|
Post by klavohunter on Jun 7, 2016 18:28:20 GMT -6
So, late-game Large Cruisers seem impractical due to the way they end up having most of the expense of a battlecruiser, and none of the strength. They're cool if you get an 18,000-ton, 10" gun treaty, but otherwise, no.
I have experimented with Very Small CAs, with something like 9x7" main guns for armament. I felt disappointed every time I tried these...
HMS Courageous-pattern "Large Light Cruisers" weigh in as Battlecruisers in RTW. I consider them an extraordinary risky design to build, but they have been fun, and effective in colonial postings. Be prepared to run from any real battlecruiser you encounter!
My other fun experience with late-game CAs was my Germany game I posted to the favorite ships thread, where I refit my 1899 CAs' 11" double turrets with 16" singles and let them tag along with the battle line for epic clashes with the Royal Navy.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 28, 2016 12:33:10 GMT -6
I would like to report that I have seen my ASW Technology research being set to High multiple times during my game as the USA, when I did not set that myself.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 27, 2016 1:35:33 GMT -6
I noticed that the game designed some ships for me, including a Japanese Asama-class CA, which was nothing like the Asama-class the Japanese were using in my game. Nor was it any Asama-class I recall designing myself...
I think the game just tried to build something, at the start of my turn I got a popup to confirm the building of a (very cheap) new class of ship. I told it no, suspected it was one of the MS...
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 23, 2016 21:42:34 GMT -6
I abandoned my previous game after finding out how effective the AI is at matching your legacy fleets. If you design any super-cruisers at game start, the AI will respond in kind!
... My game as humble little Japan seems to be off to a terrible start. I made conservative, effective, Japan-sized designs, to hopefully not arouse the wrath of the AI's ship designer.
This did not work, and my 8700-ton, 9" gunned CAs provoked the AI to go insane with making supercruisers, and ONLY supercruisers, like in my last game! (in the same game slot, yes, which may have had something to do with it?) There were only 2 CAs in the entire world on par with my 8700-ton ships, everything else was over 10 kilotons.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 23, 2016 19:52:26 GMT -6
Thank you for the patch! I'm starting my first game and I already have encountered an oddity. Some nations are fielding a variety of battleships that are over the tonnage their home shipyards can build. That's okay, I suppose they ordered from foreign yards. Great Britain, however, has gone over their 16000 ton dock space limit to make a bunch of 16,200 ton ships.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 23, 2016 9:41:56 GMT -6
Can't wait to go home and try it!
Question, did you fix the bug associated with the Decrease Number of Guns in Turret button? The Increase button works, but Decrease didn't in the last patch.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 12, 2016 9:23:47 GMT -6
If it's any consolation, the AI is completely heartless and will abandon damaged battleships that lose speed and fall out of line, and will do next to nothing to maintain a formation and defend the cripples. This is a complete contrast to their perfect formations at the start of a battle. I managed to sink 8 Italian battleships for only 2 of mine last night after completely shattering their formation with a reckless charge in a night battle. My own fleet also broke apart in the chaos, but my ships managed to stay in their squadrons and hunt down single lost, panicking Italians.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on May 10, 2016 10:56:31 GMT -6
It is quite frustrating in the early-game to see your Battleships falling out of formation, or to see the squadrons behind the flagship lag far, far behind, when they can go the same speed as the flagship. At least it is satisfying to break up the AI's much-better-organized fleets and sink their predreadnoughts with all these handicaps against you.
My strategy to mitigate this in my current France playthrough is to go for maximum-speed predreadnoughts to outmaneuver the enemy. Despite the average German battleship having at least 2" of armor on my battleships, the 4-knot advantage has let me chase down the enemy when it suits me, and to cut their fleet apart when the opportunity is presented.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Apr 18, 2016 13:49:31 GMT -6
I do prefer to put my ships on Active fleet status when they arrive at their destination. Ships on Foreign Service often abuse their freedom to go places that annoy their commanding Admiral. If you don't pay attention, your Captains will conspire to form a booze cruising squadron as far away from home port as they can manage. I've found tons of ships on FS hiding out in North Europe, the Mediterranean, or Northeast Asia, endlessly enjoying barrooms and bordellos on the taxpayers' dime!
It gets real awkward when war breaks out.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Apr 15, 2016 1:16:33 GMT -6
I tend to build a single 4" or 5" battery on most of my colonies, just in case that helps ward off enemy invasion.
My attempts at seriously using coastal guns as Mediterranean powers has not been as helpful as I would've liked, so I stopped making them. Occasionally I feel the urge to build some 5" guns to make life hell for enemy DD/CL in coastal raids, but.... it just never seems worth it.
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Apr 15, 2016 1:15:56 GMT -6
Color me suitably impressed at the success of your unarmored deck ships! How bad were the ill effects of neglecting deck armor? I know as the USN it's hard to mess up since you have so much money + ships...
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Apr 2, 2016 11:54:23 GMT -6
There's something to be said for Coastal Patrol CLs, and the concept of an escort ship that can only keep up with the battle-line is not without merit. The problem comes in when those 21kt CLs get dragged into fights where they're alone...
He only has 42,000 ton dock size, making 38,000-ton battleships isn't unbelievable. There is wisdom in making smaller, less expensive ships, so you can gain a numerical advantage.
No, the true surprise is where the IJA is thanking the IJN! Are you sure the person delivering the telegram is not an assassin?
