|
Post by ikahime on Jan 25, 2017 16:38:19 GMT -6
That is certainly an interesting battleship design. Do you get good reliability from the quad turrets? I've never actually tried them, this is just me messing around with the ship designer after the end of the game. I suppose I could build these monsters, but the war with France might be over by the time they are finished. At any rate, the editor hasn't warned me of any reliability problems, so I'm just going to assume they let me fit more guns into less tonnage. In theory, this thing can outshoot anything that wanders into it's range, and keep anything that might be able to penetrate it's belt at a safe distance.
|
|
|
Post by boomboomf22 on Jan 25, 2017 17:49:16 GMT -6
I have found quads have abismal reliability issues. Had several battles where my ships armed with 3*4 16" guns had at most one turret in operation at any time.
This was the Germany game I posted the battleships from in an Almanac form in this thread
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jan 25, 2017 19:45:38 GMT -6
Is this better? I decided to focus on the idea that future gun battles will revolve around plunging fire. To this end I have decided to maximize rate of fire and deck protection. Tiered armament has been stripped in favor of a more conventional dreadnought approach. Considering stripping belt armor to increase the deck protection, or make it faster so it can control the range of any engagement. Certainly closer to the conventional wisdom of what a battleship should be. But who is to say that being conventional is better? Before taking the belt armor any thinner, I would think about lowering the number of main guns.
|
|
|
Post by ikahime on Jan 25, 2017 20:24:45 GMT -6
![](https://i.gyazo.com/0508b1a5101b84b2f71827280a1f3d72.png) A bit more tweaking and now I have a more conventional design. Between 20000 and 25000 it should be immune to it's own guns. And anything fast enough to get closer will be skewered. It's starting to resemble an Americanized Bismark, only 5 knots slower and 10 years sooner. I can get it up to 27 knots with two less inches of belt armor, but then I become vulnerable to direct fire at all ranges.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jan 25, 2017 21:47:38 GMT -6
I wonder if you could get those two knots back by switching to normal priority engines and removing some of the secondary guns like down to 16 total. Regardless, that's a ship I would love to have in my fleet. 16 inch +1 guns are a great balance between penetration and weight.
Anyone have any idea if the difference in performance between the type 2 torpedo defense system and the type 4 is worth the roughly 3 times weight penalty? The weight jump between Type 2 and Type 3 is very steep so I usually stay at 2 but the difference between Type 3 and Type 4 is not nearly as large so If I get Type 4, for me it would always come down to a choice between choosing 2 and 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 22:49:46 GMT -6
speaking of.. anyone got a competitive late game BC? ala one that can reliably pwn in 2v2 cruiser fights. for me these were always the most challenging battles. The AI designs of 10x16in or 12x16in setup is pretty effective (intimidating..) as well.
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jan 25, 2017 23:56:01 GMT -6
speaking of.. anyone got a competitive late game BC? ala one that can reliably pwn in 2v2 cruiser fights. for me these were always the most challenging battles. The AI designs of 10x16in or 12x16in setup is pretty effective (intimidating..) as well. Make a bunch of destroyers and wait for night battles. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) Seriously though... there is a point where you reach diminishing returns and need to remember that sometimes smaller ships in number are better then larger ships with uber guns and armor.
|
|
|
Post by ikahime on Jan 26, 2017 0:12:49 GMT -6
Switching to triple secondaries lets me get up to 26knots, but I can't break 27 without cutting them down to 2 tripples. I imagine they would be superfiring above the primary batteries like the Yamato's 6 inch secondaries, but the engine only lets me place them as ugly inefficient wing turrets clipping through the torpedo launchers. Removing the torpedoes doesn't free up enough weight to do anything interesting, although arguably they are only there to be cool.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 0:49:22 GMT -6
Make a bunch of destroyers and wait for night battles. you can be serious with this one as i find meself resorting to this method half the time bwahaha! the problem with cruiser battles is obviously both sides gets more or less equal numbers of ships into battle, no matter how many ships there is in your fleet... typically it's 2 BCs vs 2 BCs or something like that. hence the deciding factor other than luck and skills, comes down to fighting power of the individual battlecruiser. BBs can be more about numbers as they are mostly involved with fleet sized actions so there'd be a bunch of them together. ikahime: looking at ur design i think you can drop some deck. deck costs a lot of weight and 6inches is, imo, a bit over-protect in RTW's combat ranges. i.e. 16in +1 guns would only pen 6inch reliably at over 24000yds. engagement range is usually smaller than that. plus hit % obviously degrade with range. even if you don't want the extra speed, using some of that deck weight to strengthen vertical protection would seem more effective. but, just my 2c - it is afterall ur ship.
