Post by generalvikus on Feb 2, 2020 9:57:23 GMT -6
In my current British campaign, I've kept guns on medium priority the entire time so far. I unlocked -1 13 inch guns in 1901, -1 14 inch guns in 1902 and -1 15 inch guns in 1904. In my experience, this is atypical but not rare, and heavy guns almost always become available much earlier than they did historically. By comparison, historically British battleships used 12 inch guns from the latter part of the pre-dreadnought period, with the first 13.5 inch dreadnoughts laid down in late 1909 and the first 15 inch dreadnoughts in late 1912.
Since Britain in this period led the world in gun calibre, and since it's often noted that the 15 inch '45 was rushed into service by Churchill, it seems reasonable for me to assume that Britain's historical achievements ought to be roughly the best that can be achieved in game with gun tech prioritised.
While heavier guns were certainly used on earlier pre-dreadnoughts, I don't think that these are comparable; the early 13 inch guns of the British are represented in game by a -2 quality weapon, whereas the lowest level available when all other weapons are researched for the first time is -1.
I do not know whether heavier guns were considered for use early in the dreadnought age, but if so, there must have been good reasons for discarding the idea, such as low rate of fire and / or muzzle velocity. However, I find that heavier guns are often unlocked earlier than higher quality versions of lighter guns, giving them superior penetration potential compared with their lighter contemporaries as well as superior damage potential.
Arguments could still be made in favour of using the lighter weapons, if it were not for the limitation of centreline turrets in the same period, which strongly encourages the use of fewer, heavier guns.
I'm not sure why guns are currently unique among technologies in that they seem to have no unlock dates; I don't know if there's any real reason why it would have been more likely for heavy guns to have been introduced earlier than they were in history as opposed to better fire control or more advanced armour, for example. Certainly I think it's a valid option for varied tech games, but I see no reason why it should be a possibility in normal games, especially when technologies which seem like they might have been much more likely to appear so much sooner (for example, those limitations which are based on design philosophy rather than technical limitations, like the dreadnought configuration itself) do not do so, as a rule. I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on this issue.
In summary, I think that the present state of gun technology is historically unjustified, and that it considerably deranges the game balance. Perhaps no other design dilemma in the game is so one - sided as that of early game firepower. I would like to see some time - based restrictions on gun calibre. Alternatively, we could have Q -2 implemented as the base level for all new calibres, so that newly unlocked calibres take some time to become much more practical than existing ones. However, I thought that I would open up the discussion to the community before I phrased this as a suggestion for the devs.
Since Britain in this period led the world in gun calibre, and since it's often noted that the 15 inch '45 was rushed into service by Churchill, it seems reasonable for me to assume that Britain's historical achievements ought to be roughly the best that can be achieved in game with gun tech prioritised.
While heavier guns were certainly used on earlier pre-dreadnoughts, I don't think that these are comparable; the early 13 inch guns of the British are represented in game by a -2 quality weapon, whereas the lowest level available when all other weapons are researched for the first time is -1.
I do not know whether heavier guns were considered for use early in the dreadnought age, but if so, there must have been good reasons for discarding the idea, such as low rate of fire and / or muzzle velocity. However, I find that heavier guns are often unlocked earlier than higher quality versions of lighter guns, giving them superior penetration potential compared with their lighter contemporaries as well as superior damage potential.
Arguments could still be made in favour of using the lighter weapons, if it were not for the limitation of centreline turrets in the same period, which strongly encourages the use of fewer, heavier guns.
I'm not sure why guns are currently unique among technologies in that they seem to have no unlock dates; I don't know if there's any real reason why it would have been more likely for heavy guns to have been introduced earlier than they were in history as opposed to better fire control or more advanced armour, for example. Certainly I think it's a valid option for varied tech games, but I see no reason why it should be a possibility in normal games, especially when technologies which seem like they might have been much more likely to appear so much sooner (for example, those limitations which are based on design philosophy rather than technical limitations, like the dreadnought configuration itself) do not do so, as a rule. I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on this issue.
In summary, I think that the present state of gun technology is historically unjustified, and that it considerably deranges the game balance. Perhaps no other design dilemma in the game is so one - sided as that of early game firepower. I would like to see some time - based restrictions on gun calibre. Alternatively, we could have Q -2 implemented as the base level for all new calibres, so that newly unlocked calibres take some time to become much more practical than existing ones. However, I thought that I would open up the discussion to the community before I phrased this as a suggestion for the devs.
_(edited)_Screenshot_(739).png?width=180&height=180&fit=bounds)