|
Obviously we need better light cruisers, but can we do that now? I haven't played so I don't understand the limitations of our current budget
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 06:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:30 |
|
|
Splode posted:Obviously we need better light cruisers, but can we do that now? I haven't played so I don't understand the limitations of our current budget Our current budget will improve when we put some of those battleships in reserve. There’s no reason for us to have them all in active status.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
We need better guns and better techs before we'll really be able to build anything worthwhile, I think plowing the full amount we can into research right now is far more important than crapping out some garbage 1900 destroyers or whatever. We should probably finish the ships that are already in the yards because of sunk costs and might as well take the tonnage if we've paid for most of it anyways, but I'd argue for no new construction for a bit as we figure out how to make guns that actually work.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
Splode posted:Obviously we need better light cruisers, but can we do that now? I haven't played so I don't understand the limitations of our current budget We do not need 'cruisers' - sending our officers on a cruise, bah pure decadence. We need to be able to destroy our enemies. We should defund this cruisers boondoggle and build another score of those 'destroyers'.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
At this stage I am totally unqualified to make decisions on many of the proposed questions. I have also not been suitably bribed to vote on those matters. Except by Leperflesh, who sent me a photo of one of his cats a ways back and therefore earned my vote for BuOrd.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:08
|
|
|
I vote to cancel the Retvizan. We're not saving much by continuing her construction and we desperately need funds to build light cruisers that aren't garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:20
|
|
|
With these AA weapons of ours I am sure we are safe from perfidious Albion balloons trying to board our battleships.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
Think that we should finish things in construction but dump most of what we can afford into research. Also vote we should put some of our heavies into reserve. Our light cruisers are fit maybe for targeting practice and about it. If we need some new ships might want to look into maybe buying some ones from one of the great powers? But honestly it looks like our heavy ships are okay, our destroyers are adequate, but medium escorts kind of lack. So, research as much as can be reasonably done, maybe switch some of the unneeded battleships to reserve status with the understanding that if we need to it can key them up to active duty in a couple months (someone wants the Baltic, they can have it). Given it might be awhile until we can build decent cruisers, if a stopgap is needed potentially can look into buying some?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:32
|
|
|
Splode posted:Obviously we need better light cruisers, but can we do that now? I haven't played so I don't understand the limitations of our current budget Faster cruisers More destroyers Better fire control Good torpedo bombers
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:33
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:Faster cruisers It's 1900. Technically the only way thing sfly is in hot air balloons. First flight of any scale is in 1930 under self propelled flight. OUr ability to put things in the air is basically having naval cadets flap thier arms at their sides and make 'vroom' noises.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:37
|
|
|
Do we think we need cruisers to fight other people’s cruisers, or to attack enemy shipping? Or both? Or two different new classes?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:39
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:It's 1900. Technically the only way thing sfly is in hot air balloons. First flight of any scale is in 1930 under self propelled flight. OUr ability to put things in the air is basically having naval cadets flap thier arms at their sides and make 'vroom' noises. The cadets can also fly kites.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:45
|
|
|
Our first construction priority should be building a dozen or so corvettes and immediately mothballing them after they're finished. Having to use your fleet destroyers on trade protection during a war sucks and it's not like we got a lot of them to go around to begin with.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:51
|
|
|
In theory Russia has two (possibly three) areas that they can deploy in. The Baltics (likely adversary Germany, the Nordics, anyone in the North Sea), the Pacific (Japan, maybe Britain). Theoretically the Med (theoretically there is the Black Seas fleet which has the issue of not actually being able to go past Turkey). There's not going to be a ton of shipping in the Baltic, the ports around the Nordic countries are going to be nearly completely undeveloped and too far to make effective use of without some heavy upgrades (also railways to them). The Pacific is going to be way too big for hunting merchants. Pending the ability to operate out of Sweden/Finland/Norway (which likely presumes that Britain is an adversary), fighting in the Pacific will be very, very long range based. Given the distance from ports and infrastructure fighting will be long range and likely purely cpaital ship based. Vladovostock is capable of handling a small navy, albeit the Trans-Siberian railway cannot be expected to support a great deal so the actual ability of it to handle a large fleet for an extended period is dicey. Our likeliest adversary is Austria-Hungary. Unfortunately, we do not have any actual ability to put our fleet in the Med. Whom we would face in the Baltic depends upon whom we are friends with or whom we are enemies with. Germany, France, or Britain. We are likely on par with one of them - presuming we can concentrate our fleet. Whether our doctrine/technology is up to the task is questionable. IT would behoove us to try and be on good terms with at least one of the powers - based purely upon location, if Germany is belligerent to us we are totally locked in the Baltic. Therefore we should probably ensure that Germany is ambivalent ot us to ensure we can access the North Sea. Also, put Rasputin in charge of our research. The man is immortal and a wizard so he probably knows more than we do about how this stuff works.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 07:53
