RedParadize

I hope they fix the dd first, with late tech they get sniped at 20km

Hi dev I first need to stress that while I am about to critic your work I do enjoy the UA:D allot. I just want to help you improve the game with my modest contribution. I have been testing various built style for the last few days. It highlighted few critical flaw in the mechanics of the game. Mainly, armor, speed hit malus and Target signature/Size mechanics. Armor mechanics already have been covered by myself here and @Evil4Zerggin did a good job at analyzing speed hit malus here. I may come back on these two subject later. One things that fell out of the radar is Target signature/Size. According to my test, Target signature/Size turn out to be a huge factor in the success of my small trimmed down ship versus super battleship. How Target Signature and Target Size currently work: In builder we only see Target Signature and in battle only the Target Size hit chance bonus. I am not 100% certain of how these two relate to each other. My assumption is that Target Size is a combination or multiplication of ship displacement and Target Signature, tool-tip seem to confirm that. There is no way to see the effect of displacement on Target size, so I will leave that aside. At the moment, each part added in builder add a bit of target signature. This do not take in consideration if the part added increase the ship silhouette or not. Here is a example of this, same ship with and without overlapping object (casemate guns, torpedo, sides or tower mounted turrets): These two ship have about the same silhouette, yet one is nearly twice bigger in term of target signature. Proposal: 2D calculated target signature The beauty of this proposal is that it is for the most part already implemented. The Idea is to take the side view of the ship used for in the plan tab, use its alpha to calculate the surface visible. If the picture is perfectly encapsulating the ship and exclude underwater section, then its simple math: (length * Height) * alpha coverage. This would be calculated only once and would be visible both in builder and in battle. Example: Alpha cover 27%ish of the above water area. Ship is 235m long and 47m tall. So (235*47)*0.27= 2982m2. Target size VS Target angle: Ideally, the target size would vary depending on the angle of target. A relatively simple solution would be to also do a "2d target signature" from the front and interpolate between the two value depending of angle. I hope my modest contribution will inspire you in making this game even better than it is. Thank you in advance!

Armor focus was the point of that design. I was just surprised that I had a better hit chance (per gun yes) than them. If it would have been only about that I would have lost. By with heavy armor it works, btw, I won that fight, vs two! My latest challenge is to beat super battleship with the oldest and cheapest built possible. Agains't a decently protected SBB, best I could do is 1920 and is using the all armor meta. Speedy BC can't do it prior to 1925. @Shaftoe Torpedo are usable, it fact it would have been much easier if I had allowd myself to used them.

The 3 middle section are the main belt and deck, the two on each extremity are the extended ones. couple month ago I made a topic about this. Here is a image the illustrate it: There is a error on the right battleship. There is no turret on the rear, so no ammo there. Also, I believe that ammunition depot are now in the middle row instead of the bottom. Anyways, if you want to do a AoN, stick to middle 3 row for turrets. That way ammunition depot will be protected. As shown in the image of my previous post, the front will get utterly annihilated. The rear should be kind of safe if you stay angled.

@Cabusha You inspired me to perform some testing regarding AoN. Thing is I am currently chalanging myself into defeating super BB with the oldest and cheapest ship I can. Looks like you can make AoN work, but only if turrets are on the central section of the ship. It is much more effective if you keep yourself at high angle to the enemy. You will lose the front of the ship and take massive damage, but after that the front is more or less a shell sponge. Armoring the tower do not seem to impact its survivability. It also seem that destroyed tower transfer damage to hull when hit again.

@Hawem I see. It is most likely a translator problem. The way you formulated your two post made it sound like a order. Let me help you: Would it be possible to have 20" guns? It would be great to be able to make the H44.

@Teckelmaster I am not that young either. Anyways, my latest test pushed me to pit undersized ship against super battleship. From there I got the idea of trying to defeat them with the oldest tech possible. So far, as long as they do not have torpedoes, I can do it with 1925 more or less reliably. Its quite fun, you should try.

Yep Note that your turret are on the deck extended portion of the ship. That mean the ammunition depot is right under it and not protected. Even if it would not be the case AON is not a option atm. It is much better to go for a all around armor scheme with no citadel or barbette. Doing so, you can make super thick armor and beat end game super battleship with 1925 tech.

@Hawem This is not how it work.

@Teckelmaster looking for challenges?

Want a hug?

Hahaha! Look at this: The worst tower available and slower speed, yet I have better hit chance. With 45" of belt armor I only have to do what that BB name suggest.

It seem that there is a bug with this new feature. Only one ship of the formation will launch its torpedo.

I would like that allot. AI built ship are... not great. to be polite.

