|
Radio Free Kobold posted:aint nobody talkin' poo poo bout tin cans on my watch Like I say, "More destroyers". If there was a proper destroyer screen out, that wouldn't have happened.
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
mllaneza posted:Like I say, "More destroyers". If there was a proper destroyer screen out, that wouldn't have happened. no if there was a proper destroyer screen out he'd have had a just a little more warning. it's still "DDs coming at your battle line, at night" like one of those ironbottom sound comics
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 08:54
|
|
|
I finally caved and got the Battlestar Galactica game. It's cool and good so far. The UI is a little intuitive and the character names are a little too on the nose, but I think there's enough there that I'll beat it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
Popete posted:I know I'm in the Grog thread so this shouldn't come as a surprise. But every time I see screenshots of RtW it looks very not fun, that probably isn't the case because everyone here loves it. But it looks like spreadsheet simulator with a tacked on basic combat mini-game. I'm actually not a big fan of grog games, but RtW is such a fun platform to tinker with how you think a navy of the time should be. There's very little nonsense getting in the way of bashing ships together, and the UI is extremely intuitive and simple, usually requiring the minimum number of clicks to do stuff. It's seriously good. Regarding Battlestar, hold off on it. Devs are adding continuous damage and more strategic elements for the campaign, which seems pretty big.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 10:58
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:I'm actually not a big fan of grog games, but RtW is such a fun platform to tinker with how you think a navy of the time should be. There's very little nonsense getting in the way of bashing ships together, and the UI is extremely intuitive and simple, usually requiring the minimum number of clicks to do stuff. It's seriously good. They're in as of the DLC that released yesterday.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 10:59
|
|
|
Orv posted:They're in as of the DLC that released yesterday. Oh poo poo, that was yesterday? Heck yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 11:58
|
|
|
RtW looks a bit daunting because of the spreadsheet screenshots but that's a false perception because there's basically three screens you need to look at - where your ships are, what ships you are building, and what ships you are designing. Ship design looks complicated but is actually just a matter of choosing a size, choosing a target speed, then slapping a mix of guns and armour on until you are full up. Battles are cool and interesting but can be played as simply as you commanding the lead ship in the fleet formation and choosing when to hit the DESTROYERS CHARGE TORPEDOES button.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 12:38
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:What is a floatplane if not a boat that can also fly A floatplane is a plane with floats, a flying boat is a boat that can fly. Please do not confuse the two.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:04
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:A floatplane is a plane with floats, a flying boat is a boat that can fly. Please do not confuse the two. Indeed. Floatplane:  Flying boat: 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
So the differentiation is on whether or not the fuselage is meant to be the primary float component or not?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:29
|
|
|
If you take the floats off a floatplane, it'll still fly but it won't float. If you take the propellers off a flying boat, it'll still float but it won't fly.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:So the differentiation is on whether or not the fuselage is meant to be the primary float component or not? Yup. Floatplanes sit above the water, flying boats sit on the water, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:41
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:If you take the floats off a floatplane, it'll still fly but it won't float. And vice versa.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:RtW looks a bit daunting because of the spreadsheet screenshots but that's a false perception because there's basically three screens you need to look at - where your ships are, what ships you are building, and what ships you are designing. Yeah, and the fact that it looks like some random business application is actually a good thing the way I see it! (Same goes for CMANO, really.) You already know how to work the standard Windows UI elements just fine, so it's easy to discover all the functionality that the game has built into it. It looks ugly, but it's way better than most grog games that try to roll their own UI and just end up with a cryptic and confusing mess. Seriously, dive in. Rule the Waves is really fun and really easy to play. The only tricky part is figuring out how to buy the drat game. So excited for RtW2. By the way, if you do get into the game, D.K. Brown's The Grand Fleet: Warship Design and Development, 1906-1922 is the perfect companion book to understand how and why the design of warships went the way it did historically, and explains why all of the designs features and systems in the game work the way they do. I feel that Fredrik must have been reading this as he developed the simulation. Tetraptous fucked around with this message at 15:59 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
