tc27
Junior Member
Posts: 68
|
Post by tc27 on Jul 16, 2015 2:54:00 GMT -6
That Texas class is an absolute beast...6 triple centerline turrets!!
Question has any built any specialised commerce raiders...does the games abstracted commerce raider mechanic take into account the ships range and speed when calculating its effectiveness as a raider?
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Jul 16, 2015 8:10:03 GMT -6
Well, one thing I found so far is that it definitely helps having long-range ships as raiders, as that way they do not require base support (or risk getting interned). AMCs seem to be the only class that can easily be made long-range without a heavy weight penalty.
I haven't seen any impact from speed so far, except that it makes it easier to flee if they get intercepted.
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Jul 16, 2015 8:24:22 GMT -6
By the way, I just realized that there's no reason we couldn't share our designs either! For those who want to check them out, here are my designs from the previous page... The original Constitution (laid down around 1904): Constitution.10d (4.89 KB) And the Texas: Texas.10d (5.03 KB) The ship designs go into the Rule the Waves/Save/ folder. To be able to open them in the ship editor, you have to change the file extension to match your nation number in the save slot. For example, the player's nation on save slot 1 has the file extension .10d for the ship, save slot 2 is .20d, 3rd = .30d, and so on.
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Jul 18, 2015 2:21:57 GMT -6
Yes, great thread. Loving all this and will just have to go buy the game now.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Jul 22, 2015 3:49:34 GMT -6
So, having bought the game, I thought I would post my BC design that I'm using in my first campaign, playing as GB. It's 1905 and I have 5 of these in service. I post it not as a best design, but because I literally haven't a clue what I'm doing and all tips would be very welcome. What should I have done differently? I wanted something fast enough to be able to run away, but with a big-gun punch. It looks vulnerable to destroyer and torp attack to me, but I was planning to surround it with swarms of DDs to counter that. Does that work? All comments/tips welcome!
Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by eisenengel on Jul 22, 2015 5:56:24 GMT -6
So, having bought the game, I thought I would post my BC design that I'm using in my first campaign, playing as GB. It's 1905 and I have 5 of these in service. I post it not as a best design, but because I literally haven't a clue what I'm doing and all tips would be very welcome. What should I have done differently? I wanted something fast enough to be able to run away, but with a big-gun punch. It looks vulnerable to destroyer and torp attack to me, but I was planning to surround it with swarms of DDs to counter that. Does that work? All comments/tips welcome!
23 knots is fairly slow for a BC, in a few years the battle line will go 21 kn or more. 7" belt armor, ditto. Wouldn't worry about destroyer attack too much, you have light cruisers and your own destroyers to ward that off. Personally I would drop the guns to 12" or lower and increase speed and armor. Unfortunately, a fast ship with good armor is a very big and expensive ship. You probably did the best you could on a 16500 ton displacement.
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 22, 2015 7:35:14 GMT -6
So, having bought the game, I thought I would post my BC design that I'm using in my first campaign, playing as GB. It's 1905 and I have 5 of these in service. I post it not as a best design, but because I literally haven't a clue what I'm doing and all tips would be very welcome. What should I have done differently? I wanted something fast enough to be able to run away, but with a big-gun punch. It looks vulnerable to destroyer and torp attack to me, but I was planning to surround it with swarms of DDs to counter that. Does that work? All comments/tips welcome!
The AI decides how many destroyers you will have per battle, so relying on "swarms" is going to be hit and miss. But obviously the more DD's you build the better.
|
|
|
Post by phoenix on Jul 22, 2015 8:22:51 GMT -6
Thanks Cleveland and Eisenengel. I posted the design in another thread too, and had lots of suggestions from there too. All very useful. I'll stat again, I think, and try to get it faster!!
Peter
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Jul 22, 2015 9:15:44 GMT -6
Another thing about DDs: if you want to rely on them for protection, wait until you develop the "screen formation" tactic (which usually happens quite late in the game). Until then, you'll mostly see destroyers deployed as "support") which means they'll stay back behind your capital ship until ordered to execute a flotilla attack. Usually I find that in major battles, all your available destroyers in a region will show up, but I wouldn't quite count on them as effective close defense until you've researched the screening doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by galagagalaxian on Jul 22, 2015 11:11:06 GMT -6
I don't post this as a genuine "Best Ship", but here is my take on Vittorio Cuniberti's Ideal Battleship, as postulated in his famous article in the 1903 edition of Jane's Fighting Ships. I designed this in a 1905 Italy game with some modest tech advances (but a frustrating lack of centerline turret tech) Unfortunately, the man asked for the impossible. He specified a 17,000 ton ship with a 12" complete belt (meaning extended too I would presume) and 24 knots of speed with that armament! Something obviously had to compromise. He also specified hull dimensions and according to one website I found, it actually displaces roughly 21,800 tons, so I'm close in that regard. Anyways, if I was designing this for myself I'd make a few changes, at the very least I'd consolidate the four single turrets into another pair of wing turrets to save a bit of weight.
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 22, 2015 11:25:36 GMT -6
You'll need the extra weight to carry more ammo I designed an Italian BB with 8 single 12" gun turrets. It was pretty worthless in battle.
|
|
|
Post by galagagalaxian on Jul 22, 2015 11:30:33 GMT -6
Ammo is one thing I would add, yes. I left it at 80 because HMS Dreadnought only had 80 rounds per gun and Cuniberti wasn't specific on ammo. He also specified 4 submerged torpedo tubes, I seem to have deleted those from the design at some point. Not sure why.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 22, 2015 16:21:17 GMT -6
I basically refuse to use submerged torps in my designs. Until very lat in the game, the only ships that carry torps are destroyers.
Cheers
Bruce
|
|
|
Post by elouda on Jul 22, 2015 17:12:23 GMT -6
I basically refuse to use submerged torps in my designs. Until very lat in the game, the only ships that carry torps are destroyers. Cheers Bruce Not only are they historically accurate, theyre a very good investment as 'finisher' weapons early on - a torpedo or two into a crippled ship is a certainty that it will go down, allowing you to move off in pursuit of the rest. I tend to put torpedoes on everything, until around the time Improved Directors appear, at which point unloading 2-3 full salvos for multiple hits apiece generally does the same job.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 22, 2015 17:49:59 GMT -6
I'm not denying there historical accuracy, I just have a severe aversion to having a huge, vulnerable compartment below the waterline. In all honesty, they weren't effective on capital ships at all....I guess I'm using a bit of 20/20 hindsight.
Cheers
Bruce
|
|