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Mar 31, 2016 22:48:58 GMT -6
I don't believe I properly shared my favorite Warship Treaty game. Once upon a time I was playing as the United States, and I had a nice lead in early Dreadnoughts. I had the only proper superfiring centerline-gun battleships of any nation when I agreed to a treaty... The limitations were 18,000 tons, and 12" guns. At that time, the United States had just researched Quality 1 12" naval rifles, and was lacking decent-quality guns of larger calibre. Yankee ingenuity initially resulted in the aggressive designs of the Rhode Island class Battleship and the Ranger-class Battlecruiser. Built to bring maximum main gun firepower on-target as fast as possible, these treaty ships made huge sacrifices in secondary armament, trusting in their many escorts to screen them from Destroyers. The South Carolina "Second-Generation" Treaty Battleship was also built, using quadruple turret technology to attempt to better protect the main armament. While the designers were proud of their achievement, their captains and crews were less enthused with the extremely crowded, heavy and jam-prone turrets, and the loss of the 9th gun from the Rhode Island. During the treaty, Tsarist Russia built fine ships over the treaty weight, like the Rymnik class, the lead ship of which was taken as reparations and renamed, along with the entire state of Finland after a short victorious war in 1917. A humiliating performance was put on by the Russian Navy, whose heavy ships never saw battle, with only the light elements of their navy engaging the US Navy. The cataclysmic US-UK War of 1920-1922 saw the near-complete destruction of the Royal Navy, and the American dominance of the Mediterranean as Gibraltar and Egypt were ceded to the United States. The slow, stately Bulwark class was Britain's first treaty Dreadnought class, built with thick armor and fearsome armament. The succeeding Princess Royal class treaty Dreadnought was a Battlecruiser in truth, with new Princess Royals laid down after the collapse of the treaty that had given cause to such undersized vessels, perhaps as a measure to stretch a budget spread thin by a refusal to scrap pre-treaty 'Dreadnoughts' with 6x14" main guns. The Princess Royal was derided as ugly, but unnaturally fast for a Battleship. Her armor was thin and her turrets poorly arranged. Misused by being placed in the battle-line, all six ships of the class were sunk by the thunder of American guns. The RN Inconstant class Battlecruiser was a strange beast, vastly better armored, but slower and worse-armed than the American Ranger-class ships. Perhaps the Inconstant was an attempt at reviving the Armored Cruiser concept? If so, it was not a successful one. Germany came up with arguably the wackiest treaty designs. Just... look at them. France also made a 6-gun battlecruiser, but with 3 double turrets. Neither their BC Lyon, nor Germany's Goeben have very well-armored turrets, instead spending great amounts of tonnage protecting their secondary guns. Prize for maximum firepower goes to the Japanese Aki-class, mounting a full dozen 12" rifles without superfiring turrets! Aki is ready for the KANTAI KESSEN! where she can line up opposite the enemy fleet, and overwhelm her gun-duel opponent. Potentially an attempt to copy the Wisconsin under treaty limitations... Boring, well-armored ABXY double 12"-turret Battleships were built by Russia, Italy, and France. Italy wins some sort of anti-prize for building 4 more of their pre-treaty, pre-dreadnought Battlecruiser design from 1906. I saved the best for last, the undisputed queen of the seas for 9 years, the USS Wisconsin (and her sister Minnesota!). Countless enemies have drowned under the endless, merciless rain of shells she unleashes...
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Mar 5, 2016 11:57:31 GMT -6
Not my ship - This is the AI United States' pride and joy, the Constitution class. Whoops, wrong slide. Despite having only 10" armor on her turrets, these Connies have so much firepower that it's very hard to attack them. I managed to get Constitution herself to Heavy Damage by engaging her closely with a 17,000 ton CA, which had successfully sunk a cross-deck-firing US BC by itself earlier. Freya had 4 double 10" turrets, forward, aft, and forward wings, with 7.5" belt armor and 26 knots speed. Freya only succeeded in keeping Constitution's attention long enough for one of my Lothringen-class dreadnoughts to engage, they had 12x12" guns in triple ABXY turrets, which I always meant to upgrade to 15" guns, but never found the money to. This BB managed to pound on Constitution and survive her gunfire in return, but failed to sink the battlecruiser. It managed to limp into a neutral port to be interned, so she's out of the war but not dead... and she has sisters. Edit: Managed to sink 2 of those Constitutions before the end of the war. The strange thing is, the other AI nations are almost all copying it as a Battlecruiser AND Battleship design! 5 turrets with tons of 16" guns, 10" armor at the belt and turrets... The British copies all blew up nicely at 1931 Jutland!
|
|
|
Post by klavohunter on Feb 21, 2016 14:11:58 GMT -6
I refit my ancient CAs and BBs with 16" guns in single turrets to replace their 11" and 12" doubles. This was decisive in bringing down two modern British BCs! That's brilliant! Totally stealing that idea. (I'm seeing it now - ancient Bs with no armour, ancient everything, but super-duper guns!) It did the job on my BB's and CAs that time, but I cannot speak for the effectiveness of upgunning/building new B's. Mind you, it was only possible to fit those CAs with the big guns because they had 11" guns, 10"s aren't enough. The time I built "Coast Defense Battleships" with modern weapons, they never saw battle, since predreadnoughts just don't get invited to many kinds of battles (and almost nobody tries blockading the Japanese home waters).
|
|