Quality of armour is increased as new technologies manufacturing armour plates are invented.
There is no information about armour used on ships in game even if save file contains this information.
We have no information about quality of different armour plates manufactured by different processes.
In real history it was known what armour plates were used in own ships and even sometimes about other navies ships. There were done tests to compare quality of armour manufactured by different technologies and even if real properties could vary, it gave some estimation of quality.
I would suggest:
1. have information about quality of armour in ship design as coefficient for simplification (similar HAA recently added) and ship picture in strategic list of ships and ship picture in battle
2. have information about quality of armour on enemy designs - it could vary to real number as done for speed or armour thickness
Note: Coefficients of armour quality could be not completely correct ones (could be setup at game start with variation to be slightly different with each game, similar to ship wrong recognition or shown speed of foreign designs) with new technology and could change to be more precise as battles are fought and armour is used and real quality is observed compared to artificial tests in "laboratory" conditions.
This would make game more realistic and provides player with feedback that should have been given (as was in history) . And I hope not so difficult to add if used simple method without test corrections by real battles, a little more comlicated if corrected by information from real battles are included.
Post by akosjaccik on Dec 28, 2019 17:37:31 GMT -5
I concur. It would also help pressing the idea that for example "penetrating 13" of armor" does not simply mean "penetrating 13" of armor" without any further clarification regarding the quality, as this mindset can't carry over from RtW1 now that thickness is meant in a physical form instead of an "armor equivalent value". Small thing, but it also helps immersing into the alternate history the game is creating, for example, I know that my pre-dreads all use harveyized armor, but XY ship is my first that takes advantage of the Krupp cementing technology.
At least it would be nice to know the armour quality of my own ships in sevice (what armour tech was avaliable at the time it was built) It would help me decide when a ship isn't worthy of a rebuild because the armour quality is hopelesly obsolete
When it comes to information about the armour quality of enemy ships, that would vary from accurate to dead wrong, if avaliable at all depending on what information my spies has procured
I was pondering this issue the other day when I looked up what "Krupp Armor" actually was. As far as I can tell, it was armor produced from steel that was manufactured using an entirely different process from the preceding best technology "Harveyized Armor."
With this in mind, it strikes me as a bit 'unrealistic' (though perhaps not unreasaonbly so) that achievement of "Krupp Armor" results in "gradual improvement in armor quality."
First off, I have to say: I'm not sufficiently familiar with the construction of ships of the era to know for certain whether or not the "armor" on the things could be removed and replaced or otherwise "modified," after construction of the ship. I suspect that, like anything else, it would have been possible and I vaguely recall descriptions of such things having been done. With that in mind, I suppose what has happened here is that that the developer has decided to "abstract" the process of upgrading armor by simply affording "gradual improvement in armor quality" upon attainment of new armor techs. From a player standpoint, this is more streamlined and "cheaper" (if the ships gradually get their armor improved for nothing more than the "maintenance" cost of the ship, then that is presumably cheaper than sending it in for a refit and paying to upgrade the armor).
I'm a gear fondler and enjoy painfully detailed builder/designer/planner game loop mechanics like this game has, so to me it is a shame that the developer opted for the streamlined approach on armor. I suspect I would have much preferred if one of the toggles in the design window was a drop down menu that allowed the user to select from a list of armor types currently known to his nation and then for this to be "upgradeable" only by manual refits of the ships once built.
It would help me decide when a ship isn't worthy of a rebuild because the armour quality is hopelesly obsolete
For me, "hopelessly obsolete" indicates that it's time for the big rebuild: carrier conversion. I've played entire games without purpose-building a single carrier, just building cheap and crappy carriers on top of cruiser and battleship hulls. It really lets one get the jump on the AI as far as total fleet airgroup size without breaking the bank.