I love the game. It is a masterpiece, but ain't perfect yet, and constructive criticism and open-minded thinking about how it could improve are what it needs, not tired old recourse to the same diluted claims which do not hold up to scrutiny. I agree if there are AI wars. But such wars need to be done based on ship available which is not easy, similar thing is automatic battles. But such simulator would be extremely difficult without waiting minutes till result are calculated based on existing settings (right now you can play scenarios and let it play by AI but it takes time to be finished) as you need to simulate protection level, randomized etc. Look at tortuga powers simulator, it is good but has quite a limitation as ships which would be good on scenario can be not so in such simulator.
Constructive criticism is excellent way how to tell things, I completely agree. I just wanted to tell how it works right now.
|
|
|
Post by anthropoid on Jan 12, 2020 11:22:13 GMT -6
Nah; based on my experience with the source code for games that are doing a _LOT_ more calculations under the hood to resolve a game turn, it wouldn't take long for the app to process a battle outcome. Unless the data structures are super inefficient or something (which I do NOT think they are).
Writing the algorithms to determine outcomes might be quite a tall order and might involve anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand lines of new source code; NOT a trivial overhaul at all. But even with simple C style architecture and assuming relatively modern hardware, you can get a PC app to whiz through that kind of stuff surprisingly fast. What is it that 1GHz is a rough equivalent to? 1 billion or so operations PER SECOND?!? Been a few years since my coursework on that stuff, but that is the number that sticks in my mind.
ADDIT: going back to my suggestion that there be a "hands off" mode in which the player had ZERO control over tactical actions during battles . . . Assuming there was any real interest in doing such a thing, and maybe no one but me has any interest in such a thing . . .
Probably would be better to add a "new mode" that would sit on top of "Admiral Mode" in the UI drop down list. "Grand Admiral Mode." Leave all the existing modes exactly as they are and make Grand Admiral mode all about the strategic decisions, but with ample capacity to review battles, and (in general, post-battle intell allowing) reach conclusions about the reasons why battles turned out the way they did and to then make follow on decisions in reaction. Some capacity to specify a posture or operational doctrine for the navy in general and/or immediately before an engagement might also make it feel less random.
|
|
|
Post by director on Jan 12, 2020 13:09:39 GMT -6
The three levels of game command ('Admiral', 'Rear-Admiral' and 'Captain') are just terms of naval rank - picking one does not mean you actually play as an officer of that rank. They could just as easily have been called , 'One', 'Two' and 'Three' or 'Elevator', 'Escalator' and 'Stairs'. There are three levels of tactical command - not the experience of playing at three different levels of responsibility.
Ladder shooting is a term from the period when long-range shooting began to be tactically feasible - ie, after Tsushima and before WW1. Generally, it refers to firing four pairs of shells, two at each range, for over, slightly over, slightly under and under the estimated range. Each pair of shells looks like the rung of a ladder with 4 steps, hence the term. This is also why most gunnery experts considered an 8-gun battery a good minimum for ranging fire (it's the same on land, or was until aircraft, radio and lasers each changed the game).
Some navies preferred to fire 4 shells, wait and then fire 4 more while some fired 8 at a time. In any case the object was to get close to the target and then go to full-battery fire on the determined range. If shells were determined not to hit then the battery would go back to ranging fire. This was necessary because both the firing ship and target were changing course (and likely speed) plus the observed range, course and speed of the target could be in error. Add in the delays in passing and processing the data, and the delay for shell-flight to target, and it really becomes remarkable that anyone ever scored a hit.
In general, if 5% of shells hit the target it was considered good shooting (that's what the Germans and possibly the Grand Fleet's battle line scored at Jutland; Beatty's battle cruisers scored at 3% or less). Every navy boasted it could shoot better than that, but - except at point-blank range - 5% remained a good hit-percentage unless radio-equipped aircraft or shore-spotters were used. Even in WW2, with aircraft for spotting, ships had trouble hitting shore targets.
For myself, I enjoy the planning and building phases, but I also enjoy leading my ships into combat. My least-favorite naval actions (convoy raids with 1 DD against the entire enemy fleet, or 1 CL raider runs up on an enemy BC) could be fixed by tweaking the battle generator, so - No - I am not in favor of eliminating combat. I'd be OK with that 'Grand Admiral' mode being optional, but truthfully I'd much rather the time was put into fixing the game's other issues (like not being able to assign ships to divisions or task forces).
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Jan 12, 2020 15:14:14 GMT -6
I think it would be reasonable to include an option to limit the range that secondary guns engage targets at, perhaps as command button like the "hold fire" one. When activated, secondaries would hold fire unless the target was within 2/3-1/2 the guns maximum range or engaging a separate target from the main battery.
|
|
|
Post by pirateradar on Jan 12, 2020 20:34:10 GMT -6
You cannot, you are Admiral and this is not your task. This is task of captain and crews and they decide based on their experience. Experience crew are more likely to conserve ammution if range is extreme etc. However, if you play as Read admiral you can stop fire division based if you can control them. As captain (I have never used it) you can do it ship by ship but it applied on all your guns.
If I'm an "Admiral" then give me a comfy chair back at Kiel or Wilhelmshaven and a stunning blonde secretary and just send me the AARs I do not buy it. Captain Mode allows a high degree of control over divisions, but does not allow for something as simple as a signal being sent out by semafore "All Sub Batt Hold" ? It does not make sense. Admiral Mode is not "Admiral Mode." Admiral Mode should be: NO control over ANY ships at all, and an option to either skip the battles entirely and simply read an AAR or the option to watch the battles unfold by instant replay. There could be an intermediate setting like "Vice Admiral" mode in which the player controls only one ship and if that ship goes down, game over man (unless the flag can be transferred to another ship). In this mode, the practical considerations of how to actually send signals from the command ship to other ships and how to improvise in conditions where communication breakdowns occur could really become an engrossing game play dynamic. At present none of these modes really capture, sorry to say. I love the game. It is a masterpiece, but ain't perfect yet, and constructive criticism and open-minded thinking about how it could improve are what it needs, not tired old recourse to the same diluted claims which do not hold up to scrutiny. It sounds like the Admiral mode you're interested in is TortugaPower's auto-resolve tool for battles. Testers needed!
|
|
|
Post by anthropoid on Jan 13, 2020 9:02:33 GMT -6
Ohh! I will have to check that out! Thanks
|
|
|
Post by cabusha on Jan 26, 2020 8:07:00 GMT -6
A very interesting line of ships - and one very sexy looking destroyer leader! Can you give us any more details on how they fared in combat? It sounds like you got a lot of use out of them. They all look quite solid to me; my only criticism would be that the 3 x 8 inch broadside isn't sufficient for proper ladder shooting, so you're adding to the 'multiple batteries firing' penalty while also incurring the 'small number of guns' penalty. As far as I know you need 4 - 6 guns to be firing for optimal gunnery, so I generally try to ensure that a battery will always have that many guns firing at full strength, ideally with at least one in reserve. As I recall, the ships were largely fine. The heavy secondary batteries were largely ineffective because of the lack of a secondary director (as expected) but the main guns performed about as good as one could ask. It's been a month, so my memory is vague, but I believe most of the ships had a 15-20 year service life, mostly kept around for blockade purposes even after they were out-of-date.
|
|