|
Post by wlbjork on Nov 2, 2023 22:38:02 GMT -6
For the 1890 design: View AttachmentMy standard Colonial Battleship design for GB. Designed to provide an intimidating presence in the Mediterranean (and a few other locations) at a fairly cheap cost. = Interesting choice on short range. They do have their uses. Espicaly at game start short ranges are good for home defense and areas you will also want something. = Not so keen on the q-2 guns though at game start choices are limited. If there was a 8" or 10" q-1 Id switch to those. Also q-2 can never be upgraded due to RTW3 coding against it. = low freeboard oof... i get the weight savings but id likely add it in and up the tonnage slightly. though given her slow speed it might not affect much anyway. = secondary guns a fair choice. I usually use the 2.5" enclosed value vs 3" though both are reasonable trade offs. = speed 17 bit slow but thats a big weight item to change so understandable = colonial service a good choice to contest for foreign locations and avoid the presitge losses, though the ship is fairly small anyway. = overall graphic, nice monitor = not seen is the second tab for torpedoes. Id certainly want 2, 3 or 5 torps for side, rear and maybe double side. It would deter or hurt much bigger ships with that. = main gun firecontrol is local but quantity 2. Isnt there at least some FC to put on? can set it to quantity 1 since its only got one turret anyway. 1&3) Yeah, short range and low freeboard free up a lot of tonnage, especially in 1890. Plus, as Colonial warships, I want to park them in a sea zone and more or less forget about them. Whilst a few sea zones do cover the Atlantic, most are more benign waters so - hypothetically - they aren't exposed to bad weather so much anyway. 2) 8" Q-1 guns are an option, the downside being that for the first 20 years or so there's a 10% RoF penalty for twin 8" turrets (meaning the equivalent of 1.8 guns, not a huge penalty but...). 10" guns - even at -2 - would allow for them to be downrated to 9" -1 guns once invented but gun development seems slow until about 1910 - and again, weight is a factor. 4) I have a strong feeling I had over 100t of free space left where my typical goal is about 50t. Best guess is that making secondary armour 3" was the simplest way to use that free weight up. 5) Yeah, one of the reasons behind the design is that it gets the full B strength rating, even though it's a puny little thing. 5 of them in the Med nets you a useful blockade strength score, saving the heavy ships for deployment elsewhere., should the French or Italians get uppity. 6) I love that graphic, have to admit it's one of the default designs, but when it came up several games ago I realised how perfect it was for a single forward turret ship. 7) Good point, there's just 1 submerged tube on each broadside. 8) For 1890, there is no FC that can be installed. On the other hand, quantity of 2 Local doesn't affect weight at all. You are correct though, once FC does become available that's another few tons that can be shaved off. In 1920, I chose instead to go for: View AttachmentWith a mass of 16 12" guns, it is intended to drown it's opponents in a sea of shells. I must admit, the secondary (casemate) armour is very much on the light side but I was also trying to keep the ship somewhat affordable. = BE at 5.5" thats pretty high. Trying for immunity from CL and CA at range? = 12 main guns not my style but it is an option and was your design intent = 90 rounds per gun seems low but given the number of barrels its okay. 90-100 was fairly common in real world designs. = Tertiary guns seem low. Id trim off 2 of the secondary for a better tertirary against DD and later planes. 6" guns are okay-ish but not ideal for DD that is more like 4" or 5" = conning tower armor seems low. I like to be at or closer to the belt armor. Some folks trim it down but a blown conning tower means a lack of control for a time which is when very bad things can happen to the ship. = If I was to change things it would be to remove the middle 4 gun turret to: == up ammo to gun so overall ammo count similiar == increase deck armor == improve tertirary 3" - 4" against fast movers like DD == turret top armor to 4 ( I use T/3 round up) 1) Sort of. If I have the free tonnage, my goal is to armour BE against 6" shellfire to reduce the chance of floatation damage (admittedly, not such an issue with AoN), and also to reduce the chance of taking damage in that area which can reduce speed. 3)Pretty much. The idea is that with so many main guns, it should be scoring 2-3 hits most turns. Overall damage per shell is low, but each hit has a chance to critical. Not actually got around to testing it in game yet, but it's an idea I've had for a while. Therefore it's volume and not duration of fire that was this designs goal. 4) Yeah, I don't normally go that low on tertiary guns, especially AA guns - but at that point in time, AA guns were very sparsely equipped. 4x3" guns or 4x4" guns was typical for the period. Call it a quirk of history. 5)It's always a gamble, but my goal for conning tower armour is 6" protection. As you say, there's a risk of the conning tower being knocked out by a heavy shell - but I usually find they don't hit frequently enough for that to be a major risk factor. I find the trade-off to be worthwhile for the most part.