dublish posted:And vice versa. Unless its jet powered.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 13:55
|
|
|
Tetraptous posted:Yeah, and the fact that it looks like some random business application is actually a good thing the way I see it! (Same goes for CMANO, really.) You already know how to work the standard Windows UI elements just fine, so it's easy to discover all the functionality that the game has built into it. It looks ugly, but it's way better than most grog games that try to roll their own UI and just end up with a cryptic and confusing mess. I'm imagining War in the Pacific built from the ground up with a Windows UI and getting insanely mad at what could have been.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 14:21
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Unless its jet powered. It's Sea Dart time already? 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:06
|
|
|
Caconym posted:It's Sea Dart time already? I could have sworn there was a Popular Mechanics cover of a *submersible* Sea Dart once, with the pitot tube being a up-folding periscope. Can't find it quickly, so have this instead: 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Caconym posted:It's Sea Dart time already? It's time to Seap what you Row! 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
I would like to know more.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
Orv posted:I would like to know more.  The Saunders-Roe "SARO" SRA-1 was a flying boat equipped with 4 20mm cannons and could carry 2000 pounds of bombs, had a max speed of 512mp/h and existed as a means to create a fighter aircraft that could mimic the successes of other fighter floatplanes, effectively allowing any coastline to host fighters. Unfortunately, aircraft carriers were quite good at providing a sea-borne fighter group, as well as problems with the plane itself, such as a heavily framed cockpit, or lack of a powerplant once the original manufacturer stopped building them, doomed the design. Today, it remains as an interesting "what could have been".
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
There probably would have been a lot more seaplanes if there hadn't been a second world war.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Oh, it's seaplane discussion time? Alright, let me  See, Imperial Japan had something of a fetish for seaplanes. They put them on everything, even moreso than usual. They put seaplanes on things that should not have had seaplanes, and they used (tried to use) them for more than just gunnery spotting and scouting. Let's start small here with the I-15 class submarines.  See that funny protrusion right in front of the sail? That's a seaplane hangar. A scout seaplane for your submarine. This is a horrible idea. See, the submarine is fundamentally an ambush predator, right? So if you're sending up a seaplane to buzz around and find potential prey, well, they're going to spot the seaplane and think "Oh, there must be something around here that can launch seaplanes, we should leave". On top of that, you need to remain surfaced for a good long while to ready, launch, and retrieve the seaplane (often a few hours). What's more, when your seaplane is spotted, any nearby aircraft can follow it right back to the submarine and bomb it. Now let's get a bit bigger.  The aviation cruisers were modifications of perfectly-good Mogami-class cruisers. Rip off the rear battery, replace it with a flight deck and space for about a dozen seaplane scouts. This is actually not a terrible idea. I mean, you're neutering a whole cruiser's firepower, sure, but you're getting a perfectly serviceable fleet support asset in return so it kinda works out. Now watch this.  It's immediately after the debacle at Midway. Japan just lost an entire fleet's worth of carriers. They need replacements now. So what they do is they take the superdreadnoughts Ise and Hyuga and they rip off the rear battery. They replace it with a floatplane hangar and pave a flight deck and catapults overtop. This provides the lovely battleship with a whopping twenty two aircraft, with 7 stowed in the hangar, 11 on deck, and the rest stored on the launch catapults. You might be thinking "Gee Ise, what are you going to do with two dozen scout floatplanes?" but you would be wrong. These are not scouts. These are carrier bombers. Carrier bombers, catapulted off the arse of an obsolete battleship, that have to either land on a nearby island or ditch into the sea because the aviation battleship cannot retrieve its own air wing The reason this is a bad idea is because you're trading half the guns on your battleship (whose guns are the entire point) for a lovely one-use air wing, and you're also exposing the facilities of that air wing (fuel, ammunition, I'm not even going to mention the I-401 class. Their mere conception offends my inner Radio Free Kobold fucked around with this message at 21:38 on May 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Great post. My mind blanked out at the submarine+seaplane combo. I can't even.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:36