|
|
|
I've added a open question about mothballing ships.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 08:41
|
|
|
Build all the ships! Since we don't have anything great for replacement capital ship department, it'll keep the Russian navy strong enough for the moment. On the Cruiser front, some sort of light commerce raider (c 3-4000 T) seems in order, with good range so we can transfer them between theatres, as well as expanding our flock of destroyers, to ensure plenty of strong support units for the battle line. And ships to clean up crippled enemy capital ships while the big boys duke it out. That said, the world is calm at present, we can probably rest up some of our heavier ships for the moment. Pickled Tink posted:At this stage I am totally unqualified to make decisions on many of the proposed questions. I have also not been suitably bribed to vote on those matters. Except by Leperflesh, who sent me a photo of one of his cats a ways back and therefore earned my vote for BuOrd. Qualifications are highly over-rated good sir. Oh, forgot to ask. Did the patch hit. Is it decently playable now? (it is a Grog game, it is almost nmever ACTUALLY worth getting. Not to mention the trainwreck of a store because well...Grog game.)
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 08:45
|
|
|
No patch yet, so we're going full in with fun code! It'll be Fiiiinnnne whyismyfacemeltingoff?????
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 09:10
|
|
|
This means the AI will have some weird legacy fleets at game start and will build some weird CLs, but the game isn’t totally broken.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 09:16
|
|
|
Yeah, like the AA guns are not something we can built atm, but the auto designer doens't seem to care to much - which is why we have two ships with some AA. Its broken, but not unplayable so in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 09:18
|
|
|
Instead of Unarmoured Destroyers, please find out if we can create minesweepers with guns of a similar size. Because it used to be that at game start, you can create a minesweeper all but identical to a destroyer ...except minesweepers had the option for armour and destroyers didn't
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 09:30
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Instead of Unarmoured Destroyers, please find out if we can create minesweepers with guns of a similar size. We can, they’re KEs and I think we can build them up to 900 tons
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 09:32
|
|
|
I was curious. The first 'proper' Zeppelin. The LZ1 flew several times in 1900. But then there's a hiatus and further prototyping etc. First Zeppelin in actual military service is 1908.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 11:35
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:I was curious. The first 'proper' Zeppelin. The LZ1 flew several times in 1900. But then there's a hiatus and further prototyping etc. I don’t remember what the year tag on zeppelin technology is, but there’s also some randomness with the tech system. We might get zeppelins in 1910 or we might get them in 1920.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
Remember everyone, Vote Saros for BuOrd! I pledge maximum Zeppelin and insane treaties that result in people bringing nonsensical warships to the battle for decades. ---------------------------------------------  This here isn't too bad of a fleet for the current v1 game. The Battleships are solid if a bit weird and everything else is passable except the absurdly slow CL's. That said the fleet is generally not worth much at this point of the game and tensions are low so it's best to place half in reserve and the other half in mothballs and start saving like mad. Once we get a tech or two we can do a replacement CL run and a a semi-Dreadnought style battleship. Some minesweepers for trade protection wouldn't be a bad idea either. Max research is an absolute no brainer, you should never not be at max research as technology is king in the Dreadnought game. Saros fucked around with this message at 12:01 on May 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 11:56
|
|
|
We know that 11% and 12% research gives diminishing returns compared to a linear increase from 1-10% but I don’t know how diminishing they are
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 12:00
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:We can, they’re KEs and I think we can build them up to 900 tons Sounds like that class should be locked behind having larger destroyers tech... Also: sum posted:Our first construction priority should be building a dozen or so corvettes and immediately mothballing them after they're finished. Having to use your fleet destroyers on trade protection during a war sucks and it's not like we got a lot of them to go around to begin with.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
KEs below a certain size can only be built in wartime and are automatically sold off afterwards yeah
