|
Post by L0ckAndL0ad on Jun 11, 2019 13:15:25 GMT -6
Maaaan! When I was writing the feedback thread today I totally forgot to mention one particular thing that made me love CLs in RtW. Search Line formation! I'm not sure if other ships can use it, I never tried it, they probably could, but it is often a default formation for CLs. When you put a 2-3 CL division in Search Line, it works so wickedly great, akin to CMANO formation editor. They go in front of the parent formation, and spread out in width. When they encounter something, they investigate contacts to ID them, and then work in "Support mode", which is also great - going on to disengaged side when needed, hiding behind the parent division if things go bad. It is a really great feat of AI programming. Just wanted to highlight that.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 11, 2019 13:45:54 GMT -6
Maaaan! When I was writing the feedback thread today I totally forgot to mention one particular thing that made me love CLs in RtW. Search Line formation! I'm not sure if other ships can use it, I never tried it, they probably could, but it is often a default formation for CLs. When you put a 2-3 CL division in Search Line, it works so wickedly great, akin to CMANO formation editor. They go in front of the parent formation, and spread out in width. When they encounter something, they investigate contacts to ID them, and then work in "Support mode", which is also great - going on to disengaged side when needed, hiding behind the parent division if things go bad. It is a really great feat of AI programming. Just wanted to highlight that. Any "...cruiser" design can use Search Line - CLs, CAs, and BCs. Other ships cannot, I'm pretty sure.
|
|
infi
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by infi on Jun 11, 2019 13:57:04 GMT -6
there are like 3 viable CL archtypes IMO
2100T Super minimalist 2x1x5" with minimal armor / Medium range and Reliability and as much speed as possible for raiding. these cost ~8-10m and are completely expendable.
5500T Heavy Raider / Fleet Scout 2x2x8"+ 10x4" Protected Scheme with 2.5" Belt / Medium / Reliability and as much speed as possible. these cost ~20m and are pretty effective against other CL's and are fast and heavily armed enough to either evade or discourage CA's and BC's from chasing them for a pretty long time.
Mid 20's till radar fire control becomes prevalent a 5500-8000T 3x3x6" or a bunch of DP dual mounts + 32TT / 28-30Knts that functions as a Fleet Screen / Torpedo Carrier these cost 20-30m and will usually be well positioned in a Night Battle and sink larger ships or alpha enemy DD's.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 11, 2019 14:35:27 GMT -6
there are like 3 viable CL archtypes IMO 2100T Super minimalist 2x1x5" with minimal armor / Medium range and Reliability and as much speed as possible for raiding. these cost ~8-10m and are completely expendable. 5500T Heavy Raider / Fleet Scout 2x2x8"+ 10x4" Protected Scheme with 2.5" Belt / Medium / Reliability and as much speed as possible. these cost ~20m and are pretty effective against other CL's and are fast and heavily armed enough to either evade or discourage CA's and BC's from chasing them for a pretty long time. Mid 20's till radar fire control becomes prevalent a 5500-8000T 3x3x6" or a bunch of DP dual mounts + 32TT / 28-30Knts that functions as a Fleet Screen / Torpedo Carrier these cost 20-30m and will usually be well positioned in a Night Battle and sink larger ships or alpha enemy DD's. They are much more type of cruisers. The main point is you are adapting to what your enemies or adversaries have. Any "standard" cruiser design is always more costly than adapting your designs to current needs.
Just some examples: Legacy raider cruiser could be: 2100 tons 2x2x8", 10x4", 20 knots. She can run battleships and sunk enemy protected cruiser quite easily.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 14:50:08 GMT -6
there are like 3 viable CL archtypes IMO 2100T Super minimalist 2x1x5" with minimal armor / Medium range and Reliability and as much speed as possible for raiding. these cost ~8-10m and are completely expendable. 5500T Heavy Raider / Fleet Scout 2x2x8"+ 10x4" Protected Scheme with 2.5" Belt / Medium / Reliability and as much speed as possible. these cost ~20m and are pretty effective against other CL's and are fast and heavily armed enough to either evade or discourage CA's and BC's from chasing them for a pretty long time. Mid 20's till radar fire control becomes prevalent a 5500-8000T 3x3x6" or a bunch of DP dual mounts + 32TT / 28-30Knts that functions as a Fleet Screen / Torpedo Carrier these cost 20-30m and will usually be well positioned in a Night Battle and sink larger ships or alpha enemy DD's. They are much more type of cruisers. The main point is you are adapting to what your enemies or adversaries have. Any "standard" cruiser design is always more costly than adapting your designs to current needs.
Just some examples: Legacy raider cruiser could be: 2100 tons 2x2x8", 10x4", 20 knots. She can run battleships and sunk enemy protected cruiser quite easily.
