|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 15, 2019 14:48:28 GMT -6
Imho it would make sense to eg have "sloped deck" AoN as well.
Leaving out the sloped deck behind the belt armour has little to do with not armouring the ends of the ship.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jun 15, 2019 16:31:02 GMT -6
Imho it would make sense to eg have "sloped deck" AoN as well.
Leaving out the sloped deck behind the belt armour has little to do with not armouring the ends of the ship.
It has to do with the way that AoN armor is designed to make the citadel of the ship. It has to be an armored box which doesn't really work with a sloped deck |
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 15, 2019 17:10:12 GMT -6
Nah, even the famously AoN designed US battleships had 3 armored decks on top of each other.
The thing about actually implemented AoN was not armoring the bow and stern portions of the ship and had nothing very little to do with the armored deck configurations.
|
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jun 15, 2019 17:48:17 GMT -6
Imho it would make sense to eg have "sloped deck" AoN as well.
Leaving out the sloped deck behind the belt armour has little to do with not armouring the ends of the ship.
It has to do with the way that AoN armor is designed to make the citadel of the ship. It has to be an armored box which doesn't really work with a sloped deck If we're only considering the citadel's resistance to flooding from the ends, then I would say that, realistically speaking, it's feasible to do an armored raft with a sloping armor deck close to the waterline rather than on top of the belt. I don't think it'd be as good as having the deck on top of the belt since any watertight compartments above the main armor deck* are more likely to be compromised by battle damage - they'd probably be compromised by low-trajectory shells exploding on the thin upper armor deck and might be damaged by splinters from shells exploding above it if the upper armor deck isn't thick enough to stop that, and plunging fire would almost certainly wreck them, especially if plunging shells exploded 'inside' the box on or above the main armor deck - and also because an open-top box would be vulnerable to flooding over the top of the 'walls' whereas a closed box isn't, but as long as the sidewalls and endwalls remain watertight and flooding hasn't reached the top of the wall at any point on the box it'd work.
That said, I don't really feel that there's a good reason to include an AoN variant for Sloped Deck. It is to the best of my knowledge an ahistorical hypothetical armor configuration, at least in the period covered by the game, and getting a benefit out of having a sloping main armor deck near the waterline rather than having the main armor deck on top of the box means that your armored box has failed in its design goal - having the sloping deck low in the hull increases protection against low-trajectory shells for the machinery and magazine spaces by placing a layer of armor between them and any shells that penetrate the armor belt above the deck. If shells are penetrating the armor belt, your citadel has been compromised and you no longer have an unfloodable raft to keep the ship afloat.
*Any realistic armored raft with enough buoyancy to keep the ship afloat when everything else is flooded has to have watertight compartments above the waterline, and if you put your main armor deck roughly at the waterline you're probably going to have to have at least some part of the citadel's buoyancy reserve come from compartments above it.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jun 15, 2019 17:48:40 GMT -6
Nah, even the famously AoN designed US battleships had 3 armored decks on top of each other. The thing about actually implemented AoN was not armoring the bow and stern portions of the ship and had nothing very little to do with the armored deck configurations. AoN is much more extensive than just not armoring the bow and stern AoN requires a complete redesign of the ships systems and armor to make the ends of the ship completely expendable, while installing two cross sectional armored bulkheads, and a single belt and deck around the citadel. The other decks on American warships were above the citadel, with splinter deck protecting upper crew spaces and an upper deck to detonate bombs |
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on Jun 15, 2019 19:45:05 GMT -6
Bismarck had armoured raft as far as I have understood, that is flooding the ends past the heaviest armour would have been insufficient for pushing the flat portion of the main armoured deck underwater. On the other hand the main belt covered huge portion of the waterline (and perhaps had to on account of the reduced height of the deck) which would negate some of the weight savings of AoN.
|
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jun 15, 2019 23:05:31 GMT -6
Another issue with sloped decks is that they could trap water above the deck, as happened with Kirishima.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevethecat on Jun 16, 2019 6:54:20 GMT -6
And as engagement ranges increased the advantage of a slope decreases as the relative angle of the shell hit would progressively go back to 90d, negating the slope. So you had a design which weighed more, was harder to build around and utilise ship internal volume and was getting outclassed by longer range gunnery.
As far as I'm aware the game simply models pen for range and doesn't take into account that slope deck ships would want to stay closer to maximise the strength of the armour by making shells hit at a more acute angle.
|
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 16, 2019 7:15:07 GMT -6
And as engagement ranges increased the advantage of a slope decreases as the relative angle of the shell hit would progressively go back to 90d, negating the slope. So you had a design which weighed more, was harder to build around and utilise ship internal volume and was getting outclassed by longer range gunnery. As far as I'm aware the game simply models pen for range and doesn't take into account that slope deck ships would want to stay closer to maximise the strength of the armour by making shells hit at a more acute angle. Sloped deck is somehow modelled but we do not know how. |
|
|
|
Post by yemo on Jun 16, 2019 7:59:18 GMT -6
Nah, even the famously AoN designed US battleships had 3 armored decks on top of each other. The thing about actually implemented AoN was not armoring the bow and stern portions of the ship and had nothing very little to do with the armored deck configurations. AoN is much more extensive than just not armoring the bow and stern AoN requires a complete redesign of the ships systems and armor to make the ends of the ship completely expendable, while installing two cross sectional armored bulkheads, and a single belt and deck around the citadel. The other decks on American warships were above the citadel, with splinter deck protecting upper crew spaces and an upper deck to detonate bombs Iowa had the splinter deck below the citadel deck... |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jun 16, 2019 9:02:31 GMT -6
The splinter deck was *just* below the citadel deck, and they were attached to the upper, not the lower part of the belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jun 16, 2019 13:14:20 GMT -6
AoN is much more extensive than just not armoring the bow and stern AoN requires a complete redesign of the ships systems and armor to make the ends of the ship completely expendable, while installing two cross sectional armored bulkheads, and a single belt and deck around the citadel. The other decks on American warships were above the citadel, with splinter deck protecting upper crew spaces and an upper deck to detonate bombs Iowa had the splinter deck below the citadel deck... Still was a flat deck. |
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on Jun 16, 2019 13:26:30 GMT -6
Richelieu had turtleback splinter deck.
|
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jun 16, 2019 13:32:26 GMT -6
  Interesting Afaik the deck just represents the total effective deck armor and the 6.7" main deck is better represented as flat, but that armor scheme definitely should be represented in some way |
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on Jun 16, 2019 13:33:48 GMT -6
I think that it would be useful to separate deck and belt armor into multiple customizable layers for late game battleships as these drastically changed the effectiveness of deck and belt armor
|
|
