|
TehKeen posted:What Dunno-Lars said, if you build them 600 tons or greater they don't have that restriction nor do they get scrapped. If we're going for the cheapest possible ship for trade protection (which I assume is optimal, nobody said anything when I asked if their capabilities matter) then a 600-ton corvette is an inferior choice to a 500-ton destroyer, though, isn't it?
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 08:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:39 |
|
|
Gort posted:If we're going for the cheapest possible ship for trade protection (which I assume is optimal, nobody said anything when I asked if their capabilities matter) then a 600-ton corvette is an inferior choice to a 500-ton destroyer, though, isn't it? I think it diverges as time goes by because of some math to do with equipment weight but I’m honestly not sure. I’d have to test it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 09:05
|
|
|
Gort posted:If we're going for the cheapest possible ship for trade protection (which I assume is optimal, nobody said anything when I asked if their capabilities matter) then a 600-ton corvette is an inferior choice to a 500-ton destroyer, though, isn't it? One thing I find interesting is I've never seen destroyers spawn the "raider intercepted" mission, but whenever I send cruisers on trade protection I get a bunch of those and stop losing transports to raiders. Which is probably for the best since a single destroyer would get demolished going up against commerce raiders. My working theory is that destroyers (and maybe corvettes? I haven't tried) will work for the minimum number of trade protection ships to avoid a penalty, and will kill subs (I assume they're what's causing enemy sub losses, anyways) but don't actually protect ships from raiders, while light cruisers+ do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 09:10
|
|
|
Gort posted:If we're going for the cheapest possible ship for trade protection (which I assume is optimal, nobody said anything when I asked if their capabilities matter) then a 600-ton corvette is an inferior choice to a 500-ton destroyer, though, isn't it? You can save a lot on the engine costs because a KE only needs to go 20kts at most.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 12:41
|
|
|
Gort posted:If we're going for the cheapest possible ship for trade protection (which I assume is optimal, nobody said anything when I asked if their capabilities matter) then a 600-ton corvette is an inferior choice to a 500-ton destroyer, though, isn't it? In my current game, my 500-ton legacy destroyer costs 1816 and 11 in maintenance (per the build screen—in practice maintenance cost varies with status and location) and my 600-ton 1902 corvette costs 1785 and 10 in maintenance with over three times the gun power and minesweeping gear. You can make cheaper destroyers, but then you run the risk of the battle generator pulling them into regular battles. Bremen posted:One thing I find interesting is I've never seen destroyers spawn the "raider intercepted" mission, but whenever I send cruisers on trade protection I get a bunch of those and stop losing transports to raiders. Which is probably for the best since a single destroyer would get demolished going up against commerce raiders. Cruisers do not need to be on TP to repel or intercept raiders. Even cruisers set to raid can intercept raiders, I think. I do think it's fair to characterize TP as a primarily ASW role.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 19:20
|
|
|
One thing to keep in mind when designing KEs is that the minimum size needed to mount 4 K-guns (significant improvement to ASW to capabilities) is 900 tons. I've gotten into the habit of building and keeping some 36 900 ton KEs with max ASW capabilities mothballed between wars to have a force ready for trade protection immediately upon war. While a 500 ton KE takes only 4 months to build but they will be only half as capable as the larger ships and minesweepers, with even less ASW capability, get priority in building early in a war. Zeond fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jun 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Cruisers do not need to be on TP to repel or intercept raiders. Even cruisers set to raid can intercept raiders, I think. I do think it's fair to characterize TP as a primarily ASW role. In my current game I had a dozen cruisers in a region on active fleet, but was still losing 3-5 transports a month to raiders in that specific region. I set four of them on trade protection and instantly the next month I got messages that two raiders had been thwarted. Maybe raiders can intercept raiders, but I'm fairly certain active fleet can't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
It’s at least intended that cruisers on TP have a higher chance to intercept than cruisers on AF.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:It’s at least intended that cruisers on TP have a higher chance to intercept than cruisers on AF. But as I noted, apparently destroyers can't do it at all, so there are advantages for using larger ships for TP (I have no idea about corvettes).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 01:03
|
|
|
I did it i found the worst ai design
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:I did it i found the worst ai design What's wro... Oh, it's gonna make fireworks like it's British, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
