|
Post by tbr on May 20, 2021 22:27:14 GMT -6
I can't believe I've never thought of this before but what about letting us choose the size of torpedo we use? We can already choose oxygen torpedoes which increases damage. Is that it? Because oxygen torpedoes were also harder to detect and could go pretty far. Would be cool to replicate the Long Lance which I don't think can happen as of now. I'm sure there's more detail that could be added for torpedoes but yeah Personally i do hope we can customize torpedoes a bit more for our needs although first i hope they improve (and make more realistic) the core systems of the game. That would mean extended ranges with higher hit rates and rate of fire so destroyers don't have as easy a time approaching ships so we can also have better torpedoes without them being broken OP. Currently oxygen torpedoes only increase torpedo range very slightly. Here is the 2 last torpedo techs you can unlock. Advanced preheater;1926;N;20;12;915;Torpedoes now have range@speed 5000@38/13000@27 Oxygen fuelled torpedoes;1930;N;20;12;916;Torpedoes now have range@speed 5000@38/18000@27 Currently oxygen torpedoes only seem to increase long range by about 5000 yards they don't add extra damage and they don't seem to be harder to detect. It is quite hard to detect these parameters so it is possible some of it is modelled i cant know for sure. (long lance should have range@speed 20000@50/40000@38 and a warhead of 490 kg (about 1.5 to 2.0 times as much explosive filler as usual torpedoes of the time.) increased explosive filler version would be range@speed 15000@50/30000@38 with a 790 kg warhead.) You cannot just "trade range for explosive", any torpedo is a delicate balance between materials with diferent masses and densities, quite literally. Your proposal would likely have so much down-trim that I doubt it could maintain dynamic buoyancy, and if it (barely) could the penalties on range and accuracy would be severe.
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 21, 2021 3:45:56 GMT -6
Personally i do hope we can customize torpedoes a bit more for our needs although first i hope they improve (and make more realistic) the core systems of the game. That would mean extended ranges with higher hit rates and rate of fire so destroyers don't have as easy a time approaching ships so we can also have better torpedoes without them being broken OP. Currently oxygen torpedoes only increase torpedo range very slightly. Here is the 2 last torpedo techs you can unlock. Advanced preheater;1926;N;20;12;915;Torpedoes now have range@speed 5000@38/13000@27 Oxygen fuelled torpedoes;1930;N;20;12;916;Torpedoes now have range@speed 5000@38/18000@27 Currently oxygen torpedoes only seem to increase long range by about 5000 yards they don't add extra damage and they don't seem to be harder to detect. It is quite hard to detect these parameters so it is possible some of it is modelled i cant know for sure. (long lance should have range@speed 20000@50/40000@38 and a warhead of 490 kg (about 1.5 to 2.0 times as much explosive filler as usual torpedoes of the time.) increased explosive filler version would be range@speed 15000@50/30000@38 with a 790 kg warhead.) You cannot just "trade range for explosive", any torpedo is a delicate balance between materials with diferent masses and densities, quite literally. Your proposal would likely have so much down-trim that I doubt it could maintain dynamic buoyancy, and if it (barely) could the penalties on range and accuracy would be severe. First of all its not my "proposal" its literally the Japanese type 93 torpedo mod 1 and mod 3 torpedoes which existed I didn't "make up" the model 3 torpedo In addition to that the increased warhead version of the torpedo had the exact same drift characteristics they shortened the fuel tank section and made the warhead section longer (you can look up the cutaway look of the different model torpedoes) The increased explosive shorter fuel tank version is the 1944 type 93 mod 3 the non increased warhead mod 1 and 2 type 93 from 1935 TLDR the japanese found they needed more boom and made that a reality Evidently the Japanese could Same with the Americans who on their mark 15 mod 0 torpedoes had a 224 kg warhead with 5.5km range at 45 knots but with the mod 3 increased the warhead to 363 kg but reduced range to 4.1km at 45 knots essentially the Americans shortened the fuel tank by 1/5th and managed to get a 1/3rd larger warhead in it
|
|
|
Post by tbr on May 21, 2021 8:49:42 GMT -6
Looking at the navweaps stats one should see what I meant. It is NOT a straight (just) trade but a delicate balance of density and trim. The type93 mod3 had 100kg more negative buoyancy at the same length. I bet the designers hit the limit I referred to with their modification there. It is not just the 100kg more but that they are concentrated at the tip, leading to negative trim. Added to the higher weight in water the torpedo needs to generate more dynamic buoyancy. With the same propulsive power that means you need to increase the angle of the fins (for downward pressure at the end of the torpedo) to get a "stern down" rund in the water which generates more positive dynamic buoancy. Sometimes this is done by giving the stator part of the fins (the "strakes") a permanent angle to relieve stress on the hydraulics or servos. With the major mass concentrated near the tip of the torpedo and the propulsion power at the very end this however creates a more instable behaviour in water (the torpedo is more prone to gyrations because the levers between center of mass, center of buoyancy and locus or motive power are off), leading to stresses for the gyro-rudder system and potential bearing inaccuracy of the run of a straight-runner. This also reduces the range of the torpedo further because more power is spent on maintaing depth and correspondingly less on getting down range... www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTJAP_WWII.phpYou can only cheat physics so far until it comes back to bite you. Today, with modern electronics we are just introducing torpedoes that are "instable" like modern fighter aircraft and need a computer to get them to run straight, but this is beyond the tech of the RTW2 timeline, even with the expansion.
