|
|
Post by cormallen on Jun 18, 2023 6:18:16 GMT -6
Oh, I don't generally mind it myself but balancing Dreadnoughts vs Pre-Dreadnoughts at anything like equal numbers is not terribly reasonable. Contemporary opinion judged it at two or three to one but I don't see the BG giving many 8 BB vs 20+ B fights in game? Either way, the point that no admiral would seek to fight outnumbered is only half of the equation; concentration is the most basic principle of naval warfare. As such, the choice is not between fighting outnumbered or fighting even; it is between fighting and not fighting at all. If the enemy has twice as many battleships as you have, you can choose not to fight them, but you can't just choose to fight only half of his battlefleet: at best, that would be a consequence of good fortune or effective planning which brings all of one's own fleet into contact with a fraction of the enemy's, but reciprocal action inevitably leads the outnumbered side to be outnumbered in battle most of the time, because the enemy gets a vote. The fact that the battle generator leans towards more or less evenly matched battle-fleets therefore has no factual justification. Likewise, in smaller engagements, the historical tendency was for different forces to encounter one another, varying more or less randomly in size, and thus unequal engagements were normal, with the superior force having the advantage on average - as a matter of probability rather than anybody's choice. In short, the fact that the inferior side does not want to fight outnumbered may induce the inferior side to be cautious and thereby influence the number of engagements, but hardly the balance of forces within those engagement which do occur. Any bias in the battle generator cannot be justified on any grounds other than to make the game more entertaining, and I strongly suspect that the vast majority of players of this particular game would find more entertainment in a realistic war than an evenly matched duel. As I said, I don't personally mind. The OP however was trying to explore alternate paths not taken in fleet design so may find the BG unobliging to their endeavours? |
|
|
|
Post by t3rm1dor on Jun 18, 2023 7:25:33 GMT -6
Regardless of the relative cost effectiveness of Dreadnought vs Pre/Semi-Dreadnought types I suspect the Battle Generators kink for "balanced battles" will get in the way of this being a working strategy? I have a lot more experience to report now, having fought 16 months of war with Britain in 1912 - 13. Fleet actions were fought in June, July, September, and October 1912, and January, May, and June 1913, in addition to smaller capital ship actions in August and November 1912, and March 1913. Between those actions, six German and twenty British capital ships have so far been sunk, including four German dreadnoughts, two German predreadnoughts, seven British dreadnoughts, and thirteen British predreadnoughts. In the average fleet action, the German battle line consisted of at most 50% dreadnoughts, though usually less, and the effective line speed was limited to 12 knots, as the minimum speed of the originally 16 knot predreadnoughts degraded to 14 knots. On the whole, the battles have been very indecisive despite the aggression of the British fleet, because at least half of my divisions have invariably spawned stacked on top of and phased inside one another, invariably causing a huge traffic jam and sometimes a black hole at the start of each battle. Furthermore, signalling errors have been so constant that it has been quite impossible for me to even maintain a completely straight line with no course changes for any length of time, even when in later battles I have mostly proceeded at 10 knots, giving a 40% speed margin to the slowest ships to allow the line to reform. It's only now, after long experience, that I have decided to give up on AI control of battle divisions. I wonder (and hope) if the game is giving me so many signalling errors because of the huge size of my fleet - over 30 battleships in most outings - as I read recently that at least one British admiral of the pre-war era thought that controlling more than 16 battleships would be impossible. Under these conditions, gunfire has been quite ineffective, and torpedoes have shown themselves to be the dominant weapon. All German capital losses have resulted from torpedo hits, usually at the head of the overhauled battle line. On the other hand, it is impossible to blame either the slow speed of our battle line or the ineffectiveness of gunfire for our failure to sink more than a few British capital ships per action, because our fleet has always been so disrupted by the traffic jam or black hole at the start of the battle, and so disrupted thereafter by constant signalling errors destroying the line, that its average speed has been reduced to about 70% of the theoretical line speed, and the potential for concentrated firepower has been largely wasted. In spite of this caveat, the ineffectiveness of AP fire, and the relative effectiveness of HE, still managed to shock me on at least one occasion, when three of my battleships (edit: battlecruisers!) engaged their three British opposite numbers. The German battlecruisers sported 11" guns with 11" armor on the belt and 12 on the turrets; the British vessels had 12 inch guns, with 5.5" on the belt and 6" on the turrets. The battle was fought at around 10,000 yards, at which range the German guns could theoretically pen the British belt and turrets twice over, but only two out of 24 enemy turrets were destroyed, and very few belt penetrations were recorded, although the Germans expended almost all of their 130 rounds per gun - 70% AP and 30% HE - over a whole day of shooting. The single British BC which was destroyed was burned down, and since two of the German ships nearly suffered the same fate, I considered it basically a draw. This was quite an unpleasant surprise, since my strategy going into the war had been to rely on these 11" BCs to make short work of their lightly