|
|
Post by stevethecat on Jun 4, 2019 23:48:40 GMT -6
I would like to be able to customise barrel length, a '15 inch gun' is cool and all but is it 42 cal? 45? Let me choose from say 35, that would save weight and deck space up to 50, heavier but with slightly higher accuracy and muzzle V for pen.
Add a few moments of 'Damn, the ship is a bit too heavy, do I sacrifice ammo? Gun length? Armour?...'
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on Jun 5, 2019 2:49:51 GMT -6
a gun barrel shouldnt change how accurate your firecontrol is It won't help greatly, but it will decrease the risk that a shot in your ladder that's meant to land long lands short, causing the entire salvo to appear to land short, so that you adjust to longer range when in fact you were on target. true each gun could be given an accuracy modifier of + or - some although id still prefer actual numbers which you can compare to the real world it just allows you to get a better grasp |
|
|
|
Post by christian on Jun 5, 2019 2:55:38 GMT -6
I would like to be able to customise barrel length, a '15 inch gun' is cool and all but is it 42 cal? 45? Let me choose from say 35, that would save weight and deck space up to 50, heavier but with slightly higher accuracy and muzzle V for pen. Add a few moments of 'Damn, the ship is a bit too heavy, do I sacrifice ammo? Gun length? Armour?...' there is a gun designation assigned to each gun by the game which based on the muzzle velocity and weight determines the caliber of the gun is how i would do it although it could be done in another way a lightweight high velocity gun will have lower caliber while a heavy high velocity gun will have a long caliber gun this means a low weight high velocity gun is almost gauranteed to give a short caliber gun although not super short but much shorter than other guns the gun will likely also suffer in other areas due to weight skimping but yeah |
|
|
|
Post by dougphresh on Jun 5, 2019 7:11:45 GMT -6
I like what you've done here.
Right now I can't see any reason not to take the largest possible guns, as soon as possible.
It would be nice to have a reason to do some of the more interesting historical mounts and gun configurations, like the French quadruple turrets.
How did SAI handle guns?
Would 2in DP/Automatic mounts be possible?
|
|
|
|
Post by bshaftoe on Jun 5, 2019 8:24:41 GMT -6
I like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jun 5, 2019 8:41:27 GMT -6
I would like to be able to customise barrel length, a '15 inch gun' is cool and all but is it 42 cal? 45? Let me choose from say 35, that would save weight and deck space up to 50, heavier but with slightly higher accuracy and muzzle V for pen. Add a few moments of 'Damn, the ship is a bit too heavy, do I sacrifice ammo? Gun length? Armour?...' there is a gun designation assigned to each gun by the game which based on the muzzle velocity and weight determines the caliber of the gun is how i would do it although it could be done in another way a lightweight high velocity gun will have lower caliber while a heavy high velocity gun will have a long caliber gun this means a low weight high velocity gun is almost gauranteed to give a short caliber gun although not super short but much shorter than other guns the gun will likely also suffer in other areas due to weight skimping but yeah Interestingly these two properties are basically at odds with one another. Barrel length is probably the most important determinant for how much energy you can extract out of a given charge/shell combination, and while you can mitigate shorter barrels by changing the propellant in the charge, a longer barrel with a suitable propellant will always give you a better velocity.
I suppose in a situation where you asked for both, the higher priority choice would be the main factor. If weight is the primary consideration, then cutting the length down is a suitable choice, whereas if velocity is the primary consideration then its not really an option.
Of course, weight is also reduced by advances in gun construction technology, so the other downside to light guns could be a higher cost relative to others of the same date.
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on Jun 5, 2019 9:16:12 GMT -6
there is a gun designation assigned to each gun by the game which based on the muzzle velocity and weight determines the caliber of the gun is how i would do it although it could be done in another way a lightweight high velocity gun will have lower caliber while a heavy high velocity gun will have a long caliber gun this means a low weight high velocity gun is almost gauranteed to give a short caliber gun although not super short but much shorter than other guns the gun will likely also suffer in other areas due to weight skimping but yeah Interestingly these two properties are basically at odds with one another. Barrel length is probably the most important determinant for how much energy you can extract out of a given charge/shell combination, and while you can mitigate shorter barrels by changing the propellant in the charge, a longer barrel with a suitable propellant will always give you a better velocity.