|
|
|
Post by tbr on May 21, 2021 8:58:54 GMT -6
Oh, and looking further into the stats the type 93 mod3 was also significantly less accurate than the mod1. That said, the Long Lance conceptually was a salvo coverage weapon and individual accuracy did not matter as much to the designers as at those distances hit rates were more affected by other factors than wander of the individual torpedoes.
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 22, 2021 8:14:32 GMT -6
Oh, and looking further into the stats the type 93 mod3 was also significantly less accurate than the mod1. That said, the Long Lance conceptually was a salvo coverage weapon and individual accuracy did not matter as much to the designers as at those distances hit rates were more affected by other factors than wander of the individual torpedoes. Wander distance is almost the same on both torpedoes the mod 3 having the same wander distance at 30000 m as the mod 1 has at 32000 m a marginal difference at best (mod 1) 1,100 yards @ 35,000 yards (1,000 m @ 32,000 m) (mod 3) 1,100 yards @ 32,800 yards (1,000 m @ 30,000 m) you probably looked at the wrong ranges and compared wander distance at a shorter range for mod 1 than for mod 3 I still dont agree that its too hard to balance a torpedo or that it looses accuracy or any of the other stuff claimed as real life torpedoes from almost every nation got improved warheads yet lost next to no accuracy and lost no speed but only range due to a shorter fuel tank
|
|
jatzi
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by jatzi on May 22, 2021 13:55:34 GMT -6
Anyways being able to have models of torpedoes and mess with the range and explosive would be very cool. Would require a reworking of the torpedo tech of course but there'd be lots of benefits to this. We could have model specific dud rates for instance that perhaps wouldn't be known without doing multiple fleet exercises or going to war. This could also affect subs adding to that side of the game, which sorely needs help.
|
|
|
Post by tbr on May 23, 2021 12:02:55 GMT -6
Oh, and looking further into the stats the type 93 mod3 was also significantly less accurate than the mod1. That said, the Long Lance conceptually was a salvo coverage weapon and individual accuracy did not matter as much to the designers as at those distances hit rates were more affected by other factors than wander of the individual torpedoes. Wander distance is almost the same on both torpedoes the mod 3 having the same wander distance at 30000 m as the mod 1 has at 32000 m a marginal difference at best (mod 1) 1,100 yards @ 35,000 yards (1,000 m @ 32,000 m) (mod 3) 1,100 yards @ 32,800 yards (1,000 m @ 30,000 m) you probably looked at the wrong ranges and compared wander distance at a shorter range for mod 1 than for mod 3 I still dont agree that its too hard to balance a torpedo or that it looses accuracy or any of the other stuff claimed as real life torpedoes from almost every nation got improved warheads yet lost next to no accuracy and lost no speed but only range due to a shorter fuel tank More than 6% difference is not marginal if you want to directly hit a target. However, as I wrote above, the Long Lance was designed to be used in a salvo context (multiple full ship salvoes in the water for full lateral coverage of an enemy fleet divison), and in this context the difference does not matter.
