|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 8, 2024 14:42:32 GMT -6
The Pennsylvania-class have a 3" torpedo protection bulkhead, rated to withstand 300lbs (140kg) of TNT - or roughly the power of a British 18" torpedo of WW1. That very much seems like TPS 1 to me. Nor can I see any indication that any of the other 'Standards' improved on this value. Therefore, a TPS 2 limit seems entirely reasonable. Actually no, per the manual (possibly the S&I manual tbf) any TPS at all is TPS 3, TPS 1 and 2 are simply improved internal subdivisions. Per Nav Weaps the Tennessee class battleships incorporated a new five layer torpedo defense system (TPS4, and even if the TPS definitions were changed, this would still be TPS4) and featured AY three gun turrets (of the same ish diameter of the two gun turrets of the Colorado class)
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jul 3, 2023 10:08:12 GMT -6
The software to edit a .lyr file is reasonably expensive (hundreds of USD) iirc
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 28, 2023 8:42:05 GMT -6
To be absolutely fair you don't actually have to hit with underwater torpedoes for them to have an effect in battle, their presence forces the enemy to perhaps take less than totally favorable positions that would expose them to torpedo attack
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 18, 2023 22:15:10 GMT -6
There's precious little real world examples of shipboard defenses engaging a missile attack, and as far as i can recall none in the game time period. The Falklands (12 years after game envelope), the USS Stark (17 years) and Gulf War (21 years) are all I can think of, until the recent fireworks in the Black Sea. In only one of those was the attack stopped entirely, and that's the only cae I know of where one ship protected another (HMS Glasgow shooting down a ground-launched AShM bound for USS Missouri). That said... my gut feel based on OP results is that SAMs are overpowered as an anti-surface weapon, and that their defensive results sound more like what you'd hope for with modern-era Aegis type systems and VLS launchers. The Israeli destroyer Eilat (Ex RN Z-Class destroyer Zealous) was sunk by Styx missiles in 1967, the first ship to be sunk by missiles in wartime. Although the formal end of the game is 1970 a number of techs post date that and the last actual tech is 1976/78 which nets a number of missile boats, minesweepers, auxiliaries of various types, and at least 1 additional WW2 destroyer sunk by missiles during the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 and Yom Kippur War of 1973. The notable statistic from these conflicts is that no ship which did defend itself with chaff countermeasures was hit by radar missiles, not a single one. Indeed no ship equipped with chaff that used chaff to defend itself before 2000 was ever hit by missiles. My experience is broadly similar, in that once SAM get anti ship capacities they become king, although I have mostly seen fire out of control from then. Gun ships surprisingly remain useful until this tech, bc they can mop up very effectively after the missile barrage. MAA R is also from experience useful in intercepting missiles, but there is no arguing that SAM systems are more versatile. Finally aircraft only work in concentrated strikes against isolated targets, and cost a ton; SAM and Cap are very effective in countering air attacks.Late game I would recommend minimal investment to retain CAP and recon capacities, but to not expect much from aircraft. I haven't tested helis + long range guns, radars do allow for some very long range hits which can cripple a ship. There is something funky with RMAA in that with max tech it seems ineffective against missiles while earlier missiles are vulnerable to RMAA shoot downs.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 13, 2023 0:11:43 GMT -6
Other times dismissing an ordinary commander costs 12 prestige
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 11, 2023 22:34:58 GMT -6
On introduction HSSM have poor armor penetration but a few techs jack it through the roof as far as I understand it. I've seen a heavy missile penetrate a 13.5" thick inclined armor belt, to a magazine.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 9, 2023 15:21:02 GMT -6
OK, AI 1915 DDs now not only auto hit any ship, but they are also able to reload their torpedoes to hit again... It's entirely possible for them to have had additional torpedo launchers on the other side of the destroyer, or to not have fired all of their torpedoes the first time around.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 9, 2023 15:19:11 GMT -6
Fully half the batteries built in Panama will always be worthless, because they get placed on the Pacific side, I don't even think you can get a battle on the Pacific side of Panama
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 3, 2023 15:20:49 GMT -6
I posted this over on Matrix not sure how many of the same people are here. "I'm 100% guessing, but it's possible that what's driving people nuts may be that both the "Destroyers launch torpedo" logic and the "oh dang that destroyer might launch" logic are making the exact same calculations. That leads to the AI knowing it only needs to evade when there's a high probability a torpedo is in the water, otherwise it can roll along fat dumb and happy. As soon as a destroyer enters launch parameters, that by default means the AI target knows it's in the same launch parameters... thus a perception that it's got some special knowledge and is avoiding the *actual* torpedoes." Basically, if both AI actions (launch and evasion) use the same algorithm, there's no conservatism (extra unneeded evasion) or risk taking and poor judgement (failure to evade) built into the AI's digital helmsmen. They will always evade only when they need to. Frederick and WilliamMiller have long stated (since RTW1 release or so... ) that there's nothing in the code giving the AI an inherent advantage, and given how open and engaged they are regarding just about everything I see no reason to believe otherwise. Exactly this, I've been trying to say that.
Regarding cruiser gunnery stuff, hits can compound pretty hard, if the 8" cruiser got lucky and scored a couple good hits early on, that advantage compounds as the 6" cruiser's accuracy was degraded.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 3, 2023 13:53:07 GMT -6
Assign from the Officers tab rather than the ships in service tab
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2023 19:47:59 GMT -6
So as soon as aircraft operations are allowed I sent out a strike of Ground Strike aircraft to attack Halifax, I checked the log after the battle and found Armor Piercing Bombs used against ground targets.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2023 18:30:16 GMT -6
As shown in the two screenshots, Captain Glennon was promoted to RAdm, while commanding a battleship, the turn message did not indicate that he held a position that was reasonably important. Anecdotally it says unassigned officers are unassigned but not that assigned officers are assigned nor more importantly where they were stationed.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2023 18:14:50 GMT -6
Given the severely limited topside space of a destroyer the requirement to have a single above water torpedo tube is a bit excessive, it can't be a corvette because those are smaller (too small for MSAM). Thus allow SSM tubes to satisfy the requirements for destroyers to have torpedoes.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2023 18:01:14 GMT -6
I do care about officers for capital ships, and their division commanders, modern cruisers, and modern destroyers. I could care less about older cruisers, and less than the latest destroyers. My suggestion is that in the division name submenu add a tick mark for automatic automated officer assignment without a pop up, while keeping the notifications for other divisions.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 30, 2023 8:41:09 GMT -6
There are also now B*D hits that'll do a chunk of superstructure damage, which is one of the ways a big capital ship will die.
|
|