Same Meta, but without Speed: I have been thinking allot about the meta I came up with. The basic concept was to avoid getting hit at all cost, and if hit survive it. One of the core element was speed, but what if I removed it from the equation? So what I did is take all the desired attribute of my previous Meta except speed and torpedo. Why removing torpedo? well if I am gonna be slow it doesn't make sense to expose myself to be torpedoed. I will simply try to stay at range, but can I do that without speed? To figure out I will add a bunch of destroyer into the mix. Setup: 2 BB vs 4 SBB 8 Destroyer The low signature steel brick: Here what I came up with to test this. It basically have all the attribute of my meta but at 25 knots. I chose a Modernized hull because of their comparable size to my previous Meta Design, but also for its decent 90 resilience and best tower setup 50 Base Accuracy and 60 LR Accuracy for a very low weight. Two triple 18" and two triple 7" to fence of the DDs. And as the name suggest, a insane level of armor: I had to restart the match a couple times to get the kind of enemy I desired. Namely a decently armored fast Super Battleship. Note the ridiculously high target size. As a result, I have twice more chance to hit him than it have to hit me (15.8% vs 7.3%). So while its fleet have a total of 16 triple 17" and I just have 4 triple 18", I am not that far behind in term of effective firepower. With armor factored in, I have the advantage. Here is the DD advancing on me just prior to their death. I had no difficulty at avoiding the torpedo as grouped ship do not launch their torpedo simultaneously. In fact I think only two of them launched their torpedo. I won, but not by a big margin. Conclusion: Speed is very important, but maybe not as much as target size. Specially if not the speed malus is not maxed out (37knot). Target signature and ship size play a significant role in hit probability. The part that I retain of my original meta, namely: low signature, no citadel, no torpedo defense and barbette make allot of sense. This allowed me to free up allot of displacement for armor, even more since I did not invest in speed.This meta work too, but its clearly not as fun as fast Battlecruiser. I am now of the opinion that target size/signature and the lack of purpose of citadel and other damage mitigation buff are problem as serious as the speed malus.

@Steeltrap I agree with you. Specially about the communication part. I would also like to point out that it is not only speed (and its to hit malus) that is over the top. Armor and armament easily fall in that category too. In fact, I can make a Battlecruiser or Battleship that is faster, better armed and armored then anything that existed, all at the same time. One of the reason of this is that I do not add torpedo defense, double hull, barbette or citadel. I keep damage mitigation buff to the minimum. The freed up mass is simply reinvested on armor and speed. As I pointed out in my analysis, A single torpedo on 1 of the 3 mid bottom compartment will destroy it along with engine it contain, regardless of citadel or torpedo protection and cannot be repaired. Without engine, the ship will eventually die. This negate all the engine repair and damage chance reduction provided by citadel and else. About ammunition explosion, it require penetration, can't be triggered by fire and wont happen at all if the compartment get destroyed. Simply put, the best barbette provide a -25% explosion chance at the cost of 22,5% gun mass and cost. This can represent thousands of tons. Not being penetrated provide a reduction of 100% and weight less. Citadel is just as bad. These component are massive and expensive, their cost and mass are not worth it. Now, if for some reason I had to add them, then I would not be able to make a ship that is better in all 3 category.

@Steeltrap I agree. Note that the problem is not top speed per see but the malus that come with it. Speed malus is currently too good to be ignored. The fact that it increase non linearly and cap at 37 make it a go too speed. However I think that speed as armor should not be killed off. The best would be a bit more linear increase of the malus.

My meta worked really well on that scenario, the only thing you have to do is to delay with CL as long as you can. If you are lucky, they will have long range torpedo, if they do then use them to turn away the BC. You might even get a hit. Alternatively, if they have armor, keep the distance and try to score some hit on DDs. Once this BC get into play its more GG for them. Just keep a eye on destroyer and their torpedo tube status.

