Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

About VarangianGarde

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think you can save a ship in Custom Battle. That's definitely something that'd be a good add to the game.
  2. @Nick Thomadis Do you think we could see transports, colliers, tenders, and the like in the Custom Battle section of the updated game?
  3. Hi Folks! Love the recent updates, especially with late tech heavy cruisers. Although I'd still love to see a bit more national differentiation in hull types, the CAs of the 30's era are well done. @Nick Thomadis Any thoughts on development of Coastal Defense Ships, Gunboats, or Q ships?
  4. In the absence of other orders, steam to the sound of the guns!
  5. I think it would be more realistic. Historically, the only way an engagement would even start would be if ships came within sight of one another. Hell, at Jutland the engagement essentially ended once night fell and the fleets largely lost contact. Once RADAR was introduced, as noted elsewhere, contact ranges increased significantly. However, considering the vast majority of the game falls before 1930, I think its critical the mechanics for optically sighted engagements to be correct. As it stands, the current scenario just gives you a direction to head, then you have to just grind for a while to get there. If the battleships diverge, then its just a crapshoot if you'll find the other one in time. Having realistic sight ranges would essentially solve that issue, assuming that your crew would competently track the enemy formation in the pre-battle maneuvering, allowing you to act out the scenario itself. Check out this site for a quick horizon calculator: http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm @Nick Thomadis
  6. Beat Beatty, or the Hipper ships will turn to Jelicoe!
  7. Yes, although often sight range is not effective range for guns. Let's say (for simplicity) you're on a destroyer bridge at 10m height. You'd be able to see another ship along the horizon at 11.3 km. However, you'd still see the ship past this point (depending on size). If the air is clear enough, you'd see the ship "sink" below the horizon as it recedes. Let's say its another destroyer with a 10m conning tower. You'd see at least a portion of the ship out to 22 km. If you're using 5" guns, then you can see it, but you won't be able to hit it.
  8. The same thing happened to me. I would suggest that most scenarios start with an "enemy in sight." It doesn't have to be in gun range, but it should be a definite contact.
  9. I noticed this. When I shut down the game to reload, the game took about 30 minutes to reset from "in game." Edit: This happened again after exiting the game:
  10. I really like your convoy raid scenario idea. I'd say the goal line should be "loss contact." Thus, better rangefinding and RADAR would improve the capabilities of merchant raiders, while faster ships and beefed up escorts could tip the scales to the "defender."
  11. Well put. I agree that logistical support needs to be a factor that significantly enhances or penalizes fleet performance. To tie in with another idea, friendly minor powers with port facilities would be another diplomatic incentive in the game. Maybe support ships could operate from them, and depending on how good relations are, maybe even repairs and dry docking could be a possibility.
  12. Yes, me too. But... with such late stage tech you won’t be doing any favors to your sim sailors.
  13. I don’t know if the game will reach that level of specificity, but I think the shell weight options are on the right path. Maybe a bit more detail on range effects with each shell type?
  • Create New...