armoured opponents and then contribute to the battle line, and as such laid down only BCs in the years immediately before the war. For their part, the only serious damage to German battleships has been invariably the result of either structure damage - often fires - or torpedo hits. To the best of my recollection, not a single German capital unit has been put down by enemy AP fire, alone or predominantly. Since the British ships have lighter armour and have usually scored half as many heavy hits or fewer than we have in each engagement, they generally came off worse from our AP fire, but not much worse. Generally, I think that decisive results are very difficult to achieve in this era, and it's largely down to the ability of ships to move and shoot through one another in seething, incoherent masses when withdrawing. This makes it hard to get close enough to deal a lot of damage to the majority of enemy ships without becoming seriously exposed to torpedo attack from a few enemy ships positioned ahead of the pursuing formation. With that said, I find myself increasingly dissatisfied with the German philosophy of dreadnought design, which I attempted to emulate in this game - assuming that my AP techs are not atypical. Unfortunately, despite spending several months on very high priority, I know that I am at least behind the British in HE tech, which has contributed to the disappointing effects of our gunfire. Nevertheless, I can only consider the 11" Q0 BCs to be a failure; if their AP shells couldn't make an impression on the tin can British BCs, they're unlikely to contribute their money's worth in our battle line. That even the most modern predreadnoughts are stuck with Q-2 11" guns certainly doesn't help our prospects - but considering the abysmal performance of the Q0 11" BCs, and the only marginally better nominal penetration of the 12" Q0 guns on all our dreadnoughts, I have rather little faith in the effectiveness of even our most modern battleships. Something to note about pen in the 10's and 20's is that sloped deck designs are a very hard nut to crack, but that doesn't mean AP is useless. BE hit can lead to salt enter feed tanks , and DE hits to engine damage (although this is more relevant with bigger calibres). 11 inches is also a very disappointing calibre, one that I used as well in a recent German run, that struggles to do enough damage to enemy ships, although I'll be surprised you didn't get 3 or 4 flash fires in British ships. Regarding battleship obsolescence, depends a lot of the time moment I'll say. Even old, slower models can fill a role in blockage points, and the last pre dreadnought model can be kept until carrier conversions are available. I don't like spending a lot on refitting then, but dreadnoughts doesn't make older battleships immediately obsolete; good high calibre guns in faster ships is what really neutralized this ships. |
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jun 18, 2023 7:49:37 GMT -6
Something to note about pen in the 10's and 20's is that sloped deck designs are a very hard nut to crack, but that doesn't mean AP is useless. BE hit can lead to salt enter feed tanks , and DE hits to engine damage (although this is more relevant with bigger calibres). 11 inches is also a very disappointing calibre, one that I used as well in a recent German run, that struggles to do enough damage to enemy ships, although I'll be surprised you didn't get 3 or 4 flash fires in British ships. Several of the British losses in the fleet battles were down to flash fires - and I had one 8" semidreadnought blow up as well. By the time my battlecruisers were operational, I think the British had learned their lesson, which is a pity, since the ~ four flash fires the Royal Navy has suffered would have wiped out more than half of their BC fleet, but didn't make much of an impression on the battleline. At least according to the gun chart, 11" is only marginally inferior to 12" in damage over time, and at least at my current tech level, the difference in penetration is 1" at 10k yards. In fairness to the guns, though, I went further than most of the historical German battlecruisers in sacrificing firepower for protection - only 8 guns in order to get 12" of armour on the turrets. Their British opponents had the same number of 12" guns. |
|
|
|
Post by metesky on Jun 18, 2023 11:00:52 GMT -6
I think the 90 shell limit for secondaries over 6" in the battle generator makes semi-dreadnoughts a bad deal all around compared to a proper pr-dread with a heavy 6" battery. You can put 180 rounds for your 9" guns in the ship designer, but open up your semi-dreads ship screen in battle and you will see that it only has 90 rounds available. 6" and below get a max of 150 rounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jun 18, 2023 12:35:41 GMT -6
I think the 90 shell limit for secondaries over 6" in the battle generator makes semi-dreadnoughts a bad deal all around compared to a proper pr-dread with a heavy 6" battery. You can put 180 rounds for your 9" guns in the ship designer, but open up your semi-dreads ship screen in battle and you will see that it only has 90 rounds available. 6" and below get a max of 150 rounds. I didn't know about that fact, but I did know that secondaries above 8" flash fire, and I've seen it happen often enough that I think it's necessary to provide them with heavy armor. For that reason, predreadnoughts put out a lot more damage per ton. I started this thread by asking, 'when do predreadoughts outstrip dreadnoughts;' I don't see much reason to believe that semidreadnoughts ever outmatch either. |
|
|
|
Post by director on Jun 18, 2023 14:56:02 GMT -6
Economically, dreadnoughts were estimated to cost a little more to build and run than a large B like Lord Nelson, while being combat-effective as two. Fisher was able to persuade the Admiralty and government to build dreadnoughts at least partly on the promise of economy. Once Germany started building, all the British could do was spend the money to build more.
