Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

G777GUN

Members
  • Content Count

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

26 Excellent

About G777GUN

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman
  • Birthday 07/27/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    SCOTLAND
  • Interests
    Models. Lots and lots of models. Experimenting new ideas. 3D printing. Being clever. :)

Recent Profile Visitors

65 profile views
  1. 30 degrees is acceptable. Its just enough to let ships past. Problem is the way the game works right now is it would be easier just to make the ships detach from the line. I completely agree that the ships should not detach from the line but right now its the short term solution because easier for the game developers to do. An auto detach feature when ships are too damaged. Right now how the ships work is pretty standard movements. In the future they will most likely make ship movements more complex. However making a ship a ship wait while the line goes foward and wait to get to the rear of the line to follow the very last ship might be a stretch for now. Depends if the DEVs can do it.
  2. When a ship get its speed reduced the last thing I want is for that ship to block the rest of the line, which happens ingame quite a lot because its turns a full 180 in an attempt to sail to t the back of the line. When using a line of pre-dreadnoughts the ships are already slow and they are more of a pain when this happens. Took a bit of time but here be images: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iz_AUbpGz8Z5kXq5KYNaTZoqveQky6g7 Here is my suggstion to the DEVs. Instead of making the ships attempt to go to the rear of the line just make it so the damaged ship just detaches from the line. For now. The player can then decide what to do with the damaged ship.
  3. Okay. I get why they made the ships turn round ingame, mainly because they slow down the fleet but shouldnt they just make the okay ships overtake the damaged ship? Makes sense. Especially in different weather conditions where maintaining a ideal speed is near impossible. I think a lot of navies as like that. Hmmmm. Can I ask... Since you are basically the shield for the aircraft carrier what where to happen if your ship took too much damage or had an engine failure. Like lets say an actual conflict, what would be the course of action. Abandon ship and sink it (if not already sinking). Or if anything happened to the carrier... would you just do the same thing and abandon the carrier, take on whatever survivors and sink it. If ofcourse you cant get the ships back? Or fight until the very last bullet is used?
  4. Now with saying that /\ it looks the DEVs will have to sort out what shell types and how many they will aloow a player to carry in their ships.
  5. Unfortunatly there isnt much cited showing HE to be effective in history. I think HE was mainly used just used against weak targets or to mess up ships. at close range. But mind though its HE it doesnt mean that it wont be able to blast through armour (or even belt armour depeding on a few bits of data, what it made of, how thick is the belt and how much can the HE can blast through. Think of the KV-2 (the russian derp tank), that thing killed Tigers in History using basically HE power. But most of the time in history everyone was just using AP since it was destructive enough even against lightly armoured or no armour targets. Because fragments, breaking stuff, killing people and causing flooding Come to think of it this entire segment gives you an idea of just effective HE was: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_15-42_mk1.php "Outfits for all battleships and Renown were originally limited to APC. The Renown class later carried 60 APC and 60 CPC, then 72 APC, 24 CPC and 24 HE and at the end of the war carried carried 84 APC and 36 CPC per gun. The Courageous class were originally designed for 80 rounds per gun but this was increased to 120 rounds following the Falklands battle, where ammunition expenditure was very heavy. The Courageous class initially carried 72 APC, 24 CPC and 24 HE but all HE was replaced by mid-1917 and the immediate post-war outfit was 36 APC and 84 CPC per gun. The Royal Sovereign class may have carried 104 rounds per gun as commissioned. In the 1920s, 6 shrapnel rounds per gun were added to most battleships while the outfit for Renown was changed to 96 APC, 24 CPC and 6 shrapnel rounds per gun plus a total of 70 practice rounds. As completed, Hood had an outfit of 289 CPC, 672 APC, 30 shrapnel (stored only in the bow shell rooms) and 82 practice rounds. After her 1929-1931 refit, she carried 160 CPC (TNT burster), 640 APC (Shellite burster), 48 shrapnel and 96 practice rounds. The three follow-on "Admiral" class battlecruisers would have had their outfits reduced to 110 rounds per gun for "A" and "B" turrets and to 100 rounds for "X" and "Y" turrets due to changes in arrangement of the magazines and shell rooms - see the Mount / Turret Notes below for additional information. In the latter years of World War II, surviving ships replaced five APC rounds per gun with HE unless they were assigned to bombardment missions, in which case the proportion of HE was greatly increased. Outfits for monitors during World War I was 10 CPC and 90 HE per gun while during World War II it was 30 to 60 APC or CPC and the balance HE. Monitors usually carried 8 practice shells per gun. HMS Vanguard when commissioned carried 95 APC, 5 HE and 9 practice shells per gun." In short HE does not look effective if they didnt bother carrying much of it. It had reasons to be on a ship but not much use out of it.