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 13:35
|
|
|
Yeah KE's are I think wartime conversions only like AMC's? You Still a dozen or so extremely cheap DD/MS ships with a single gun and no expensive torpedoes wouldn't go awry.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 13:35
|
|
|
Saros posted:Yeah KE's are I think wartime conversions only like AMC's? You It is possible to build KEs in peacetime as long as they are heavier than 500 tons. Those are nice if you dont want to send most of your DDs on convoy duty on the outbreak of war. Constructing 15 cheap KEs still takes 3-6 months depending on tonnage after the war has been declared and it binds your CL/raider force and DD force to convoy escort in the beginning of the war. Ikonoklast fucked around with this message at 13:51 on May 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 13:43
|
|
|
I'm all for the "let's design some corvettes" as our first shipyard challenge. I voted to cancel the Retvizan, I don't like the non-turreted secondary guns.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
Casemates are actually much better than turrets for secondaries at the start because their armor weighs less and turrets get rate of fire penalties until you research appropriate techs (a fair way along the line). We also have already paid for and spent most of the required time building the currently in progress ships so cancelling them is just tossing away a bunch of money.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Yeah, I can’t get behind cancelling any of the in-progress ships.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:03
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:I'm all for the "let's design some corvettes" as our first shipyard challenge. Turreted secondary guns have a fairly massive -40% RoF penalty, this is just too much. It's reduced to 20% for single turrets but single turrets are hardly better than casements. Casements might not b the future but they are definitely the present for the next 10 years or so at least. wedgekree posted:In theory Russia has two (possibly three) areas that they can deploy in. The Baltics (likely adversary Germany, the Nordics, anyone in the North Sea), the Pacific (Japan, maybe Britain). Theoretically the Med (theoretically there is the Black Seas fleet which has the issue of not actually being able to go past Turkey). This kind of an historical analysis but doesn't really reflect in game. The black sea doesn't exist, the Med is meaningless to us, or no more meaningful than any other zone. The baltic doesn't exist either, it is part of Northern Europe. Railways have nothing to do with anything in this game, only thing that counts is base points, of which we have pretty decent capacity at Vladivostok, more than enough to base our entire fleet there should we so choose, trans siberian throughput be damned. Norway would be nice to have but is totally unnecessary and strategically meaningless thanks to the Baltic being part of NE we have more base capacity there than we could ever need. No adversary is more or less likely than any other unless we choose to target one through the pop up events that have a choice to do so. There is nothing Germany can do to blockade us into the Baltic anymore than France or Britain can, the Suez canal can not be traversed unless you are pals with Britain, but anything else is free access, even Gibraltar. We are currently on par with Britain, Germany and France, but this won't last against the first two. We should be able to keep up with France more or less. There is no point building anything yet, or starting Bs are decent as they are, the CAs are very good, and whilst the CLs are catastrophically bad we have time before a war to get some tech before designing new ones. The DDs are merely average but again there's no point building new ones just yet. Research should be set to 10% for maximum without getting hit by diminishing returns our light budget can't afford to waste yet. E: Vote Pharnakes for Buord, minimum fluff, maximum firepower.  Pharnakes fucked around with this message at 17:21 on May 21, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
I propose we fund more of these... "Battle" ships. If we are to fight a war we should clear be able to battle!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
His Imperial Russian Majesty's ship Dolly Parton
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Pershing posted:His Imperial Russian Majesty's ship Dolly Parton I think the period-appropriate reference is “Gibson girl”?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
After reviewing the information provided, I've voted to cancel none of the ships but also build no new ships*. I've voted for pharnakes as buord. * I agree we should wait for technological improvements before designing new cruisers, but that that should be our first build before looking into corvettes, as they can be rushed out very quickly if war looks likely
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 17:44
|
|
|
Why is there no option in research for Zeppelins? What ship can withstand a shell fired from directly above? What ship can elevate its guns to hope to hit? Our blue water navy is important, but our blue sky Navy is the FUTURE!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 18:03
|
|
|
Research options for things like flight will appear over the course of the game. This is still 1900 don't forget, and we are a nation of backwards illiterate slave peasants.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:30 |
|
|
The Retvizan is the only ship I could consider cancelling. Almost all its guns are -1 quality, unlike our current battleships with their +0 quality secondaries. The Dvenadtsat Apostolov, on the other hand, is being built in Great Britain, so we might glean some technological insights from it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2019 18:06
|
|