|
Post by alsadius on Jun 13, 2019 10:34:10 GMT -6
Variable tech can have an impact here. In my AAR, we realized that my ships have like 30% more machinery weight than a comparable savegame, at the same tech levels, because of variable tech. So it might be worth looking at those numbers to make sure that's not throwing off your historical builds too badly.
|
|
|
Post by jorgencab on Jun 13, 2019 10:41:29 GMT -6
Variable tech can have an impact here. In my AAR, we realized that my ships have like 30% more machinery weight than a comparable savegame, at the same tech levels, because of variable tech. So it might be worth looking at those numbers to make sure that's not throwing off your historical builds too badly. No... it is not.. I don't use variable tech and the tech level seem quite consistent with historical progression. I usually play at roughly 70% tech progression and technology seem to progress at a pace comparable with real history at that level from what I can tell. You can also start a simple 1920 game and try to make some historical ships there... most cruisers will not get the amount of weapons and armour they historically had and the machinery needed for the speed make the ships extremely expensive. With the changes I made I actually can build most historical ships to roughly the same specifications. My changes go up to about 15.000 at roughly half a knot bonus speed and at 2.5 knot for the smaller cruisers at 3-4000t.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jun 13, 2019 12:38:42 GMT -6
Variable tech can have an impact here. In my AAR, we realized that my ships have like 30% more machinery weight than a comparable savegame, at the same tech levels, because of variable tech. So it might be worth looking at those numbers to make sure that's not throwing off your historical builds too badly. Also even if you aren't playing with variable tech, some tech can still be delayed somewhat, and can have a pretty big difference occasionally.
|
|
|
Post by entropyavatar on Jun 13, 2019 12:45:15 GMT -6
It's not all about weight here, I think that is my point. It is rather simple. A ships with wider beam in comparison with its length will be slower than a ship with smaller beam in comparison with its length. The drawback with a smaller beam is overall sea-keeping and stability to fire heavy guns or any guns at all in extreme cases. So, there could be a choice for cruisers to use a faster hull frame or a more traditional hull frame. If you use the faster frame you are more limited to top space and what sort of weapon you can fit and will experience lower rate of fire or accuracy penalties. The ship can also be more effected by harsh weather conditions. This way there is a trade off between offensive firepower and speed that have little to do with weight and you might be worse of in harsh weather. Selecting length to beam ratio might also allow armor and required horsepower calculations to follow a more physics-based approach.
|
|
|
Post by jorgencab on Jun 13, 2019 15:08:50 GMT -6
It's not all about weight here, I think that is my point. It is rather simple. A ships with wider beam in comparison with its length will be slower than a ship with smaller beam in comparison with its length. The drawback with a smaller beam is overall sea-keeping and stability to fire heavy guns or any guns at all in extreme cases. So, there could be a choice for cruisers to use a faster hull frame or a more traditional hull frame. If you use the faster frame you are more limited to top space and what sort of weapon you can fit and will experience lower rate of fire or accuracy penalties. The ship can also be more effected by harsh weather conditions. This way there is a trade off between offensive firepower and speed that have little to do with weight and you might be worse of in harsh weather. Selecting length to beam ratio might also allow armor and required horsepower calculations to follow a more physics-based approach. Yes... if you have a more narrow beam you need more weight for armour AND you also will need to cover a larger length of hull to protect machinery and magazines. A ship with a wide beam can fit more stuff inside the thick layer of armour alongside the belt and it also require much less armour in general on the belt for its displacement. So there would be some real world consideration to make and a reason for why they sometimes elected to not build their ships like that, especially of you wanted them to stay afloat during combat for any length of time.
|
|