  6. I just spam torpedoes on some missions. Lately I am just testing different design ideas for when Campaighn comes out. My brother wants me to get him the game but will wait till they develop the game a bit further. I feel somewhat envious though. If my predictions are right. Each country will be able to develop tech from history and even the ones that were on the drawing board. Yikes.
  7. Ah. Well I hope in future you can change the weapons for the year they were created and per country. I mean I dont normally go by the games standards as I said earlier it will just be basic data until (in short) the game improves. In game you have some very unrealistic guns like triple 15 inch guns in a British style round turret. Or Yamato style triple 17 inch turret that can be fitted to a HMS deadnaught hull in Destroy a full fleet mission. Even if the gun is a tad bit smaller I dont think this will fit on HMS dreadnaught. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_12-45_mk10.php http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_18-40_mk1.php I wouldnt mind the British single 18 inch gun in game. Despite its drawbacks. Designed in 1915 with development most likely from the from guns of the time period. I bet this gun does far better than any other gun for the time. TO ALL PLAYERS THE GAME IS STILL IN DEVELOPMENT
  8. Great photos of battledamage. Amzing how accurate the japanese were. You can see in one photo that there is a ship that lost both its gun barrels on one of its turrets.
  9. Right. I have went through all the missions again on FANTASTIC setting. No problems encountered.
  10. USE TORPEDEZEZEZ PEOPLE. Force them to sink for now. I always fir torpedoes to ALL my ships. Even if they are just 15 inch they will still cause flooding.
  11. Good idea. I ran over my crew. By accident. Poor souls Short story: Somehow the enemy AI ship decided that DESPITE burning and half sunk could have impecable accuracy despite my guns still having problems hitting the bloomin target at 500 meters. I pulled up alongside... fired torpedoes... waiting for the impact... BOOM.... Detonates my rear magazine and ship sinks. Then the Battleship behind the that blew up went over the lifeboats at 40mph+ and some of those boats dissapeared into the hull and were never seen again. It was the mission where you must chase down two enemy battleships. Wouldnt mind if they put in exploding lifeboats animation in the game. Heck why not crew morale aswell.
  12. Well it was just what they had for the time period. Everything was well... crappy. Plenty new ideas still being integrated and such for the time period. Heck even the link for that big gun it, says it was "too ambitious". Heck that gun was only tech development. About the armour. Still Iron was better than nothing if thats your only choice. Still Iron can deflect incoming shells if the angle is just right but against a gun head on at point blank. Oh crap.
  13. It depends if the folks that made the game have went through this yet. I dont think they have. The guns are pretty much just basic data (if you can call them that :p) the same as the armours, for the moment until different nation guns are implemented.So far Iron Armour is just there to be armour to deflect the standard AP projectiles. One could argue that its the projectiles that also should be looked into and changable, again thats a future thing. But for now got to help them make just basic combat more realistic. If you put that gun in the game, that monster 16.25 inch cannon. It would most likely miss despite being so powerful (which they even say in your link). And even if it did hit it might bounce off. Thus making Iron armour not a bad idea for the time period. Bet that gun would cause some very serious flooding if it did hit.
  14. I can just hear the echoes of dead captains from WW2 and WW1 calling BS to just how much damage that ship has and its STILL sailing about. However have you tried using AP. Even so.... Okay here is an idea. CO2 poisoning. Lets be honest there is no way those people in that ship are still able to breathe. Damage control is gone. Wounded are everywhere. There is no working vents or structure for that matter. The crew is pretty much wiped out above deck. Heck the funnels are destroyed. The ship is basically dead. BUT I bet that ship can still hit you a few times even with its casemate guns which are saying LOCKED. There is no more command structure also, its gone. This ship would be blind and manuevering would be impossible. Btw that thing would be killing the crew at full power.
  15. I think its the Gangut. Or suppose to be. Never heard of the Izmail. Will look it up later. The turret design is actually not a bad idea. Just means your ship can be shorter and better armour protected around the vitals. One big downside is you cant mount any deck decondary guns. So in WW2 it might be a problem. Because planes. Another thing is that the game does not take into consideration top weight. This russian ship would be far more stable than others. Not to mention that angling is something this shiip could do well while engaging or retreating. Stay at 45 degrees of your target and that armour give an effective thickness of 300mm's or more.
×
×
  • Create New...