Bremen posted:In my current game I had a dozen cruisers in a region on active fleet, but was still losing 3-5 transports a month to raiders in that specific region. I set four of them on trade protection and instantly the next month I got messages that two raiders had been thwarted. Maybe raiders can intercept raiders, but I'm fairly certain active fleet can't. I'll have to keep an eye on this. It's possible it changed between 1 and 2 with the switch from CP to TP. I did confirm in my current game that one of my raiding cruisers thwarted an enemy raider.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 03:53
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:I did it i found the worst ai design Sure, it's thinly-armored, but it makes up for it by being slow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 14:55
|
|
|
That...isn't terrible for 1907? Am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
If it was 2-3 knots faster it would be ok as a battle-cruiser.. Right now it's just a weird thinly armored Dreadnought and kind of the worst of all worlds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
I'm not sure I've managed to make a decisively better ship in 1907. It'd certainly eat any pre dreadnought's lunch without and will be a useful cruiser hunter for quite a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 15:10
|
|
|
I encountered it in 1917
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
It's a terrible French battleship that's kept in service too long because of lack of funds. Historical.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
Anyone know where I can find the magazine box checkmark?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:00
|
|
|
Huh anyone else ever get an out of memory error before?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
I just started getting into this game and uhhh lesson learned, do not skimp out on BCs. Every scenario outside of a fleet action (which the enemy always declines) puts my CAs and below up against massive BC fleets, which sometimes works out ok if I can catch them at night but overall it is a bad situation. My first BC ended up dying gloriously, killing both a BB and another BC before dying to another BB after almost sinking it, too. My second BC was canceled when I got a "build more DDs" event. I should have built like 4 or 5 of them but instead I have a bunch of shiny new destroyers and converted CVLs. Edit: yeah this war will end poorly for me, I'm Austria against France Italy and USA in the late 20s and now I also have no CAs. I guess the game sees if you're winning a lot of wars and maybe does a balance of power thing to start coalitions? bees everywhere fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
I finally had a proper Midway-plus carrier battle, heroic pseudo-democracy Germany against Communist UK/France, who keep invading their neighbors. Things I learned: - CAPs are extremely important. I think the combined British/French fleet had one bomb hit and one torpedo hit combined, and they lost over a hundred aircraft to my fighters. I'd make sure at least a third and maybe half of your air wings are fighters later in the game...as long as my battle fleet had fighter cover -- generously provided by an attached carrier -- it was pretty much free to do whatever it wanted. The carrier group's CAP was also maxed out; they didn't get touched. - Battle lines are still very useful. I basically ended up using my heavies kind of like armored cavalry...they charge forward and make contact, then I launch my 400 or so aircraft strike once I have the enemy fixed. - Ship AA isn't great. All of my heavies have multiple directors and are pretty well maxed out on AA, and they only managed to shoot down 16 enemy planes. This could have been because the CAPs were mauling them before they got close, or it could be that they broke up the attacks without shooting down the planes, but the shipboard AA itself isn't particularly lethal. - Dive bombers really wreck carriers. One of the RN's CVs was done after only 3 heavy bombs. This guy was done after 4, but my fliers really kept at it:  Also one of the most heroic engagements I've seen in RTW: This guy:  Took on two of these guys:  By herself, and survived, not for lack of trying on my part...we were chasing her for hours laying down shells, but she made it into the fog and dusk and escaped. She somehow or other took 27 hits from 17" shells and made it home. I want to know what the math is on that, like what the actual odds were of that happening. Of note: we probably would have gotten her, but both my giant battleships destroyed their own radars with their own guns and couldn't fire accurately at night. Is there a way to prevent this? bewbies fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
Also, by 1935 or so, submarines get absolutely murdered by ASW. Every other navy has at least 90 subs in their fleet; I'm usually getting 10-15 of them a month. I have a bunch of airship bases and floatplanes and a ton of sub hunters, but regardless, it doesn't seem like sub warfare is a winning strategy after planes and the new ASW gear comes out in the 1930-35 time frame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 03:26
|
|
|
 the ai decided to only put six inches of armor on its 13 inch guns so a single flying boat killed it. edit: also til that old ships are more prone to flooding Stairmaster fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 03:44
|
|
|
My entry for worst Ai ship: They must be RNG hosed in ship design technology because that's a 1911 design.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:01
|
|
|
😶Does it only have belt armor? Or is it not shown?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:34