|
|
jatzi
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by jatzi on May 23, 2021 12:20:14 GMT -6
What about being able to set escort fighters to linger? Or being able to use floatplane scouts as CAP? floatplane fighters? I tend to put floatplanes on basically everything that can carry them so being able to put up some limited CAP with floatplanes would be really helpful. I wouldn't expect them to do much but anything is better than nothing sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by umbaretz on May 23, 2021 13:17:21 GMT -6
What about being able to set escort fighters to linger? Or being able to use floatplane scouts as CAP? floatplane fighters? I tend to put floatplanes on basically everything that can carry them so being able to put up some limited CAP with floatplanes would be really helpful. I wouldn't expect them to do much but anything is better than nothing sometimes. >Or being able to use floatplane scouts as CAP? You can ask AV to provide CAP. (never seemed to work for me though).
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on May 23, 2021 13:33:07 GMT -6
You can ask AV to provide CAP and AV can be Helicopter Aircraft Carriers, does that mean you can have a squadron of helicopters providing combat air patrol?
|
|
|
Post by tbr on May 23, 2021 13:43:13 GMT -6
What about being able to set escort fighters to linger? Or being able to use floatplane scouts as CAP? floatplane fighters? I tend to put floatplanes on basically everything that can carry them so being able to put up some limited CAP with floatplanes would be really helpful. I wouldn't expect them to do much but anything is better than nothing sometimes. >Or being able to use floatplane scouts as CAP? You can ask AV to provide CAP. (never seemed to work for me though). Oh, I had it work for me, admittedly before the update that resticted AV to 14ktons. Now there are some "Cap" FS flighty if you set an AV to provide them, but they are too few and too intermittent to have effect.
|
|
|
Post by umbaretz on May 23, 2021 14:38:03 GMT -6
You can ask AV to provide CAP and AV can be Helicopter Aircraft Carriers, does that mean you can have a squadron of helicopters providing combat air patrol? Well, some helis have anti-air missiles, so in a pinch you shoul be able to use them as CAP, I guess?
|
|
jatzi
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by jatzi on May 23, 2021 22:12:34 GMT -6
I'm more talking about floatplanes from regular ships. AV's don't get used very often past a certain point.
|
|
|
Post by christian on May 24, 2021 12:26:54 GMT -6
Wander distance is almost the same on both torpedoes the mod 3 having the same wander distance at 30000 m as the mod 1 has at 32000 m a marginal difference at best (mod 1) 1,100 yards @ 35,000 yards (1,000 m @ 32,000 m) (mod 3) 1,100 yards @ 32,800 yards (1,000 m @ 30,000 m) you probably looked at the wrong ranges and compared wander distance at a shorter range for mod 1 than for mod 3 I still dont agree that its too hard to balance a torpedo or that it looses accuracy or any of the other stuff claimed as real life torpedoes from almost every nation got improved warheads yet lost next to no accuracy and lost no speed but only range due to a shorter fuel tank More than 6% difference is not marginal if you want to directly hit a target. However, as I wrote above, the Long Lance was designed to be used in a salvo context (multiple full ship salvoes in the water for full lateral coverage of an enemy fleet divison), and in this context the difference does not matter. If we take navyweps values for wander distance as gospel yes but considering wander distance is barely included on any torpedoes and how this forum often likes to argue RPM/ROF values from navyweps are wrong from what was actually achieved in addition to that the values (hopefully) come from japanese tests during the war which were notorious for having all their blueprints tests and whatnot burned (whether by themselves or by b-29s)
|
|
|
Post by alpha2518 on May 24, 2021 21:35:55 GMT -6
Just a small QoL suggestion for the expansion that will also make sense as the timeline expands. Please fix the calculations for aircraft maintenance costs and and maintenance costs for ships and tonnage. As we expand into the cold war era it worth noting that some nations, the USA and USSR maintained quite extensive and sizeable fleets. Yet as the game is currently modeled it would be impossible for those nations or anyone else to be able to maintain a fleet of the size that these superpowers built. This can be fixed by making ships both cheaper to build and maintain and by fixing the tonnage calculatins were others have pointed out with carriers for example, being unable to have historical hanger armor thickness.
|
|