You and I place a higher premium on speed and build B's with 20-knot speed because we know the dreadnought era is coming. The historical reason for building dreadnoughts was not only their gun battery, which made range-finding easier and faster, but their superior speed over conventional battleships, which made possible opening or closing the range at will. A second reason is that B's typically didn't get the gunnery control upgrades as the dreadnoughts did, and since it is harder to hit a fast target compared to a slow one, superior speed counts. I know I'd rather be moving at 20 knots as opposed to 12 because the latter makes for an easier target.
I don't doubt your results. I will say that my experience with gunnery in the 'teens is somewhat different. I do appreciate your clarifying the level of fire control you had.
Ships can take a lot of killing - I usually think of 30-40 hits as a minimum requirement. Mission-kill is now my goal - if I can cripple a ship, I switch targets and let the DDs finish it off (you likely do the same). I'm now more likely to take a win and go home as opposed to my earlier tendency to press for a Trafalgar/Tsushima style victory. And if the enemy pursues, then usually I can come 'round on him and bloody his nose until he quits.
A tactic I use (and you may also, so apologies if you already know this) is to fade back 20-50 degrees off a parallel course and shoot up the enemy as he comes on. This also disorganizes his force, with the fastest getting out in front of the slower. That permits me to switch direction, re-open fire and rapidly close the range to concentrate my line on the lead ship. I avoid fighting in parallel lines - no advantage in it.
Lack of ammo is a HUGE problem with any system that proposes to hit the enemy at long range, and a problem with fighting an AI that tends to push forward a few ships, get them damaged, send up the next few, etc until you are low on ammo. I don't really have a solution except to say that I frequently shut down firing to conserve ammo while I manuever to get a good firing setup. For that, I seriously wish the fleet commander could, you know, TELL HIS SHIPS TO STOP FIRING without going to every single division. Better yet would be a way to stop main batteries but leave the lighter calibers free.
My battlecruiser style is to take German armor, British gun-power and German speed - my first BCs in my US game were 27k tons, made 27 knots, 8x14" guns and a 10" belt (12" turret armor).
I agree. The current rules might work for blockading Germany by controlling the exits from the North Sea but they do not work for, say, blockading the US Atlantic coast. Geography is much more important than the current rules permit.
|
|
|
|
Post by cormallen on Jun 18, 2023 15:06:53 GMT -6
The game does tend to be rather kind to ships with mixed batteries. Semi-Dreadnoughts famously suffered from their shell splashes looking too similar to spot well as ranges increased. They should be fairly lethal at shorter ranges but nerfed at longer ones. The old trope of the mixed battery "Killer cruiser" with masses of 7, 6 and 5 inch guns is still alive and well in the dearly years!