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 11, 2019 14:59:31 GMT -6
They are much more type of cruisers. The main point is you are adapting to what your enemies or adversaries have. Any "standard" cruiser design is always more costly than adapting your designs to current needs.
Just some examples: Legacy raider cruiser could be: 2100 tons 2x2x8", 10x4", 20 knots. She can run battleships and sunk enemy protected cruiser quite easily.
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion. So ideally raider as it is not expected to be overhelmed.
You do not need cruiser to fight multiple cruisers. Why? If you have so small number of cruisers than build smaller and more of them. They are more capable hunting raiders, be where they need to be.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 15:11:40 GMT -6
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion. So ideally raider as it is not expected to be overhelmed.
You do not need cruiser to fight multiple cruisers. Why? If you have so small number of cruisers than build smaller and more of them. They are more capable hunting raiders, be where they need to be.
Ah! I understand now. We use cruisers differently. I use them primarily as force multipliers and on foreign stations. This means that they have to be able to fight sizeable cruiser groups which can often include 2 or 3 CLs, or a CL and DDs. I use them as semi-heavy units (circa 5000-6000t), not as raiders or with swarm attacks. I suppose the 8" guns are a good bet if that's the function you're looking for.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 11, 2019 15:29:38 GMT -6
So ideally raider as it is not expected to be overhelmed.
You do not need cruiser to fight multiple cruisers. Why? If you have so small number of cruisers than build smaller and more of them. They are more capable hunting raiders, be where they need to be.
Ah! I understand now. We use cruisers differently. I use them primarily as force multipliers and on foreign stations. This means that they have to be able to fight sizeable cruiser groups which can often include 2 or 3 CLs, or a CL and DDs. I use them as semi-heavy units (circa 5000-6000t), not as raiders or with swarm attacks. I suppose the 8" guns are a good bet if that's the function you're looking for. Exactly. There is a lot of strategies and designs that could work. This is one of best parts of RTW1/2.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 15:30:52 GMT -6
Ah! I understand now. We use cruisers differently. I use them primarily as force multipliers and on foreign stations. This means that they have to be able to fight sizeable cruiser groups which can often include 2 or 3 CLs, or a CL and DDs. I use them as semi-heavy units (circa 5000-6000t), not as raiders or with swarm attacks. I suppose the 8" guns are a good bet if that's the function you're looking for. Exactly. There is a lot of strategies and designs that could work. This is one of best parts of RTW1/2. One of the many reasons why I think this game is brilliant!
|
|
infi
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by infi on Jun 11, 2019 16:00:16 GMT -6
They are much more type of cruisers. The main point is you are adapting to what your enemies or adversaries have. Any "standard" cruiser design is always more costly than adapting your designs to current needs.
Just some examples: Legacy raider cruiser could be: 2100 tons 2x2x8", 10x4", 20 knots. She can run battleships and sunk enemy protected cruiser quite easily.
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion. I don't like CL's or CA's to be less than 22 knots, personally. A 20 knot CL cannot escape or match speed with most AI legacy CA's, so if it gets a bad engagement it will probably sink. A 20 Knot CA is easily run down by ships that are markedly more powerful in as little as 3-5 years. 22 Knots is faster than most CA's and most CL's in legacy fleets, and can outrun or match speed with first generation Dreadnoughts... Reducing the enemies closing speed to 0-3 knots for the majority of the 1900's is enough to make them very survivable into the 1910's and sometimes even the 30's in colonial areas, especially if they have 8" guns. Building to current needs is efficient in the short term, but overbuilding is more efficient in the long run IMO; because you end up scrapping and rebuilding tonnage to fulfill the same role that a slightly more expensive ship could have filled for a decade longer.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 11, 2019 16:07:11 GMT -6
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion. I don't like CL's or CA's to be less than 22 knots, personally. A 20 knot CL cannot escape or match speed with most AI legacy CA's, so if it gets a bad engagement it will probably sink. A 20 Knot CA is easily run down by ships that are markedly more powerful in as little as 3-5 years. 22 Knots is faster than most CA's and most CL's in legacy fleets, and can outrun or match speed with first generation Dreadnoughts... Reducing the enemies closing speed to 0-3 knots for the majority of the 1900's is enough to make them very survivable into the 1910's and sometimes even the 30's in colonial areas, especially if they have 8" guns. Building to current needs is efficient in the short term, but overbuilding is more efficient in the long run IMO; because you end up scrapping and rebuilding tonnage to fulfill the same role that a slightly more expensive ship could have filled for a decade longer. Issue is that slightly powerfull ship will last 1 year more but cost quite a lot more. Both ways has pros and cons.