I suppose in a situation where you asked for both, the higher priority choice would be the main factor. If weight is the primary consideration, then cutting the length down is a suitable choice, whereas if velocity is the primary consideration then its not really an option.
Of course, weight is also reduced by advances in gun construction technology, so the other downside to light guns could be a higher cost relative to others of the same date.
though short barrel high velocity is possible french 450mm is an example |
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jun 5, 2019 9:37:27 GMT -6
Interestingly these two properties are basically at odds with one another. Barrel length is probably the most important determinant for how much energy you can extract out of a given charge/shell combination, and while you can mitigate shorter barrels by changing the propellant in the charge, a longer barrel with a suitable propellant will always give you a better velocity.
I suppose in a situation where you asked for both, the higher priority choice would be the main factor. If weight is the primary consideration, then cutting the length down is a suitable choice, whereas if velocity is the primary consideration then its not really an option.
Of course, weight is also reduced by advances in gun construction technology, so the other downside to light guns could be a higher cost relative to others of the same date.
though short barrel high velocity is possible french 450mm is an example Not aware of any French 450mm guns, have any data on it?
EDIT: The only one I could find data on is the Mle1920. I wouldn't really call /45 'short', more like average. It does have a rather high muzzle velocity, but thats due to a rather lightweight shell (so actual energy output and retention isn't as impressive as it world seem) and a very high chamber pressure, especially for the era. I couldn't find anything on how extensively this was tested, but I would hazard a guess that barrel life and general reliability probably wouldn't have been very good (Richelieu had issues at ~10% lower pressures, despite a much newer gun), and these types of combinations also tend to do bad things to accuracy when the barrel isn't long enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on Jun 6, 2019 15:18:16 GMT -6
though short barrel high velocity is possible french 450mm is an example Not aware of any French 450mm guns, have any data on it?
EDIT: The only one I could find data on is the Mle1920. I wouldn't really call /45 'short', more like average. It does have a rather high muzzle velocity, but thats due to a rather lightweight shell (so actual energy output and retention isn't as impressive as it world seem) and a very high chamber pressure, especially for the era. I couldn't find anything on how extensively this was tested, but I would hazard a guess that barrel life and general reliability probably wouldn't have been very good (Richelieu had issues at ~10% lower pressures, despite a much newer gun), and these types of combinations also tend to do bad things to accuracy when the barrel isn't long enough.
i believe its the one il take a look point is high muzzle velocity with a shorter barrel is still possible but there is no reason to have that as the weight goes to a tougher breech to contain the pressure main reason for shorter barrels is just the barrel lenght you need to have very big facilities to bore out large long barrels |
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 6, 2019 16:08:04 GMT -6
Not aware of any French 450mm guns, have any data on it?
EDIT: The only one I could find data on is the Mle1920. I wouldn't really call /45 'short', more like average. It does have a rather high muzzle velocity, but thats due to a rather lightweight shell (so actual energy output and retention isn't as impressive as it world seem) and a very high chamber pressure, especially for the era. I couldn't find anything on how extensively this was tested, but I would hazard a guess that barrel life and general reliability probably wouldn't have been very good (Richelieu had issues at ~10% lower pressures, despite a much newer gun), and these types of combinations also tend to do bad things to accuracy when the barrel isn't long enough.
i believe its the one il take a look point is high muzzle velocity with a shorter barrel is still possible but there is no reason to have that as the weight goes to a tougher breech to contain the pressure main reason for shorter barrels is just the barrel lenght you need to have very big facilities to bore out large long barrels Shipboard position also may dictate the need for a shorter barrel. For example, some early German pre-dreadnoughts had a turret midships (Q) but in order to allow for the turret to traverse from one side to the other the barrels had to be shorter than the ones fore and aft. |
|
|
|
Post by felixg92 on Sept 6, 2019 18:09:22 GMT -6
Now this is getting closer to being along the lines of national characteristics and specific models of ordnance, rather than the one size fits all....I dont love (but do understand the current one size fits all) ordnance approach, not all 16 inch guns perform the same obviously and I prefer the intricacy and complexity and individuality of the actual weapons that were built.
It will add a layer to design and planning for sure.
So do you want fast, good or cheap says the ordnance salesman to the Secretary of the Navy, pick any 2!