|
|
akd
Full Member
Posts: 126
|
Post by akd on Jun 18, 2023 18:41:18 GMT -6
I think the 90 shell limit for secondaries over 6" in the battle generator makes semi-dreadnoughts a bad deal all around compared to a proper pr-dread with a heavy 6" battery. You can put 180 rounds for your 9" guns in the ship designer, but open up your semi-dreads ship screen in battle and you will see that it only has 90 rounds available. 6" and below get a max of 150 rounds. Sounds like a bug, not an undocumented limit, as the weight definitely continues to climb. |
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jun 19, 2023 2:55:56 GMT -6
An update on my experience - two years of constant fleet battles into the war, we finally got a convincing result against the British fleet. On this occasion, our BCs lured them in front of our line, but they chose to engage anyway: ![]()   Two changes were made before this battle, though of course it's difficult to say yet whether or not they were responsible for our victory. Firstly, I decided to reverse my earlier judgement and load up exclusively AP ammo on the capital ships. I came to this decision, ironically enough, because I had finally given up on the idea of a decisive battle, and resolved to fight the war of attrition, and I hoped that even if less damage would be done by firing AP shells at long range, it might at least succeed in slowing a few enemy ships so that they could be caught. A cursory look at the results doesn't prove either way whether this theory played out. Secondly, after one particularly frustrating fleet battle, I did a fleet - wide command shakeup, generally weeding out any officers of below average ability anywhere in the battle line, and getting good commanders in charge of the DD divisions. Obviously, one sample is not sufficient to say anything conclusive, but it seems that it may have helped. Despite my leaving all friendly battle divisions on AI control, they did a much better job of maintaining a battle line - so much that I never had to reduce speed below the line speed of 12 knots, which is unheard of. Moreover, almost the entire destroyer flotilla - also AI controlled and on their own initiative (I made sure that my flag was not up) decided to charge the enemy, sweeping them away from our line and hitting several stragglers in the process. A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one. After that, we pursued the enemy at 15 knots, leaving our slow boats behind, and with several British ships lagging on the outskirts of their roughly circular formation, I was able to pick off several stragglers with (this time deliberate) destroyer attacks, resolving to sacrifice a destroyer division if necessary to kill each battleship. In the end, it turned out much better; 8 enemy BBs and 5DDs sunk for 9 DDs lost and 10 heavily damaged. Fortunately, I switched some time ago to building almost exclusively 600 ton 'torpedo boats,' which seem to be very cost - effective, completing in 9 months instead of 13 (which has helped stay ahead of the attrition.) Each one costs less than 1/40th of a battleship. |
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jun 19, 2023 8:11:34 GMT -6
Well, gentlemen, I feel compelled to report that the question has been settled rather decisively, and in a most tragic fashion. By early 1915, four years into the war, we had claimed a total of 16 British predreadnoughts, five battlecruisers, and twenty British dreadnoughts sent to the bottom, (that's 41 total) for the loss of four dreadnoughts and two pre-dreadnoughts. Nevertheless, Britain had no fewer than twelve capital ships under construction. After the above battle, we finally succeeded in establishing a firm blockade of Britain, which would have lasted; and Britain was finally teetering on the brink of revolution. America and Japan had both joined on my side mid-way through the war, but neither contributed anything. France, which had sat on the fence for many months, finally came to Britain's rescue. France alone had a larger budget than I had, with 9 capital ships under construction, bringing the Allied total up to 21 - to my two. Keeping all those predreadnoughts alive to finally turn the tables on the British blockade had paid off, but it was all for naught - sink another twenty enemy capital ships and I would still be blockaded and headed for revolution. The massed torpedo boats which had bought my later victories contributed no blockade points. What's a German to do in such a bleak situation? Submarines, of course! So, I tearfully scrapped most of the heroic predreadnoughts, undefeated in countless battles, and put the remainder of the surface fleet into ignominious reserve to fund a hundred submarines.
A few months later, Britain collapsed into revolution - at last, a place in the sun! But all we got was five measly points, which bought Burma and Cyprus in the peace deal. Had I not betrayed the heroic predreadnoughts, I would now have been blockading France; but instead I was blockaded myself, since the French had kept enough of their pre-dreadnoughts. In the short interval, my crews had lost all their hard - earned proficiency. Weary from endless indecisive fleet battles, unwilling to fight, I declined all battles and waited for the submarines to arrive, but revolutionary ideas spread from Britain and by the time the first ones were a little over half done, the Kaiser was out!
The French did considerably better out of their peace deal than I had out of mine - considering they didn't sink a single ship. They made off with half of my remaining fleet; five battlecruisers and four dreadnoughts, leaving me with nine dreadnoughts and the eight predreadnoughts which had been spared the scrapyard (three 20 knotters, and 5 15 knotters which had been kept for global power projection, in expectation of the glorious victory when I would never be blockaded again.) And France, never having fought a single battle, was master of the world's oceans, with 18 BBs, 14 BCs, and 8 Bs!
|
|
|
|
Post by blarglol on Jun 24, 2023 8:57:05 GMT -6
The French did considerably better out of their peace deal than I had out of mine - considering they didn't sink a single ship. They made off with half of my remaining fleet; five battlecruisers and four dreadnoughts, leaving me with nine dreadnoughts and the eight predreadnoughts which had been spared the scrapyard (three 20 knotters, and 5 15 knotters which had been kept for global power projection, in expectation of the glorious victory when I would never be blockaded again.) And France, never having fought a single battle, was master of the world's oceans, with 18 BBs, 14 BCs, and 8 Bs! Typical frogs imo |
|
