Post by generalvikus on Jul 19, 2023 16:00:45 GMT -6
I'm currently playing a 1920 USA campaign where I've decided to play out the Treaty for as long as possible; and, since the battle generator does not seem to be very kind to carriers - I don't yet know if that has changed with the last update - I've been building lots of 10k ton treaty cruisers. This has naturally raised the question of how best to cope with treaty limitations. I'm playing with the realistic speeds mod.
Naturally, there's the low - hanging fruit; all - or - nothing armor with 0" extensions, and all - forward armament. But beyond that, what to do?
On the face of it, machinery development looks to be a dead end; almost all the techs are 1% weight reductions. One would therefore guess that ship design and hull research, both of which provide nebulous "HP requirement reductions" are a better bet. The next option is armor tech - again, 2% weight reductions are not impressive, but the 'gradual increase in armor quality' might make up for it. Finally, there's going overweight. As I understand it, doing so increases flotation damage, but I don't know how much. Has anyone looked into that?
In 1926, my latest 10K ton treaty cruisers are 3x3 8" (I lack reliable quads) with 130 rounds in an ABQ layout, 5"B and 1.5" D and 0 TDS, immune to my Q1 guns from 14 to 17k yards; medium range, speed of 31 knots with speed focused engines. In my case, the high speed is a necessity, because the world is swarming with BCs and hardly any BBs, and so I sacrificed the TDS; but I could fit TDS 1 by going considerably overweight. I'm interested to hear what sort of treaty cruisers you guys like. I can see very little room for improvement. For example, a 2x4 8" design saves 200 tons, or 2% of the displacement, in exchange for 12% less firepower - it seems hardly worth it, even before you consider the impact of hits and mechanical failures disabling the 50% of your firepower instead of only 33%.
And, while we're at it, how about Treaty battleships? I intend to set a 35KT limit, though I'm undecided as to whether to end the holiday in 1930 or 1935. I'm leaning towards 3x3 14" ABQ, 120 rounds with a 14" AoN inclined belt, 3.5" D, (regardless of efficacy, I've restricted myself to AoN only for this campaign,) at 28 knots. Bomb penetration as I understand it, is anemic, so may as well capitalize on that. The immunity zone is 14 - 20k yards against Q0 16" guns, and 10 - 22k against Q0 14". Unlike the cruiser, a 2x4 gun all forward layout seems like an attractive alternative for a battleship - with 14" guns it saves 2k tons or 6% of the displacement, and with 16" guns it saves 2,300. Getting to 28 knots is very expensive - I have always assumed it's necessary so that the ship won't be penalized by the battle generator if it doesn't meet the design speed. Does anyone know if this is the case?
As for tech, I'm considering going all out on armor, ship design, and hull for the remainder of the build holiday in order to get the best possible BBs and CVs when it expires, on the assumption that machinery is essentially a worthless tech group. I'm particularly interested in hearing your thoughts on how to get the best out of technology with a displacement limit.
Naturally, there's the low - hanging fruit; all - or - nothing armor with 0" extensions, and all - forward armament. But beyond that, what to do?
On the face of it, machinery development looks to be a dead end; almost all the techs are 1% weight reductions. One would therefore guess that ship design and hull research, both of which provide nebulous "HP requirement reductions" are a better bet. The next option is armor tech - again, 2% weight reductions are not impressive, but the 'gradual increase in armor quality' might make up for it. Finally, there's going overweight. As I understand it, doing so increases flotation damage, but I don't know how much. Has anyone looked into that?
In 1926, my latest 10K ton treaty cruisers are 3x3 8" (I lack reliable quads) with 130 rounds in an ABQ layout, 5"B and 1.5" D and 0 TDS, immune to my Q1 guns from 14 to 17k yards; medium range, speed of 31 knots with speed focused engines. In my case, the high speed is a necessity, because the world is swarming with BCs and hardly any BBs, and so I sacrificed the TDS; but I could fit TDS 1 by going considerably overweight. I'm interested to hear what sort of treaty cruisers you guys like. I can see very little room for improvement. For example, a 2x4 8" design saves 200 tons, or 2% of the displacement, in exchange for 12% less firepower - it seems hardly worth it, even before you consider the impact of hits and mechanical failures disabling the 50% of your firepower instead of only 33%.
And, while we're at it, how about Treaty battleships? I intend to set a 35KT limit, though I'm undecided as to whether to end the holiday in 1930 or 1935. I'm leaning towards 3x3 14" ABQ, 120 rounds with a 14" AoN inclined belt, 3.5" D, (regardless of efficacy, I've restricted myself to AoN only for this campaign,) at 28 knots. Bomb penetration as I understand it, is anemic, so may as well capitalize on that. The immunity zone is 14 - 20k yards against Q0 16" guns, and 10 - 22k against Q0 14". Unlike the cruiser, a 2x4 gun all forward layout seems like an attractive alternative for a battleship - with 14" guns it saves 2k tons or 6% of the displacement, and with 16" guns it saves 2,300. Getting to 28 knots is very expensive - I have always assumed it's necessary so that the ship won't be penalized by the battle generator if it doesn't meet the design speed. Does anyone know if this is the case?
As for tech, I'm considering going all out on armor, ship design, and hull for the remainder of the build holiday in order to get the best possible BBs and CVs when it expires, on the assumption that machinery is essentially a worthless tech group. I'm particularly interested in hearing your thoughts on how to get the best out of technology with a displacement limit.