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Anyone know where I can find the magazine box checkmark? It's a checkbox next to the Belt armour thickness I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Does anyone know what the letters mean for torpedo-equipped planes? My best guess is H means a Torpedo uses 'heavy' range and later torp tech effectively increases the range with that payload to medium and light categories but I wasn't sure. vv Great, thanks! I was trying to figure out if prioritizing Bomb Load for torpedo bombers was worthwhile. TehKeen fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 06:20
|
|
|
TehKeen posted:Does anyone know what the letters mean for torpedo-equipped planes? My best guess is H means a Torpedo uses 'heavy' range and later torp tech effectively increases the range with that payload to medium and light categories but I wasn't sure. Yes, you have it right. The letter tells you which of the plane’s load outs (light, medium, heavy) enable it to carry a torpedo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 06:22
|
|
|
Is there a guide to ship design? I feel reasonably well-versed in naval history, but when faced with this game I don't know what constitutes "good" design for armour thickness, guns, number of turrets, etc. Is the strategy just to look at enemy ships and design something that can penetrate their armour while being impervious to their fire?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Is there a guide to ship design? I feel reasonably well-versed in naval history, but when faced with this game I don't know what constitutes "good" design for armour thickness, guns, number of turrets, etc. For Bs and BBs/BCs, yes. Gets a little more complex with CAs/CLs/DDs. You can start by autogenerating designs and tweaking them to get what you're looking for. We should do a more comprehensive writeup of "how to ship design"--I don't have time right now but I could see about it this weekend. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Is there a guide to ship design? I feel reasonably well-versed in naval history, but when faced with this game I don't know what constitutes "good" design for armor thickness, guns, number of turrets, etc. This requires a treatise because what nation you're playing as, what your overall strategy and changes in technology make hard / fast rules for anything other than BB's impossible. I have some generally good designs for 1900-1910 that I crib every game but after that it really depends on your level of tech and what your goals are. In the predread-early dread era switching your doctrine to favor HE at med/long range and maximizing volume of fire is the way to go. I don't build B's at the start of the game, because I don't feel they're competitive with CA's in terms of the battles they get into; and the CA design I posted below will win 1v1's against B's until AP tech advances significantly ( had 2 of them with 5 DD's sink 3/4 French B's in a single battle). These are all 1899 Designs, the CA's are built in France because they're the only ones with 16000 starting docks. CA:  This CL is an effective raider, a bit pricy but it can generally escape anything it can't kill, the design is overhauled and made into a new version every 5-7 years and I've had some of my starting CL's of this design continue raiding in colonial zones well into the 30's. CL:  This DD exemplifies my DD design philosophy, a balance of speed, guns and Torpedoes. 600T DD's will focus on getting up to 30 knots with a similar armament, 900 DD's will get 4" guns and more tubes. DD:  For BB's IMO you should be aiming for the following as a baseline and then choosing to focus on either Speed, Armor, or Firepower to taste. Torpedo Protection 2 or 4 8-9 16" guns or 10-12 14" guns 22 Knots+ PICK A SPEED AND STICK TO IT STARTING WITH YOUR FIRST BB Immunity to 16" shells from 25000-19000 yards, starting with turrets. 24x3-4" DP AA Battery / at least 20LAA/20MAA/4AAD Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 18:16
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Is there a guide to ship design? I feel reasonably well-versed in naval history, but when faced with this game I don't know what constitutes "good" design for armour thickness, guns, number of turrets, etc. This is what I do, I have no idea if it is mathematically optimal but it is fun. DDs: - early game, doesn't matter much, just make sure they have max torpedoes. As they get heavier, it is useful to be able to beat enemy DDs in gunfights. - late game, I build two tiers: a light ASW/TP DD, and a heavy fleet support DD. Light DD gets all ASW equipment and is never "active fleet". They augment the corvettes on TP duty. Heavy DDs are there to win the torpedo fight against enemy light forces during surface battles: prioritize speed, guns and torpedoes. CLs: - early game, decide if you want to win with a guerre de course, or with naval superiority. If guerre de course, build a ton of cheap raiders, prioritizing range, reliability, and speed. If you want to win with naval superiority, build a smaller number of "heavy" CLs that can win one on one versus any other CL. Fit as much armor and guns on them as you can, then think about speed...an 8000 ton CL can often be fast enough to catch lighter cruisers. If you have colonial holdings, also build a "colonial" class of CL, that displaces at least 6,000 tons, has colonial service appointments, and is otherwise as cheap as possible in order to fill your foreign station obligations. Late game, build CLs as CLAAs for carrier support: all the AA you can fit on them (including DP main guns), plus as many floatplanes as you can fit on them. Keep using "colonial" CLs the entire game. CAs: - early game, these are great cruiser killers. Give them a ton of secondary guns, good belt armor, and adequate speed, and watch them chew up any enemy cruiser they come across with the shotgun effect of a ton of smaller guns. This class becomes kind of a liability