|
|
|
Post by ewaldvonkleist on Nov 3, 2023 19:36:47 GMT -6
Here is my minmaxed design for the 1890 start. Free weight is 50t or so. View AttachmentThe uniform all-round armour makes the ship resistant to pretty much everything. The only threat are lucky hits that cause water break-ins or fires. The 6in gun is the best gun in the game even for Battleships until the bigger quality 0 guns appear. The main artillery therefore is minimized. The ship has 6 torpedo tubes for the finishing blow. The large number of secondary guns means that you can operate without CLs and CAs. Which has the added benefit that the battle generator's only choice is to spawn your Bs all the time. = wtf ... ah... you wanted to max out 6" secondaries so min 7" to do that. also allows B grade armor on a 6" ship = So im not sure what guns you are aiming to armor against but 10-12" 1890 guns at... short ranges where your 6" can go to work. So yeah lots of amor. = Speed doesnt match concept. You really need to control the range to get 6" guns to play = Unit machinery is an option. You really should use it for this design. It preserves your speed better which you need to get into your preferred range. = very different concept so not really sure how well this will play out. likely woulndt use it myself. 6" imho one of the best guns ingame while early game large calibre guns are bad, so why waste weight on them. All-round armpur protects very well vs. 1890s guns, making ship invulnerable to everything but waterline and fire hits. Post 1900 ship will struggle, but this is expected. The AI is unable to exploit gun range strategies, plus when put of ramge of 6", accuracy is almost zero in 1890s.
|
|
|
Post by ewaldvonkleist on Nov 3, 2023 19:44:40 GMT -6
Here is my design for the ship design contest and its text: 1st Design: 1920, no treaty, HMS Pursuer Also known as "Jacky Fisher's redemption". Always in pursuit of innovation, he created the first all-forward fast battleship that combines the best protection with actual protection. Ship design and name emphasize the continued self-image of the Royal Navy to be the one that routs the others. View Attachment= Good design = traditional forward armament = deck armor high for the era but thats understandable = increase the fire control to 3. you have lots of deck armor to fight at long range. youll need to keep accruacy up for that sort of fighting. = 4" spam is good spam. Its great on slowing DDs making their torp attacks not happen and converts to effecient DP guns for airplanes = secondary gun ammo a weird number while you have 90 tons free. on rebuilds secondary ammo is easy to change. Id max that out or bring to 200 or 250. = main gun ammo good +/- 5 as needed for any design tweaks I optimized my design for jurors, not ingame performance. Re deck armour, this is true for ingame purposes. But afaik ingame shell damage and long range accuracy is lower than IRL. If I fight long range, small calibre hits don:t happen so chance to lose both directors is small. But you could add extra lookouts, true. Re 4", I usually prefer 6in. But I wanted DP for better winming chances, so took 4". Re ammo, good point. Re main ammo: Usually I loke to have 120-140 shots. But in 1920 I usually have 69k docks, not 40k. So for this competition, I had to reduce ammo load.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 6, 2023 16:34:36 GMT -6
I deleted two posts with documents because they were not applicable and they went far to deep into warship construction for gamers. Sorry
|
|
|
Post by ewaldvonkleist on Nov 7, 2023 7:26:52 GMT -6
Feel free to upload them. I tried to look at them but my PDF readers was unable to open them :-(
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 7, 2023 8:23:03 GMT -6
Feel free to upload them. I tried to look at them but my PDF readers was unable to open them :-(
Ok, Here they are. I will post one more on the next post.
Suggestion: Read the "The Modern Warship" , it might be more applicable to the game. It's dated 1913. The other is more complex, but is dated 1935. Its the fourth edition. It does have some good comparisons of ships specifications that might be useful for building in the game.
Give us some feedback and suggestions, maybe we can get the team to provide these with the game.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 7, 2023 8:23:38 GMT -6
Here is the last pdf : Warship Design dtd 1901. I also included a table from Modern Warships comparing battleships and battlecruisers specs. Its interesting.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 7, 2023 10:38:41 GMT -6
The speed of a warship is S=1.1* square root of the length. Later it became 1.3. So, in the game design, if the speed is 29 knots. Divide by 1.1 which equals 26.3. Now square both sides and you have the equivalent length which calculates to 695.04 feet. Now, if the battlecruiser has the Length/beam ratio such as 8.2 to 1 which was Hoods, divide the length by 8.1 and you get a beam of 84.75 feet. If you assume a draught of 32 feet, you now have the dimensions of your warship. Fun, isn't it.
Note: Hood's length was 860 feet so her beam was 104 feet. Her speed was 32 knots. Have fun, gents.
Note: if you do the calculations that I have described, you get a length of 846 feet. It isn't completely accurate then who know how long she actually was.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 7, 2023 16:53:04 GMT -6
I just noticed something in the AI ship design. Here is the Garibaldi dreadnought specs. I have also posted the design report. I have not made any changes, the AI designed this ship at the start of the game. Notice the problem with too narrow. I was able to eliminate this design failure by the AI by reducing the number of guns per turret from three to two. Again, the AI designed the ship, not me. I have posted the final design, that is able to be built.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 7, 2023 16:59:49 GMT -6
Final Design of the Garibaldi design. In order to build the ship, I had to reduce the number of guns from three to two per turret. I then removed all the torpedo tubes to reduce weight and then did some more modifying to gain some speed. Interesting, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 9, 2023 10:39:58 GMT -6
The speed is equal to the square root of the length times 1.1 does not work for destroyers but is withing 20 percent for light cruisers. I am going to do heavy cruisers and carriers today.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Nov 14, 2023 20:50:13 GMT -6
I believe what your referring to is the "hull speed". This is the upper efficient speed. Above that the ship is starting to climb its own bow wave taking up rapidly more energy. Its not necessarily the ship's best speed which can be below (easily) or above (with difficulty) with this. Hull speed is related to the length of the ship as it relates to the length of sine-wave appearance of the bow water wave.
This is one reason the USS Constitution frigate was built long with the same amount of guns. Its long hull gave a higher efficient hull speed with actual speed coming from whatever wind force on the whatever the current sails were.
|
|