RHDK
-
Posts
13 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by RHDK
-
-
Guess the whole US Army vs US Navy have been taken just a tad too far
-
Have played enough missions to know RNG isn't biased, it only seems like that because of many things like when Tech you chose, weather, waves, ship design pitch and roll matters a lot, speed, size, range, gun type and mark... Choosing the biggest gun isn't always the best choice and on and on the list goes.
-
1
-
-
Submarines rarely made into ship on ship naval battles in real life, as they simply was too slow and mostly only saw action pre-battle or after, which is why I suspect they'll be more an afterthought by the devs than being included into ones battlefleets.
-
51 minutes ago, Illya von Einzbern said:
I don't know.
It is just silly to see BCs out classing BBs in various levels. Speed, armor, guns... what is so special in BBs then when BCs can simply match it and do better? Speed boost to give accuracy penalty to enemy ships, higher cruising speed for accuracy penalty and maintaining own accuracy boost. Armor can be equal or more than BB, guns can be equal caliber than super heavy...
I don't know. Perhaps i am just putting too much in to it.
Really dunno i might be too classicist and too dense to bend classes.I do think the game does it pretty good, given there really wasn't an internationally set standard of classification until the naval treaties and even then there are gaps. As to how the game makes good of it, is that battleships got less speed but more resistance and battlecruisers got more speed but less resistance, the rest is up to the player and the building RNG and adding to it tonnage set a limit to what can be done.
I have played lots of "Defend your convoy" so seen many many different RNG configurations of BCs, not once have they felt out of class, is it a speed monster even 4" guns hurt it, is it heavily armoured it turns like a brick and can't avoid the torpedoes and on and on it goes, this pretty much repeats itself in missions with BBs same thing, you trade one thing to get room for another or compromise to get a little of both.
-
R and T, but if you move the object it will reset. Also to get help with placing objects hold CTRL, prevent it from snapping into place.
-
4 hours ago, Illya von Einzbern said:
I do agree with Absolute0CA.
Historical values on guns would be lovely how ever i would like to extend that to also fit ship classifications.
No more CLs with 9" guns. Ship with 20.3cm guns were considered CAs for it's gun caliber.
No more BCs with 16" guns. Other thing i find slightly disturbing is that some BCs have more armor than BBs and greater speed along side with big guns and loads of big guns.....
I thought BCs were high speed lightly armored semi big gun platforms and not BB replacements.
These are some things i have been noticing when playing the naval academy. AI ships are quite random and not really following the proper parameters of said class they try to be.
Honestly the best BC i have seen is the 18" one
I wondered how the kek it penned my 20" belt armors like hot knife thru butter 
. Surprising? yes but man that was just silly 
The whole CL/CA classification based upon their gun size first came about with the naval treaties, before that their classification was based upon how much and how well they was armoured not gun size so the game is both right and wrong, depending upon when it takes place as we roughtly cover 1900-1945 and the reclassification came about midway 1922.
BCs depending upon which year and which navy, some was actually better armoured and/or armed than their BB counterparts, doing WW1and just after the British designed BCs (not build) to field 18" guns and better armoured than BBs at the time, again the naval treaties put an end to those or we would have seen more 18"-20" armed monster upon oceans. And with the whole fast battleship concept, it did just about the same as what Dreadnought did to the classification system but by then CVs had proven themselves.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, RedParadize said:
Restarting the game ? Btw, do I am the only one to have a display bug with the log?
Nope I got the log bug too, but upper right corner keeps track of all the hits you made.
Did a few test runs today with CLs in this mission, got a little bored so tried DDs but could only fit quad torpedo launchers as maximum however unlike the runs I did with CLs each and every time they always fire all 4 torpedoes from each launcher where as the 5 torpedo launchers on the CLs seem to shift between firing few and all, so did it with CLs again but didn't go with the 5 torpedo launchers just the same quad ones DDs get and sure enough not a single issue, 4 torpedoes from each launcher each time.
Normal or aggressive only seems to effect at what range they would fire them at.
-
@SomeNewGuy Thank you and this I would understand if I set the torpedoes to "Safe" (and in parts) to "Normal", however first run with this it was set on "Aggressive" where torpedoes on the front and rear have a nice 300+ degree field view and the two middle ones have about 80 thanks to cant sail without at least 1 main gun and 85 degree to each side, there was more single or dual torpedoes fired few all 5, than on my 2nd run (same build) with it set to "Normal" where it did some single/dual but way more all 5 in one go.
-
Just tried "defend your convoy" using 4 light cruisers each armed with 4 launchers of 5 19" torpedoes each.
Noticed sometimes only a single torpedo would be fired from a 5 tubed launcher and then the full reload cycle began or only 2 was fired, other times it would fire all 5 and think I saw a single time with only 4 fired. However was wondering if all 5 did get fired but all just on top of each other? all with same course, angle and so on?
Both tried with aggressive and normal setting, normal seemed to trigger more of the all 5 fired.
While there does seem to be a tad more flooding, damage still is very poor, potential damage about 5200, best hit did about 106 damage most in the 50 range, the BC at best had 4" armor, minimal bulkheads, cant say 100% to if anti-torpedo bulges and or double/triple hull, since info on enemy ship doesn't show that might be an idea to add that as long we are in alpha so we can report back better, but given the low level of damage it likely did have those. The first 3 hits didn't do much, one did though damaged engine, yet pumps had cleared almost all flooding by the time for the 4th hit, granted 10 game minutes later, first when 6 torpedoes hit at same time, the pumps couldn't keep up and it sank.
-
1 hour ago, Asthaven said:
Did you managed to at least hit enemy once at that distance? Also why would you think that map will have no limits?
Hitting enemies and sinking them at that range or longer on that mission isn't a problem, however invisible walls and/or whatever it is are a problem as it becomes a long drawn out running battle.
-
What also helps is checking the weather, might be as badly -40% to accuracy, then the battle will take forever.
-
Found the answer to be more guns aka more ships and to have max. belt armor, so go with more funds as neither enh. guns/torps or survivability will do much for DDs
Build them small and with as much balance to them as possible, to help keep pitch and roll low and you should be able to get 6-7 DDs.
The design I got them with was, 800t displacement, 25kn, very short range, standard bulkheads, 3-exp steam, Harvey armor, reinf. bulkheads, Anti-flood I, heavy shells, reduced torpedo ammo, guncotton, adv. hydraulics with a 1.5" Belt and turret armor. 4x4" guns (1 front 3 rear) 2 enh. funnels with a single tube torpedo in between them. 0% offset, pitch 9 roll 0.8
Upon start of mission, pause check weather restart mission if few or no bonuses, maybe split DDs in to two groups, select HE and set guns to aggressive, torps to off, speed to 19kn, keep BB alone with all set to aggressive plus HE. Target TBs as soon as it possible, help BB to stay on them too. Switch torpedos back on when you cripple one and it stopped moving.
-
1
-
I wondered how the kek it penned my 20" belt armors like hot knife thru butter 
. Surprising? yes but man that was just silly 
Penetration values for HE shells?
in General Discussions
Posted
Which makes me wonder how many ammo detonations, engine loss or massive floodings you missed out on doing that. While 3500 does sound like a lot the APs 15.000-55.000 ammo detonations are so much more fun.