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/2xgNipluGAU
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:39
|
|
|
skooma512 posted:I finally caved and got the Battlestar Galactica game. I like that this is a criticism itt
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:54
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I like that this is a criticism itt I meant to say unintuitive haha. It was the middle of the night.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I like that this is a criticism itt After rolling, look up the effects on the Grog Criticism Result Table #227b-1. Shift two columns left for online criticism, and, if live (Twitter/IRC/Discord) commentary, consult Bonus Grog Criticism Result Table #227b-1(a) for additional adjustments.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:After rolling, look up the effects on the Grog Criticism Result Table #227b-1. Shift two columns left for online criticism, and, if live (Twitter/IRC/Discord) commentary, consult Bonus Grog Criticism Result Table #227b-1(a) for additional adjustments. Make sure you're using the 3rd edition table, not the 4th edition or 5th edition charts. They simplified a lot of the criticism and that made it worse.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
Just bought Slithrine’s BS:G game because it was 50% off. Really grog light, but super enjoyable so far.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Just bought Slithrine’s BS:G game because it was 50% off. Really grog light, but super enjoyable so far. yeah its good fun! I don't like the way firing pauses between combat turns- it looks stupid and ruins the cool replays. Did they fix that yet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
Cling-Wrap Condom posted:yeah its good fun! I don't like the way firing pauses between combat turns- it looks stupid and ruins the cool replays. Did they fix that yet? It's a shame they mucked up that slight visual issue, because audio wise it's perfect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Radio Free Kobold posted:Oh, it's seaplane discussion time? Alright, let me Pretty sure Fredrik has said you'll be able to build ships like these in RtW2. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:14
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Creating more Aviation Battleships 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 05:44
|
|
|
Apparently "grognard" was one of the words at tonight's Scripps spelling bee national finals.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Apparently "grognard" was one of the words at tonight's Scripps spelling bee national finals. Did they pronounce it the "correct" French way or the goonygoon way?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 07:18
|
|
|
Radio Free Kobold posted:Aviation Crusiers Japanese ship design is a beutiful hodgepodge of innovative ship design to get the most out of ships given limited resources (Destroyers with Long Lances were apparently terrifying), embracing new advances in tactics (carriers), weird out of the box thinking (if you think about it, most modern warships basically use their aft deck for aviation while using the forward for missiles), and amazingly backward thinking and doctrine that cancelled out many of those positives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Drone posted:Did they pronounce it the "correct" French way or the goonygoon way? I don't know, I just read about, I wasn't actually watching.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 17:59
|
|
|
Jimmy4400nav posted:Japanese ship design is a beutiful hodgepodge of innovative ship design to get the most out of ships given limited resources (Destroyers with Long Lances were apparently terrifying), embracing new advances in tactics (carriers), weird out of the box thinking (if you think about it, most modern warships basically use their aft deck for aviation while using the forward for missiles), and amazingly backward thinking and doctrine that cancelled out many of those positives. The Tone class was absolutely a great design, and although the Mogami conversions were less so perhaps but still far better suited to scouting than anything anyone else had. Playing witp really makes you appreciate anything that can search and free up your carrier planes for actual strikes. The cvbbs were pretty desperate but then Japan was desperate and what else were they going to do with old bbs?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
In WitP:AE, I discovered that I have a squadron of 25+ kill mega-aces at Darwin. Darwin is not a hot spot so I could easily get by with average skill pilots there. Is there something I should be doing with these really high experience guys? I feel like I read somewhere that you can send aces back to training command to improve your rookie pilots or something, but I might be remembering wrong and I have no idea how to go about that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2018 07:03
|
|