after proper BCs appear though...the AI LOVES building BCs, and if you run into one with a CA, you're toast. Late game I've been building a handful of CAs in the 10,000 ton/8-9" gun class to serve as flagships for distant fleets. They're usually the biggest kid in the area and that can be enough to have naval superiority and enable invasions, but make sure they can run away from any enemy capital ships that show up. If nothing else it is useful to draw enemy capital ships away from more important areas. BCs: - Early game, once you can build them, do so, and make them as powerful as possible. The AI will build a ton of them, so try to make yours able to beat any potential opponent's BC one on one...if you do that, they'll be able to win any cruiser battle you encounter, and for a while, they'll also be able to fight in the battle line. Prioritize speed and belt armor. Late game they'll be more vulnerable to long range gunfire, so you won't want to use them in the battle line anymore, but make sure they're still better that the enemy's BCs 1v1, and use them as heavy scouts for the carriers and to win cruiser battles. BBs: - I don't usually build Bs, but if you choose to, give them a ton of secondary guns and thick enough belt armor to be able to resist secondary gunfire (probably 6" guns) at close range. Close the distance as fast as you can and shotgun anything you can catch until it stops moving and your destroyers can torpedo it. Once you can build BBs, try to make them all have the same speed (22-23 kts seems good) and give them at least 4 turrets and 10 main guns, with the thickest belt armor you can manage. Same tactic: close the distance and outgun your opponent at close range. Late game, start paying close attention to immunity zones: the AI seems to prefer 16" guns, which requires a LOT of armor to have a useful immunity zone. I usually don't use any BE or DE armor, just belt/deck/turret/con, and a bit on secondary batteries. Late game I've been using them as armored cav for the carrier air wings, and then as cleanup for any damaged enemy ships. Bigger seems to be better; one well designed 60k ton ship can take on two 40k ships pretty effectively, especially if you can keep the fight in the immunity zone. Make sure they're protected from air and torpedo attack though...a full spread of DD torpedoes late game can be lethal to even the toughest battleship. CVs: - There doesn't seem to be much to these yet. 30 kts seems to be about as fast as they need to be; I give them light (2") armor all over and max out the air wing at 100 planes. This requires about a 35k ton ship; I haven't seen much worth building past that size. I do max out the AA though. It might be worth giving them thick deck armor to resist heavy bombs, but I haven't really experimented with that yet. bewbies fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
Great stuff, thanks. What's the rule of thumb for armour thickness? Armour can resist up to it's own thickness in shell calibre? (e.g 12" belt is impenetrable to shells 12" or less?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Grumio posted:Great stuff, thanks. Something like that; the "gun data" tool will tell you exactly what the zone of immunity is for the shell caliber you want to resist. My general rule of thumb is I keep deck armor relatively thin and belt armor very thick until potential opponents have big battery director fire. Once they can start landing long range gunfire you have to armor the deck a lot more to defeat plunging fire, and that's when I start planning for immunity zones with the gun data tool. In that vein, being able to add additional deck armor in a rebuild is a very useful new tool to keep older battleships relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
Basically I just try to build fast BBs and then the game tells me they're actually BCs and then I say okay and then sometimes they're holding their own in the battle line and sometimes they're just obliterating enemy cruisers and that's my design strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 20:30
|
|
|
Had a fun battle yesterday as Japan against France. My two BCs and single BB was in a shore bombardment defense mission and quickly found the enemy. Enemy was severely outclassed and wiped out two of their BCs from turret penetrations and magazine detonations. A third BC was hurt, so I gave chase. Suddenly, my BCs spot some other ships. A lot of ships. Turns out they had their main fleet hanging out outside one of my bases in the minefields. No idea how many, but at least 4 BBs and another 3 BCs. And they were faster then me. I turn around and try to run away, and one of my BCs take a hit and slows down. I quickly realize that they are doomed, and focus on getting my BB and other BC out. They pounded the poo poo out of my BC. I was dead after 5 hits, several of them causing severe flooding. The other 200 hits were after it was sinking.  In the next fight, my BB had it's turret penetrated, which caused a flashfire that ruined two turrets. Ship survived though and went on to fight the rest of the battle with only the forward turrets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
Some "worst AI ship" submissions, from 1947 It may have lovely guns, but at least it has lovely armor  Its firepower consists of its air wing of 5 aircraft  It'd probably win a gun duel with a ship 40 years younger and 20k tons lighter 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
Eh, that CA is really just a mislabeled CL, 37 knots is crazy fast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:39 |
|
|
 spoiler: this guy did not survive a 1 on 1 fight with a cruiser almost half its size
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 22:17
|
|