|
Battleships really are the future in this timeline, first they sink an entire carrier fleet with guns and then they decisively win a major surface battle in 1944 
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 06:59 |
|
|
Banzai! Such a strange timeline, all the glorious naval victories are actually happening!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
sweet god almighty
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
A worthy offering for the decisive battle gods 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Battleships really are the future in this timeline, first they sink an entire carrier fleet with guns and then they decisively win a major surface battle in 1944 Can...can someone link me to when the first part happened? I must have missed it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
oh my god the decisive battle
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
ChaseSP posted:Can...can someone link me to when the first part happened? I must have missed it. A series of major surface engagements near Milne Bay in November of '42 culminated in this. Instead of Midway, we got battleships sinking carriers in a gun duel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
The battleship will always get through is the lesson of this insane timeline
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Would this and last battleship battle at least make Americans a bit warmer for some kind of peace? Or would they want more blood??
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
Jesenjin posted:Would this and last battleship battle at least make Americans a bit warmer for some kind of peace? What does your heart tell you? MORE BLOOD 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
Can we get a count of sunk capital ships for the next end-of-month update? I'm quite curious about the overall losses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Jesenjin posted:Would this and last battleship battle at least make Americans a bit warmer for some kind of peace? Well every Saturday is new battleship day, so they might as well use them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Both of those battleships were outdated and the Allies probably have like 2 dozen other, better ones. But still a rad fight
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
Literally already replaced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Still, sweet jesus. This is a much bigger battleship battle than we ever had in real life.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:46
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Battleships really are the future in this timeline, first they sink an entire carrier fleet with guns and then they decisively win a major surface battle in 1944 YES!   Generation Internet posted:Probably another thing that's already been in the thread but I always enjoy seeing his name at the top when you sort leaders by 'aggression' in the tracker: Also, I want to know who that crazy motherfucker Walseth is. Turns out he didn't die til but a couple years back https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/statesman/obituary.aspx?n=harvey-sanborn-walseth&pid=162309535  This is the face of 95 level aggression. Proust Malone fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Mar 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Does the AI react in any way to losing battleships? Will it change strategy, or perhaps decide to complete the last two Iowas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
Wonder how this'll be explained away in the papers.hailthefish posted:Literally already replaced. For battleships? Actually no, they're not "already replaced." Due to the US moving over in full to carriers, there actually aren't replacements for US battleship losses (or IJN ones, for that matter), unless this game just magically gives them replacements. And, checking the list, the US has already lost half (2 of 4) of the South Dakota-class along with half (1 of 2, the second was last seen with damage) the North Carolina-class. In terms of modern battleships, the US is honestly starting to run out, having only the remainders of those two classes along with the four Iowas (not sure how the final two planned Iowas are handled in the game, nor the Montana-class, but only like one of those would be relevant before the game hard ends anyways). Incidentally, Grey hasn't lost any of the IJN battleships yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
We'll have the allies at the negotiations table by the end of the month!Ron Jeremy posted:Also, I want to know who that crazy motherfucker Walseth is. Seriously, I wanna know what it takes to outLeMay Curtis LeMay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Wonder how this'll be explained away in the papers. I can confirm. I lost 6 battleships at Pearl and I won't ever replace that AA / torpedo sponge goodness. Battleships are worthless until you don't have any 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
I like that the picture for Birmingham is larger than the BBs
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I like that the picture for Birmingham is larger than the BBs The Birmingham was a good 30ish feet longer than the Nevada. Though the Colorado should be just a tad longer than the Birmingham. Gully Foyle fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Mar 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
Just quoting this excellent image
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
Gully Foyle posted:The Birmingham was a good 30ish feet longer than the Nevada. Though the Colorado should be just a tad longer than the Birmingham. holy poo poo i did not realize that
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2018 23:59
|
|
|
This may be a weird question, but are you able to see shell expenditure per ship per battle? I'm curious as to what gunnery accuracy for the Japanese vs American ships were. Because holy moly if it doesn't look like the Japanese BBs were deadeyes while the Americans couldn't decide what to loving shoot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
What in the Well, that's one way to continually ruin the careers of successive forward-thinking naval theorists, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:This may be a weird question, but are you able to see shell expenditure per ship per battle? I'm curious as to what gunnery accuracy for the Japanese vs American ships were. Might be the range? I don't know poo poo about naval gunnery, roughly the same as a novice in a nunnery, but I would imagine bigger guns have greater range (and fire control)? So the fact there were 6 Japanese BBs there versus the 2 US ones would have an effect on how many shells each side was able to deliver to the other, hence the USN getting 20 shells in while the IJN got as many into a single ship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Hah, I hadn't even noticed the 6,000 yards. That was basically a knife fight. Some radar operator hosed the gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 00:55
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:Might be the range? I don't know poo poo about naval gunnery, roughly the same as a novice in a nunnery, but I would imagine bigger guns have greater range (and fire control)? So the fact there were 6 Japanese BBs there versus the 2 US ones would have an effect on how many shells each side was able to deliver to the other, hence the USN getting 20 shells in while the IJN got as many into a single ship. Grey also hasn’t lost any and has used them quite a bit. They probably have outstanding experience by this stage, and since the allies haven’t done much invasions their ships probably don’t have crazy xp from bombardments.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
goatface posted:Hah, I hadn't even noticed the 6,000 yards. That was basically a knife fight. Did they maybe close because they were both confident in victory?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
How in the.. We're going to see the USN throwing the Alaska class Battlecruisers into combat at some point aren't we.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Holy poo poo 6000yds with BBs is like the WW1 Grand Fleet's wet dream, the Japanese ships would have a MASSIVE advantage in sheer volume of shellfire at that range.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:09
|
|
|
The Bushido spirit!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Holy hell I love this
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
Grey has created the universe where World of Warships and/or Steel Ocean is historically accurate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
How many rounds are left in the stores?Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:Might be the range? I don't know poo poo about naval gunnery, roughly the same as a novice in a nunnery, but I would imagine bigger guns have greater range (and fire control)? So the fact there were 6 Japanese BBs there versus the 2 US ones would have an effect on how many shells each side was able to deliver to the other, hence the USN getting 20 shells in while the IJN got as many into a single ship. At least you're plucky and adventury.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Wonder how this'll be explained away in the papers. Allied BBs lost: Alabama, Colorado, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota, Prince of Wales. IJN BBs lost: Fuso Only BC lost was the Repulse CAs: 11 Allied lost, 4 IJN lost CVs: 3 each CVEs: 5 Allied, 4 IJN CVLs: 2 each
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:He lost the Fuso near Efate, Jan 30 1943. I went to the spreadsheet of lucky ships to check the totals. You know I was thinking there'd been a BB lost at some point, but upon checking the list I wasn't seeing it. Must have just missed Fuso.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 02:28
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:He lost the Fuso near Efate, Jan 30 1943. I went to the spreadsheet of lucky ships to check the totals. That's not counting damaged (and thus probables)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 06:59 |
|
|
Night10194 posted:Grey has created the universe where World of Warships and/or Steel Ocean is historically accurate. I dunno, I didn't see any Japanese battleship ramming carriers after sinking everything else. No sudoku yet, either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2018 02:56
|
|
