|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Sept 2, 2015 22:45:00 GMT -6
First,
These guns are only easy to take out if you neglect armor, if you put the same amount of armor on them as if they were Primary guns the only disadvantage is slightly worse accuracy.
Regarding ROF, as far as I know RTW is striving to model naval battles of the beginning 20th century as accurately as possible for its engine. jdkbph and thecarthaginian pointed out quite convincingly what Problems you face if you try to manually load a 100-400kg Shell (8-12" gun) on a rolling and pitching ship and I made a Suggestion what Needs to be changed to reflect this and make RTW more realistic. Making RTW even better (=more realistic) is all I care about in this case, and if that means a certain designs become unviable - so be it...
If you do put equal armour on these guns you at best wind up with half of firepower of centerline turret, for the same weight. That's already huge penalty, imo. A case might be made that such guns will have performance comparable with primary guns in wing turrets, but then guess what? You can use turret mountings instead of casemates for the secondary guns too with minimal research, and not only this will lead to weight savings together with advantage of better fire angles compared to the casemates and no weather RoF penalty, it makes the entire argument of "but manual loading, should penalize that into the ground!" fall apart. Or you know, why not one-up it. This is perfectly legit design in the game, too, with the same speed and displacement of the thing that started it all, and similar armour as far as I can guess (extended bits were traded for guns, but it's nowhere near optimized). So the question becomes -- if the OP faces the same ship with 4x12's and 14- sorry, 16x11's, but the 11's will be instead packed in turrets because AI will select different wrapping option from the drop down menu, will that make them complain any less how this design is ahistorical and omg we're all gonna die as soon as it shows up? Or will the goal posts get moved, and next point of contention will be how unrealistic it is to have such heavy secondary batteries, and what obstacles need to be invented to prevent such design at all..? Uhm, you had comparatively heavy secondary batteries on the Satsuma class. These had their own advantages and disadvantages - the advantages were economical (completing the ship faster), the disadvantage is already in the game (fire control penalties). What you are missing TMP is the fact that it isn't a 'different wrapper' as you put it. The weight of armor, hull strength of the ship and the deckspace of the ship are all effected in a different manner by the use of armored gunhouses on barbettes. They are entirely different animals than the casemate mount for this reason, and are 'heavier' (or should be) because of it. This is about, as Krawa says, making the ship construction as realistic as possible within the constraints available... you seem to be confusing it with someone being angry that his enemy made a ship with a lot of big guns. |
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Sept 2, 2015 22:45:53 GMT -6
Note: when having a big gun in turret allow for good elevations possibilities (at least with "increased elevation" options ^^), the casemate impair more this. So it impair the maximum range of that gun. I just try that in design editor, and after looking at "gun data" from casemated Vs turreted main guns, it seem it was not taken into account. (Max ranges and other values doesn't change in the ship designer no matter if the gun was turreted or casemated) Maybe we could suggest to RTW team to take into account, if not already done, the reduced range of the reduced elevation of casemated guns (both main and secondaries), as this is a major disadvantage for heavy casemateds guns? I think that is a great idea! |
|
|
|
Post by namuras on Sept 2, 2015 23:37:09 GMT -6
The point here being, the nature and performance of technology used 15 years before the game even begins has little relevance on the period it covers. Yes, in 1884 the 9" guns in casemates were loaded manually. But why do you conclude from this that there would be no technical improvements whatsoever in this area, similar to advancements made with the turret-fitted guns, if it was decided that having heavy guns in casemates was a way to go? The point here being the technology behind casemated mounts had not changed in those 15 years.
A gun in a casemated mount had been loaded in a near-identical manner from the invention of the center-pivot casemate to the end of that type of weapon mount being used on new-build ships in the 1920's - hell, the only thing that really changed was the end of the gun you loaded the shell into! This means that a comparison between casemate mounts is apples-to-apples... even if we're comparing red delicious and granny smiths. To the contrary, barbette mount guns (including later guns in armored gunhouses) developed all-around loading, any-angle loading, rotating trunks, and power-assist ramming. This means that using a barbette mount from the 1880's and one from the 1900s is essentially comparing oranges to bananas. While that may be true... i personally have to get more games in 1.11 to see the influx of secondary flash fires. Also designs with 11" secondaries are rather rare in my expirience. |
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Sept 3, 2015 0:59:01 GMT -6
While that may be true... i personally have to get more games in 1.11 to see the influx of secondary flash fires. Also designs with 11" secondaries are rather rare in my expirience. I am into my 3rd game, and I have seen ZERO flash fires r/t casemate mounts - even with a four year war against Russia. And while 11" mounts might be rare in some games, I'm seeing a large number of 8" and 9" casemates appearing as a rule. |
|
|
|
Post by namuras on Sept 3, 2015 1:24:07 GMT -6
While that may be true... i personally have to get more games in 1.11 to see the influx of secondary flash fires. Also designs with 11" secondaries are rather rare in my expirience. I am into my 3rd game, and I have seen ZERO flash fires r/t casemate mounts - even with a four year war against Russia. And while 11" mounts might be rare in some games, I'm seeing a large number of 8" and 9" casemates appearing as a rule. But if i read this thread correctly 8"/9" casemates where done... And sofar i have only experienced 1 flash fire from secondaries. |
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Sept 3, 2015 1:42:30 GMT -6
I am into my 3rd game, and I have seen ZERO flash fires r/t casemate mounts - even with a four year war against Russia. And while 11" mounts might be rare in some games, I'm seeing a large number of 8" and 9" casemates appearing as a rule. But if i read this thread correctly 8"/9" casemates where done... And sofar i have only experienced 1 flash fire from secondaries. Yes, they were... hell, in the 1880's there were 11" casemate guns. Just because something was done - especially in the design of a complex weapon system like a ship or an aircraft - doesn't mean it didn't have inherent risks or drawbacks. It simply means that in order to accomplish the tasks that said piece of equipment had to do, compromises were made and risks weighed... and then the lesser of all the various evils were rolled into what you'd eventually send men to war in. Or, in simpler terms:  |
|