I am hazy on how quality works but understand its levels, -2 bad, 0 normal, and +1 good but what does it affect, and how much?
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on Sept 7, 2019 4:52:32 GMT -6
Now this is getting closer to being along the lines of national characteristics and specific models of ordnance, rather than the one size fits all....I dont love (but do understand the current one size fits all) ordnance approach, not all 16 inch guns perform the same obviously and I prefer the intricacy and complexity and individuality of the actual weapons that were built. It will add a layer to design and planning for sure. So do you want fast, good or cheap says the ordnance salesman to the Secretary of the Navy, pick any 2! I am hazy on how quality works but understand its levels, -2 bad, 0 normal, and +1 good but what does it affect, and how much? -2 is generally unobtainable unless from the -2 quality 13 inch gun at the start of the game "Now this is getting closer to being along the lines of national characteristics and specific models of ordnance, rather than the one size fits all....I dont love (but do understand the current one size fits all) ordnance approach, not all 16 inch guns perform the same obviously and I prefer the intricacy and complexity and individuality of the actual weapons that were built." i dont want specific nations to only get acces to specific weapons if one nation has a gun another nation should have a gun with pretty comparable performance (balance reasons) but what i do want is some nations have a higher priority in some fields of gun research and some lower for example when you play as italians and choose more penetration you would get slightly more than to be expected from other nations (italians had high velocity guns during ww2) which means that some choices will give you a slight boost |
|
|
|
Post by felixg92 on Sept 8, 2019 8:18:08 GMT -6
Yes but what is -2, +1, 0..... What is it? Does it affect penetration, accuracy or damage or all those characteristics or none of em or what. Is that a percent indication? Is it just like an fda stamp? Lol or is it pretty meaningless?
What is the benefit of 1 quality guns sinc thats the best they get i was wondering how good is that over baseline? And what is affected statwise.
As far as the long 15's on the Littorios go they were probably the best of all the 15 inch guns, except the shells were manufactured inconsistently and poorly and they suffered from horrible dispersion, plus Regia Marina Ficon was about as good as RN WW1 so good guns bad shells, mediocre fire control, the Littorios had 2ndry armament redundency issues as well, but they were damn pretty and fast, and were Not terrible ships despite the pugliese TPS and the somewhat inadequate armoring and those 15's could technically outrange the 18.1 on the Yamato's or damn near from what the stats say, i gotta look again at Campbell's but if i remember right those 15's could really throw em out there.... The weird cool thing about the littorios is the fighters they carried on their catapults sometimes, desperate but cool anyways about the only way to guarantee cap withoutt a carrier. Never really worked well i guess but I like the idea, lol i bet the pilots didnt.
|
|
|
|
Post by christian on Sept 8, 2019 11:36:19 GMT -6
Yes but what is -2, +1, 0..... What is it? Does it affect penetration, accuracy or damage or all those characteristics or none of em or what. Is that a percent indication? Is it just like an fda stamp? Lol or is it pretty meaningless? What is the benefit of 1 quality guns sinc thats the best they get i was wondering how good is that over baseline? And what is affected statwise. As far as the long 15's on the Littorios go they were probably the best of all the 15 inch guns, except the shells were manufactured inconsistently and poorly and they suffered from horrible dispersion, plus Regia Marina Ficon was about as good as RN WW1 so good guns bad shells, mediocre fire control, the Littorios had 2ndry armament redundency issues as well, but they were damn pretty and fast, and were Not terrible ships despite the pugliese TPS and the somewhat inadequate armoring and those 15's could technically outrange the 18.1 on the Yamato's or damn near from what the stats say, i gotta look again at Campbell's but if i remember right those 15's could really throw em out there.... The weird cool thing about the littorios is the fighters they carried on their catapults sometimes, desperate but cool anyways about the only way to guarantee cap withoutt a carrier. Never really worked well i guess but I like the idea, lol i bet the pilots didnt. +1 means the gun performs better than a +0 gun aka it has more range more penetration and presumably faster reload and better accuracy -2 means the gun cant hit anything has super bad penetration and reloads super slowly |
|
|
|
Post by felixg92 on Sept 9, 2019 8:13:56 GMT -6
So they do affect more than one performance parameter and we dont know by how much.
Thanks Buddy.
Superbly adequate.
|
|
