Speed v Protection: Game Experience

[malthaussen]

The argument over whether speed or protection is better for a capital ship is as old as ship design, and I'm not going to rehash it here.  Rather, my question is how this argument has played out in the game.  Unlike real-life ship designers, players of RtW have plenty of experimental results upon which to base their preferences for speed or protection.  Fortunately or unfortunately, the existing body of real-life examples of ship v ship combat are rare, especially since the age of steam.  But RtW players have fought hundreds, if not thousands, of such battles, so should be able to attest their experience of how the speed/protection argument works for ship design in the game.

Personally, I prefer speed, but I'm sure there are plenty of arguments to the contrary.

  -- Mal

[zederfflinger]

I have never tried to go too hard to the speed side, but I think that a boring old balance is the best way to go. Slow ships can't catch the AI by themselves, and fast ships often don't have the toughness or firepower to take down the enemy alone. Having fast ships to slow down the opponent should allow your heavier and slower ships to win the day conclusively. I'd like to try building an Incomparable style ship some time and test it out, but I don't have high hopes for it.

[dorn]

I have tried battlecruisers out of balance of triangle firepower  / protection / speed and the best service I get from ships which sacrifice some firepower eg.

31 knots, high protection of level of battleship and than just 3x2xcaliber of battleship or 3x3x11".  The first one has just smaller firepower, perfect for finishing damaged ships or slowing down enemy ships, the second one is good for slowing down enemy to be catch your main forces.

[malthaussen]

I was looking at a "pocket battleship" of similar design: 28 knots, 6-15" (2X3), and a fairish bit of armor (AON, 14"belt/turrets, 4" deck) with a good few AA guns (34) on a 33,400 ton hull (in 1921). Best part was the 120 million price tag, lots cheaper than any other big-gun ship I've tried. Not convinced this is a bad idea, especially if I spammed them to counter Britain's better-armed, but slower and worse-armored BBs.  But it only had Torpedo Protection 1, then I researched 2 & 3 in consecutive months. Now a ship  like that would take 36,000 tons and cost 127 mil.

  -- Mal

[vonfriedman]

I often prefer a BC with good protection and  2x4 13" or 14" quality 1 all forward, similar to the French Dunkerques. Deadly in the pursuit and fast enough to flee too.

[ludovic]

I skimp on the armour on my BBs/BCs but I am not sure what the most economical point for them is. I only rarely go above 12" though. 12" can take a hit from most guns and anything that can penetrate it will have a slow rate of fire. For speed of my BCs, I bump up the speed until the extra kns become exponentially heavier and more expensive, which is usually 25-27 for my first BC, going up to 31 by the end of the game. I can often afford the weight, but the corresponding price tag is too much. I'd rather have more BCs than a super fast BC.

Not so with CAs. Due to the metagame, in my experience, multiple BCs will often show up in the game generator if you have them, whereas if the generator calls for a CA, it will grab a certain number of CAs from each side, so you want the best ones regardless of price. My CAs always have 6" armour because it makes them pretty immune to small guns and they will get penetrated by large guns regardless, and I give them speed slightly past the expensive curve, 22 or 23 kn at the beginning up until 33 or sometimes 34 at the end. I will often be able to run down enemy cruisers and even occasionally an obsolete destroyer with my fast CAs. Even if I had very fast BCs, I wouldn't want to use them like that due to the threat of torpedoes versus their cost, but that might be a skill issue. (I still run down slow CAs or CLs with my BC if they have lost their destroyers, but I don't build my BCs around it.)

[asdfzxc922]

I tend to just build massive (35-45k tons) battleships that are reasonably fast without sacrificing armor or firepower. I usually end up standardizing on a 24-25kn battleline and 27-28kn BCs by the 1910s, upgrading to a 28kn battleline and 30kn BCs in the late 30s. The resulting ships are pretty expensive, but stay viable for 30-40 years with occasional rebuilds.

CAs are another matter. I always try to stay within reasonable tonnage limits (12-16k tons depending on the year) while being armored against 10" fire, even if it means sacrificing speed or firepower (but never main gun caliber).