conner
New Member
Albo Supremacy
Posts: 38
|
Post by conner on Oct 31, 2020 23:01:54 GMT -6
I think some people are missing the point of this ship.
It is not:
A unit I would seriously take into battle
A unit that I put thought and effort into in terms of its fighting capability
A unit you should seriously consider using outside of two very specific roles
It is:
An experiment to find the cheapest B
A battleship to fill the early battleship cap
A block of steel to boost strat points for blockading
A meme
|
|
conner
New Member
Albo Supremacy
Posts: 38
|
Post by conner on Oct 31, 2020 23:06:11 GMT -6
And what do I build instead of normal Bs? This thing  These are extremely effective in fleet battles and have a much longer lifespan that a Pre-Dread. Can keep these things going around for as long as I need CAs. |
|
geroj
Junior Member
Posts: 76
|
Post by geroj on Nov 1, 2020 16:12:16 GMT -6
16 000t ship with 8" guns?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2020 6:33:43 GMT -6
16 000t ship with 8" guns? definitely fail |
|
|
|
Post by HolyDragoon on Nov 2, 2020 6:37:15 GMT -6
I went on a quest to find the cheapest B possible. Backstory behind this was I was getting annoyed at the battleship cap, like really annoyed with it. I only build CAs for my legacy capital fleet and build Super CLs but those are a tale for another day. Normal Bs use up too much funds for what they are worth and I never really used them in combat since CAs were way better. I wanted more funds to build CAs and CLs and the Bs weren't allowing me to do that. I ended up coming up with this design. It's the smallest B you can make and is also the cheapest. Will try and answer any questions in a timely manner. I think you could rename this as a Coastal Defense Ship sometimes called Coastal Battleships. with the low freeboard, short range. These are great for the Nordic countries and Thailand. Greece, Portugal, Sweden would love it. We did have something... somewhat similar, though smaller and with less guns overall. It was classed as an armoured cruiser though. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_ironclad_Vasco_da_Gama |
|
|
|
Post by stevethecat on Nov 2, 2020 10:17:45 GMT -6
16 000t ship with 8" guns? definitely fail 8" 0-Quality isn't bad for 1900, providing that the spare weight is spent well, I would have gone for much more speed and a couple more torps, give the ship more role options. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2020 11:29:14 GMT -6
8" 0-Quality isn't bad for 1900, providing that the spare weight is spent well, I would have gone for much more speed and a couple more torps, give the ship more role options. Its needlessly overarmored, but it lacks any armor on secondary guns. I can see the message spam "crew cut down by splinters". It also have way too much ammo. I´d reduce the secondaries, put them into armored casemates, reduce the ammo, reduce the armor, and put in normal engines. In the end, I think such ship can be about 4 000 or 5 000 tons lighter and still have almost the same efficiency in battle. P.S.: Huge early CA´s are WAAAAYYYYYY too expensive to maintain. Its like throwing the money out of the window. |
|
|
|
Post by director on Nov 2, 2020 14:37:27 GMT -6
I've gotten very good use from big early CAs, though I tend to use a 10" main battery, 6" or 7" guns in secondary and 23-knot speed. I've defeated solo battleships by using a pair of them. Generally I use a 5" belt (2" ends) and 6" turret armor, with a 2" deck and 3" armor on the secondaries. They can have a long useful life and make excellent surface raiders since they can beat anything sent against them smaller than a battlecruiser.
|
|
|
|
Post by eskimobrother319 on Nov 2, 2020 15:27:01 GMT -6
If you're wanting to build a very cheap BB or BC (even CA's) I might suggest for BBs a 3x2 (14") at 24kts and standard armor and for the BC 3x2 (12") at 28kts and you can really watch the cost fall. The all forward config saves so much on weight and later cost that it makes it a no brainer for a cost cutting ship/
|
|
|
|
Post by banzaigrandma on Nov 3, 2020 16:32:28 GMT -6
I've got a similar idea for my starting Bs. But I don't scrap them. I turn them into CV for 20-ish aircraft, therefore I raised the displacement to 13t and the speed to 20kn. The 6.5in armor isn't a problem since the Bs of that period shot like StormTrooper. The ennemy Bs are busy shooting all around the ship while the secondary deals with cruisers.
|
|
euchrejack
Full Member
Don't feed the Trolls. They just get bigger and more numerous.
Posts: 139
|
Post by euchrejack on Nov 3, 2020 18:55:02 GMT -6
If you changed the engine to Reliability rather than Speed, it should make a bulkier, cheaper ship.
Added an older creation of mine (dunno if still legal), and newer design based upon your idea of maximizing the secondary armor for weight.
Need to know what country you are using for a real contest. My entry is from France, and undercuts your ship on price. Also, I put the big gun in the back, since as you mention, it should immediately be steaming to port should it get stuck in battle, hence its big gun will be firing on pursuers rather than doing the pursuing.
Also add torpedoes. They add considerable weight at a cheap cost.
Attachments:
|
|
euchrejack
Full Member
Don't feed the Trolls. They just get bigger and more numerous.
Posts: 139
|
Post by euchrejack on Nov 3, 2020 19:44:23 GMT -6
Now here is a ship that is not much more expensive, but its faster than most contemporary ships, so it's actually survive to keep your blockade up. Think of it as a Pre-Battlecruiser! Attachments:
|
|
conner
New Member
Albo Supremacy
Posts: 38
|
Post by conner on Nov 3, 2020 21:37:38 GMT -6
8" 0-Quality isn't bad for 1900, providing that the spare weight is spent well, I would have gone for much more speed and a couple more torps, give the ship more role options. Its needlessly overarmored, but it lacks any armor on secondary guns. I can see the message spam "crew cut down by splinters". It also have way too much ammo. I´d reduce the secondaries, put them into armored casemates, reduce the ammo, reduce the armor, and put in normal engines. In the end, I think such ship can be about 4 000 or 5 000 tons lighter and still have almost the same efficiency in battle. P.S.: Huge early CA´s are WAAAAYYYYYY too expensive to maintain. Its like throwing the money out of the window. - Needlessly overarmoured It's mostly for future proofing and tanking medium calibre shells at ranges under 1000k yards. It can tank 9" AP at 500 yards and under which is what I want it to do. - No armour on secondaries It's because it weighs 1k tons and doesn't provide much protection. In two fleet battles I did, only a few ships had any significant amount of secondaries stripped. So there's no point. - Armoured casemates They don't work as well in heavy weather conditions and need DE for extra protection. You also lose more guns when they're hit. You can lose 3 in one hit. I chose turrets cause when you have no armour there isn't any penalty and the extra survivability. - reduce the ammo I'm doing fleet size 16, I need the ammo. I almost ran out in both of my fleet battles. - Normal Engines No cause coal engines are more likely to have speed reducing events. Reliable engines basically stop those events for occurring. And as for reducing the size, I'd get less secondaries so that's a nope. The secondaries are what makes the ship really good since they can rake the superstructures of enemy Pre-Dreads. |
|
conner
New Member
Albo Supremacy
Posts: 38
|
Post by conner on Nov 3, 2020 21:40:08 GMT -6
16 000t ship with 8" guns? definitely fail  Definite fail alright. The main battery doesn't matter all too much. The secondaries do tho. |
|
|
|
Post by wknehring on Nov 4, 2020 2:22:23 GMT -6
This is Borodino. You´d better not mess with Borodino. Germans tried it once and it changed their mind so much that they proposed an alliance some 5 months later.
Those are the best! But Borodino looks a bit slow imo  |
|
