|
Post by garrisonchisholm on May 4, 2019 13:11:20 GMT -6
To be honest, high end weapons with high end AP are always going to be able to get through belt armor except at extreme range. I think you'll find that super-ships like this are frighteningly fragile. Would 32" of belt help? Yes, I suppose so. No real world precedent exists for such numbers however. I think you'd also find you were extremely challenged to make a viable warship with that much tonnage sunk into armor anyway. Use at own risk! Does the sloped deck scheme become worthy of reconsideration later on? I.e. you are fitting big fat deck anyway, might as well use it for vertical protection as well. You mean the Protected Deck scheme? I haven't considered that, but I'm not sure how that would come out in the wash. In limited scenarios ( >20k yards) it might be viable, but no matter the time or place my battles always come down to 10-12000 yard slug-fests. At least line engagements anyway. I'll play with that next chance I get, but there also may be some turret limitations as well for the Protected scheme.
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on May 4, 2019 13:17:18 GMT -6
Sorry for vagueness, I meant the sloped deck and belt scheme instead of AON. I.e. going Bismarck in WW2 era. Possibly as uniform thickness narrow belt, to deal with hits to the ends, unless there is some modern version that includes the concept of armoured raft (as AON ships and Bismarck did, from what I understood the basic sloped deck and belt scheme in RTW1 is vulnerable to progressive flooding in the ends).
|
|
|
Post by griffin01 on May 7, 2019 3:33:50 GMT -6
Sorry for vagueness, I meant the sloped deck and belt scheme instead of AON. I.e. going Bismarck in WW2 era. Possibly as uniform thickness narrow belt, to deal with hits to the ends, unless there is some modern version that includes the concept of armoured raft (as AON ships and Bismarck did, from what I understood the basic sloped deck and belt scheme in RTW1 is vulnerable to progressive flooding in the ends). Frankly, I find that the sloped deck behind belt it the only reasonable option, especially later in the game. No matter the belt thickness, at the usual engagement ranges it will be penetrated. People like to talk about "zones of immunity", but in my experience there is nearly no way to ensure that there is a reasonable amount of situations enabling long-range engagements. The only way to ensure the survival of your ships is to protect the citadel at all costs, which the sloped deck scheme excels at. You, of course, want either unified narrow belt (which I have mixed feelings about, considering not much is known about hit distribution in the game) or at most splinter protection for the BE.
Ideally, you would be able to make a sloped deck behind belt ship in AoN configuration, but it was discussed in detail in other threads and decided it would not be allowed. However, I believe that AoN is somewhat overrated. Concept of the floating raft looks nice until you find that your raft is full of holes and doesn't float at all, and I believe that that there is no realistic way of preventing these holes from appearing.
Edit: I say this because I don't believe that RTW distinguishes flooding on the ends from flooding overall, as in, AoN only adds some floatation points extra instead of capping the possible flooding caused by hits to the extended parts of the hull. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 7, 2019 7:54:44 GMT -6
Sorry for vagueness, I meant the sloped deck and belt scheme instead of AON. I.e. going Bismarck in WW2 era. Possibly as uniform thickness narrow belt, to deal with hits to the ends, unless there is some modern version that includes the concept of armoured raft (as AON ships and Bismarck did, from what I understood the basic sloped deck and belt scheme in RTW1 is vulnerable to progressive flooding in the ends). Frankly, I find that the sloped deck behind belt it the only reasonable option, especially later in the game. No matter the belt thickness, at the usual engagement ranges it will be penetrated. People like to talk about "zones of immunity", but in my experience there is nearly no way to ensure that there is a reasonable amount of situations enabling long-range engagements. The only way to ensure the survival of your ships is to protect the citadel at all costs, which the sloped deck scheme excels at. You, of course, want either unified narrow belt (which I have mixed feelings about, considering not much is known about hit distribution in the game) or at most splinter protection for the BE.
Ideally, you would be able to make a sloped deck behind belt ship in AoN configuration, but it was discussed in detail in other threads and decided it would not be allowed. However, I believe that AoN is somewhat overrated. Concept of the floating raft looks nice until you find that your raft is full of holes and doesn't float at all, and I believe that that there is no realistic way of preventing these holes from appearing.
Edit: I say this because I don't believe that RTW distinguishes flooding on the ends from flooding overall, as in, AoN only adds some floatation points extra instead of capping the possible flooding caused by hits to the extended parts of the hull. Please correct me if I'm wrong.I do not know how it is done in RTW. I would expect that for AoN there are to floating points, one for citadel, other for rest. And if citadel is not penetraded these flooding points could not be taken. Only way to find it is to design ship with AoN and heavy armour and let it fight in first battle in 1900 and choose not to fire. In this case, no ship should penetrate 18" belt armour with 2" deck so if you get hit and you did not sink it is OK.
|
|
|
Post by griffin01 on May 7, 2019 8:07:41 GMT -6
It would be indeed the best way to test it, though I do not believe myself to know my way around the game files enough to do something like that. Hopefully someone does, however.
|
|