Jetu
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Jetu
-
-
-
8 hours ago, Asthaven said:
The ability to use older version of guns even if more modern variant is available. (Let's say we got Mk3 variant for 305mm guns but we want to use Mk2 to cut costs for example).
Would be neat if when you scrap ships, or modernize ships (while removing/replacing guns), you can "save" the original gun turrets as surplus that can be placed on new ships.
Like how Mogami-class 155mm triples after removal were placed on Yamato & Musashi. Lowering cost, and build time for the new ship. 🤔-
3
-
-
Below we have two 74,000 ton American battleships, the Wisconsin, and Tennessee, heading to intercept an enemy fleet.
Armed with 4x2 457mm main guns, 4x2 152mm secondary guns in four twin turrets, and 12x2 127mm meaning these two ships pack heavy firepower,
with an armor profile between 75-420mm of thickness, and a top speed of 27.5 knots.
Meanwhile in Japan:
( Sorta wish I coulda had them fight eachother heh )-
3
-
-
On 10/31/2019 at 4:53 AM, Illya von Einzbern said:
They draw the shape of the ship first then bunch of mathematics monkeys had to calculate the weight distribution and miniatures to test the hull stability.
Before any ship hulls were made miniatures were made to have reference material. Miniatures are still quite common altho new 3D simulations now days are so good that the miniatures are cute relics.
There were quite a few top heavy or poorly calculated ship hull designs that led to disasters. Adding more weight/ plates to top heavy ships actually balanced them with out loss of speed (Takao-class top heavy originally but balanced with extra weight to hull and bulges)What comes to mind is the Tomozuru Incident
-
Guessing at the moment it currently is, real world map with historical or non-historical resource values.
Randomized map would be cool, but I think it could also be neat if the devs decide to sculpt their own world and lore as a non-historical campaign scenario, something like what Namco done with Ace Combat.
-
1
-
-
Here we have the Standard Battleship battle line:
-
2
-
-
So... found this gem:
Replayed the new mission, and the A.I. did this. (Made it extremely easy)
It went from 77-100% accuracy at 18km with 457mm to around 20% with 356mm. Yikes. -
4 hours ago, KiloZulu said:
I built two BB's, and maxed out their vision range - towers, radio, radar. They were both sunk before they could close to within visual range of an enemy ship. Is there maybe a decimal error in the enemy's accuracy with the new update?
I've seen the accuracy on the enemy BB. Note: With 457mm guns
At 18.5 kilometers it was 77% at the first ranging shots, and it rose to 100% on 24-29kn BB's. (after it switched targets)
Guess the best approach is not to be seen.
One other thing I noticed is the AI could place 203mm triples on the side nodes for secondary guns on the tower, which seems like an error because the Modern BB mission won't allow it? -
17 hours ago, Absolute0CA said:
I said it else where that it should be a barbette a turret size, it actually makes a huge difference in fitting weapons on a ship if you have to mount a 15” single gun on a 18” three gun barbette.
Pretty much this, thinking about it... most turrets already come with a barbette base (or rather all should)?...
One could easily just extend the barbette trunks down so that you can simply raise the turrets as you are placing them.
Speaking of 3 settings that the player toggles through when placing a turret down:
3- Triple overlap (Like Atlanta, or Yamato 155mm secondaries)
2- Superfiring
1- Deck
Just thinking it would really simplify things designer wise if it was treated like rotation where you just have to tap a key.-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, puxflacet said:
Is that front tower facing rear?
Yeah found out you can rotate the towers.. probably unintended...Since you can end up having a funnel in front of the tower, and not behind.
But would be cool if the tower stays foreward facing, but the base castle rotated around (and so not all towers can be rotated). -
1 hour ago, Sorbopalop said:
I am currently stumped on the Battlecruiser versus the dreadnought. My 13 inch guns and keeping at a distance tactic is not working at all and getting under 10 km I just get obliterated.
I remember dropping speed to minimum (23 knots), maximized the displacement, and turning my BC into a fake BC.. by literally making a dreadnought out of it... 😕
1 hour ago, Sorbopalop said:Question. Can we expect submarines at any point? that would be interesting imo. Cheers.
I have seen the game put in SS? when it was still classifying a ship for me, so I guess so.
-
-
10 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Quad guns will become available gradually for very big, late tech guns. Not sure if it is correct to make available for smaller caliber, players can comment on that.
Probably you mean the "Long Range Accuracy" (?) because most secondary towers, except some tall or late tech towers, do not have Long accuracy rating.
Quad guns should be available for most guns. Speaking of 5" (127mm)+
There has been quad turret proposals, and even actual use for some guns around 127mm, 203mm, 283mm, 330mm, 356mm, 380mm, 406mm, 510mm in size.
-
Great news!
Thank you all for your hard work.
-
3 hours ago, SiWi said:
Hallo Travelers!
So it is no mystery that there were some ship designs that were... a bit out there...
be it the H39+ or Tillman's, in terms of sheer size and firepower. or designs like the circular ships of Russia.
There was a lot of stuff in the heads of people which reality stop from happening.
Do you think the game will/should make it happen?
A Tillman 4?
A H44?
What ever else someone could dig up?
Modern Battleship Naval Academy mission allows us to reach 66,600t to 92,000t displacement (Around H-42 displacement figure), while H-44 is 131,000t.
And it looks like that mission doesn't give us everything. Speaking of 19", and 20" guns. Quad turrets. And I'm assuming there might be a final larger hull after the one provided? (is there???)
So I am pretty sure we'll be seeing those that can be done. -
Designing ships is fun, but there are some things that need more attention than currently is provided.
Internal space: Barbettes and Turbines & Boilers. Citadel length paired with armor weights.
Currently, the only major hinderance you come across is weight and cost.
So I just want more attention to be paid at what isn't seen on the surface of the ship, but what's inside.
Switch the slider to a button to place the turbines and boilers yourself, where the turret barbettes hinder space available...
Though it doesn't have to be individually placed, could just be "Assign engine space" (Where you click and drag a box to place engines, and ctrl+click to remove), and have the game calculate speed based on how much is available, and quality.
((From an older game, but it shows what I mean. But I understand you want to keep things rather simple))
Lastly, just wanted to say the game should take into account citadel length for the Belt, Deck and Extended Belt, Extended Deck.
(Something like: Citadel Length ##% of ship length)
This percent could be calculated automatically by the length end points of barbettes and engines.
This would help players that want to keep weights down by creating condensed citadel designs. -
Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts Beautiful Screenshots and Videos
in General Discussions
Posted
Looks like Naval Ops shenanigans.