20 knot raider has one advantage over 22 knots raider not getting old so quickly as this ship do not take speed as main advantage and speed is quickly get obsolete.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jun 11, 2019 16:18:59 GMT -6
If weight of broadside is what you care about, the maximum broadside throw weight you can get on 5,500 tons using an 8" main battery is 2130 pounds (four 8" shells @ 276 pounds per shell, six 6" shells @ 108 pounds per shell, six 5" shells @ 63 pounds per shell) whereas the maximum broadside throw weight you can get on 5,500 tons using a 6" main battery is only 1669 pounds (nine 6" shells @ 108 pounds per shell, seven 5" shells @ 63 pounds per shell, and eight 4" shells @ 32 pounds per shell); if you only count the main battery, that's an 1104-pound broadside for the 8" cruiser and a 976-pound broadside for the 6" cruiser (note - this assumes that the 6" cruiser has twin turrets in the A and Y positions; if you don't go in for early-game 6" twin turrets due to their reliability issues and their significantly greater weight as compared to shielded single mounts, the maximum 6" broadside throw weight drops to 756 pounds for the main battery). An early-game 6" CL cannot match a contemporary 8" CL for weight of broadside unless the 6" CL has significantly more or heavier secondary and tertiary guns than the 8" CL - even adjusting for relative rates of fire, an 8" CL will still have a higher throw weight than a similar 6" CL, at least if the rates of fire in Gundata.dat are accurate for at least relative rates of fire.
What the 6" CL has going for it isn't weight of broadside, it's volume (or overall rate) of fire - even if you assume 6" and 8" guns have the same rate of fire, a firepower-focused 6" CL has three to five more main battery guns on the broadside than a firepower-focused 8" CL, and if the ROF numbers in Gundata.dat are accurate for at least relative rates of fire then 6" guns also fire about 20% more rapidly than 8" guns do.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Jun 11, 2019 16:36:38 GMT -6
My main problem with the 8" armed CL is the rate of fire. A CL with a lot of 6" guns on a 5000t hull has an advantage against multiple smaller CLs due to weight of broadside. An 8" doesn't. It's brilliant one on one but lacks firepower against DDs and multiple CLs in my opinion. I don't like CL's or CA's to be less than 22 knots, personally. A 20 knot CL cannot escape or match speed with most AI legacy CA's, so if it gets a bad engagement it will probably sink. A 20 Knot CA is easily run down by ships that are markedly more powerful in as little as 3-5 years. 22 Knots is faster than most CA's and most CL's in legacy fleets, and can outrun or match speed with first generation Dreadnoughts... Reducing the enemies closing speed to 0-3 knots for the majority of the 1900's is enough to make them very survivable into the 1910's and sometimes even the 30's in colonial areas, especially if they have 8" guns. Building to current needs is efficient in the short term, but overbuilding is more efficient in the long run IMO; because you end up scrapping and rebuilding tonnage to fulfill the same role that a slightly more expensive ship could have filled for a decade longer. I, too, like speed and I will sacrifice quite a lot to squeeze out 23 or 24 knots for my legacy cruisers. Speed is good in any situation. However, the way I use my cruisers means that I need the turrets and the broadside. 2 8" turrets won't cut it for that, especially with flimsy armour. My legacy CL doctrine is at least 22 knts, 4 submerged torpedo mounts and as many 6" guns as humanly possible, no secondaries.
|
|
|
Post by jorgencab on Jun 11, 2019 16:41:34 GMT -6
I have had quite success with my early 8" fleet cruisers. They are usually armed with 8" in two twin turrets aft and fore and 5" and 3" secondary/tertiary which are effective enough against most CL and DD. The 5" are fast enough to straddle the enemy CL with fire and the 8" usually do the damage when they hit.
The good thing is they also help more against enemy armoured cruisers in larger battles with supporting the line in a screening capacity and actually able to do some damage. These fleet cruisers are a bit bigger though so not cheap, they are built for quality not quantity.
But I use them exclusively as fleet escorts and in cruiser actions where they really excel with good speed, reliable engines and decent protection. I rarely loose these cruisers to anything but accidents and the occasional submarine torpedoes.
My smaller light cruisers are mainly for trade protection and colonial defence. They have 6" or 5" batteries and 3" against destroyers in the early game. About 3500-4000t or so.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Jun 11, 2019 16:42:08 GMT -6
Has anyone noted an unwillingness on the part of the AI to design an "economy" sort of Light Cruiser? If I am building 10 for a budget demand I very likely don't want an 8,000 tonner, but the game seems unable to offer up a 3000 ton design. It would be nice if there were a significant variety in the ship offerings, but I always end up needing to design "small" CLs from scratch.
|
|