|
|
|
Post by ikahime on Jan 26, 2017 1:10:38 GMT -6
ikahime: looking at ur design i think you can drop some deck. deck costs a lot of weight and 6inches is, imo, a bit over-protect in RTW's combat ranges. i.e. 16in +1 guns would only pen 6inch reliably at over 24000yds. engagement range is usually smaller than that. plus hit % obviously degrade with range. even if you don't want the extra speed, using some of that deck weight to strengthen vertical protection would seem more effective. but, just my 2c - it is afterall ur ship. ![](https://i.gyazo.com/f9ed55865de9666353127e45fef62304.png) I did it! Merikan Bismark! And this one dosn't have to be powered by Jacky Fisher's rotating corpse. The idea behind the absurdly thick deck armor was that I wanted to be completely immune to plunging fire, but considering that shots are less accurate at those ranges, it's less of an issue. This design started out as a parody, morphed into a crazy what if, and finally matured as an idealized interwar fast battleship, just in time to be sunk by dive bombers in the opening days of the next war ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) Should kept that extra three inches.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jan 26, 2017 1:19:50 GMT -6
![](https://i.gyazo.com/0508b1a5101b84b2f71827280a1f3d72.png) A bit more tweaking and now I have a more conventional design. Between 20000 and 25000 it should be immune to it's own guns. And anything fast enough to get closer will be skewered. It's starting to resemble an Americanized Bismark, only 5 knots slower and 10 years sooner. I can get it up to 27 knots with two less inches of belt armor, but then I become vulnerable to direct fire at all ranges. You don't need that many secondaries imo. 12 is quite adequate. Depending on the quality of your guns I also find 16' are overkill. A good 14" or 15" will skewer most anything the ai will throw at you. The ai builds very poorly armoured ships. At long range the ai deck and turret to[ armour is totally inadequate late game. You could also thin your deck armour by and inch, but that is a matter of taste. 5" does the job more often than not. With those changes the size of the ship would probably drop quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jan 26, 2017 1:24:34 GMT -6
Oh. Didn't see your last post. 3" is too thin for the deck, imo. And the premium you paid to get up to 30kts is too high for a BB. You might as well drop the belt to 12" and make it a BC, which would actually see much more service than the BB would.
|
|
|
Post by ikahime on Jan 26, 2017 3:31:47 GMT -6
I'm getting mixed messages from your post and your signature.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jan 26, 2017 4:37:58 GMT -6
Lol. Yeah I was wondering if anyone would pick up on that (and hoping they wouldn't). In any case, as a battlecruiser, you can only have a 12" belt. As a battleship, the price you have to pay to get to 30kts means you don't have enough armour. So as a battleship "you can NEVER have too much armour". Your last design, imo, tries to be everything, but sacrifices too much deck armour. Make the secondaries single mounts and you really have an Americanised Hood, rather than an Americanised Bismarck. But that's just my opinion. If I were designing it as a BB, I'd make the deck 5", make the main battery 14" or 15", (as said, against the ai 16" is overkill most times), drop the torps, lower speed to 26kts or so ( the ship is designed to fight other BB's, not go chasing all 'round the oggin), and perhaps thicken up the vertical armour (belt, turrets and C.T.). And the ship may (or may not) also turn out to be a bit smaller (and hence cheaper).
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jan 26, 2017 10:25:50 GMT -6
Is level 4 torpedo protection necessary with that much speed?
|
|