|
Post by aeson on Dec 20, 2018 9:03:11 GMT -6
There are already -2 turrets in RTW (early British 13" gun) and, yes, the range is shocking. A -1 12" is actually far better. France also has a 13"/-2 at the start of the game.
While I agree that the 12"/-1 is generally a better gun, I would say that this is so less because of the range advantage - you're not going to be hitting much beyond perhaps 5000 yards for most of the first ten years or so of the game anyways, so an initial range of ~9300 yards isn't that much worse than an initial range of ~11,300 yards - as that the 13"/-2 doesn't offer enough additional damage potential or armor penetration to justify the much higher tonnage cost of mounting it instead of a 12"/-1. It might be more of a problem later on, but predreadnought-period ships are beginning to be on the way out in the early 1910s and you'll probably have developed a better gun by the time you can lay down a decent dreadnought.
|
|
|
Post by mobeer on Dec 20, 2018 16:22:56 GMT -6
The advantage of 13" -2 guns is when your research discovers a new 13" +0 gun, you can refit those existing guns reasonably cheaply. This is probably a gamey tactic, because the old -2 and new +0 guns would historically have been very different.
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Dec 20, 2018 16:29:11 GMT -6
It also comes down to if you think more than basic fire control upgrades are worthwhile on what is likely to be a pre or semidread.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 20, 2018 16:30:48 GMT -6
There are already -2 turrets in RTW (early British 13" gun) and, yes, the range is shocking. A -1 12" is actually far better. France also has a 13"/-2 at the start of the game.
While I agree that the 12"/-1 is generally a better gun, I would say that this is so less because of the range advantage - you're not going to be hitting much beyond perhaps 5000 yards for most of the first ten years or so of the game anyways, so an initial range of ~9300 yards isn't that much worse than an initial range of ~11,300 yards - as that the 13"/-2 doesn't offer enough additional damage potential or armor penetration to justify the much higher tonnage cost of mounting it instead of a 12"/-1. It might be more of a problem later on, but predreadnought-period ships are beginning to be on the way out in the early 1910s and you'll probably have developed a better gun by the time you can lay down a decent dreadnought.
I agree. I tend to limit the pre-dreadnoughts I build as after 1910 they're worse than useless (they slow the battle line) and become mainly backwater colonial ships (until scrapped). I do like the weight advantage of the 12" as one can generally squeeze 20knts from a 15000t pre-dreadnought with them, making them slower to become obsolete. The advantage of 13" -2 guns is when your research discovers a new 13" +0 gun, you can refit those existing guns reasonably cheaply. This is probably a gamey tactic, because the old -2 and new +0 guns would historically have been very different. I never do this; the costs are just too high. I might refit some ships at the same time as fitting oil firing but, on the whole, it's too expensive.
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Dec 20, 2018 17:30:15 GMT -6
I usually only do machinery and gun upgrades on early ships to include early dreadnoughts when treaties are in force that don’t allow building newer ships. Otherwise the upgrading of old ships takes too much away from building new.
|
|
|
Post by hrcak47 on Dec 22, 2018 8:10:06 GMT -6
Speaking of turret positions, I would like to see secondary battery also placeable on particular positions, just like primary battery. This is quite important for historical designs like the Richelieu, plus it opens interesting design possibilities.
|
|