Preface: First of, my goal is not to point out what the game should be or how historically accurate it is. This analysis only objective is determining what are the best way to built, fight and win in Alpha 4v68. I will split my analysis in defense and offense. Some of you may be aware that traditionally there is a third category added to this, namely speed. I will however not include it as its overlap with offense and defense is too great to be treated separately. I will touch cost effectiveness a little bit, but not maintenance cost. The main reason for this is that I feel that economics aspect are not very balanced in current version of the game. (if you do not wish to read the wall of text, here is what it is all about) The concept is to go for high speed, top armor and medium armament. It is possible to do so on a relatively small and inexpensive ship. A ship like I describe in my conclusion and trough the example I provide can easily go against multiple heavy battleship and their escort. Defense: Defense can be separated in 3 category: Hit avoidance, armor and damage mitigation. Hit avoidance: Ship size/target signature is the largest hit chance malus and is static, ranging from -20% for very small destroyer to more than +400% for largest super battleship. The other way to avoid hit is speed, malus range from 10% at 0kt to 90% at 37kt (credit to @Evil4Zerggin). Making speed the second largest hit chance malus. Combined together, small size/target signature and high speed can provide incredible level of protection against gun fire. As for torpedo, hit avoidance is achieved trough high speed and agility. At distance, a slight turn is enough to make torpedo wave miss, specially if going fast. For last second avoidance, Aux. engine and Shaft provide a nice turning bonus. Armor: Armor is the second line of defense. There is two important question: What to armor and how much armor ? It is important to note that turret have their ammunition located under the compartment they sit on, thus can be outside of main belt. Damaged compartment, even above water, affect top speed and its accuracy malus. For these reason it is unwise to opt a "all or nothing" approach. Given how light and cheap armor is, immunity on a wide bracket of range is possible against the largest gun, even on relatively small ship. Therefore there is no reason to not opt for a all around and thick armor. However note that armor do not protect against torpedo. Damage mitigation: Damage mitigation is the last line of defense and can be divided into 5 types: Fire, flood, ammo explosion, engine damage and torpedo defense. Fire and flooding can be reasonably mitigated with "many bulkhead" plus 1st level of Anti-flood and Anti-fire for a minimal cost&weight. Penetrating damage is required damage engine or trigger ammo explosion. Given how massive Citadel and Barbette are, it is better to reinvest this mass into armor. Armor is simply lighter, cheaper and more effective than Barbette or Citadel. As for torpedo defense, at first glance their damage reduction may seem attractive, but in any case a torpedo will destroy the compartment it hit. This is important because if one of the 3 mid bottom compartment is destroyed engine will be lost, regardless of citadel or torpedo protection. At best, Torpedo provide a damage reduction to compartment surrounding the place it hit. But does it matter? A ship that lost engine become a easy target from both torpedo and gun fire, most case scenario it will be lost. For these reasons I am of the opinion that torpedo defense is a extra at best. Specially considering how heavy and expensive it is. Offence: Weapons consist of Main gun, secondary gun and torpedo. Before covering them it is important to mention the effect of roll, pitch and balance have on accuracy. A heavily armed ship, with high pitch and roll, may end up landing less hit than a lightly armed one. There is no point in adding more gun if it impair the ability to hit of the rest of them. Main gun: Alpha 4 improved accuracy of lesser caliber, but bigger is better motto is still true. Mainly, it is a question of penetration. Some may argue that HE can compensate the lack of penetration, I am not of that opinion. When looking at damage done, most of it is from penetrating shots. Penetrating also mean risk of ammo explosion and engine damage. When you get those battle is most likely won already. Going for bigger caliber also allow to do the same amount of damage with a lesser number of turrets, thus reducing target signature, pitch, roll and ship mass. Secondary gun: Secondary is mainly useful against destroyer and lightly armored cruiser. Fire is not much of a treat, therefore secondary have almost no effect on heavy armored ship. Bigger is also better for secondary. A single triple 8" will kill a destroyer faster and further way than two triple 6" or six triple 5". It is unnecessary to have many secondary gun, a few will do, over doing it will just impair accuracy of the main battery. About casemate guns, don't use them! They have terrible effect on roll. Better have the secondary on turrets and close to center. Torpedo: Since Alpha 4, torpedo have become a primary weapon even on capital ship as soon as you can use deck launcher on them (1920). Torpedo bypass armor, ignore aiming penalty and do massive damage and crits. Pound for pound they are better than guns. On the down side, ship with strong torpedo defense can be almost impossible to finish with torpedo alone, so it can't be the only offensive weapon. Strong TDS do not negate torpedo, they will still destroy engines, making ships easy target for main battery. Deck torpedo launcher have to be placed far away from centerline, too much of them and it will have a big impact on roll. Therefore it is better to add just enough of them to be effective. Single launcher reload faster and are proportionally lighter than larger one, but they do not spread torpedo as good. For that reason, at range 5x torp launcher are preferable. Point black, multiple single launcher will do better. Conclusion: Taking it all in consideration, the ideal "meta" ship is as small it can be made to reduce target size, with the most mass effective tower available. To minimize target signature, only two main turrets, preferably of high pen big caliber. One or two secondary turrets of 6" or above, preferably on the rear. As Fast as it can be made, preferably 37kn or above. 2 to 4 deck torpedo launcher per side, preferably 5x. Enough armor to stop shell of the best gun of the era. Some aux engine and shaft, lvl 1 anti-fire and anti-flood. And lastly, no barbette, no torpedo protection, no citadel. So little armament may look scary but remember, if you manage to reduce target size/signature to its minimum and dash at 37kt. You will have a hit chance of potentially more than 10 times what a conventional enemy would have. In other word, a fleet of conventional battleship would need 20 turrets to match your firepower. The only thing you have to care about is to stay in your armor immunity zone, stay far from torpedo armed ship and maneuver frequently. Few example: Excluding the deck torpedo, ship with that focus can be made in all era, even per-dreadnought. But it get far better once you have Battlecruiser hull available. To make it easier, chose hull with good "hull form". Here is some example: 1900: No secondary on that one, simply get rid of destroyer with main battery before engaging enemy. There is not much deck armor, but since accuracy is so low no one can shoot from far anyways. Immunity zone vs 12": 5km to 7km Obsolete as soon as Dreadnought and battlecruiser arrive. 1910, More deck armor, but still no deck torpedo. Immunity zone: 2.5km to 15km Obsolete by +-1925 1925: At this point the concept ca be fully implemented. Immunity zone: 7.5km to 25km Remain competitive until the end of the game.

I like AP. most of the time I leave it on auto as AI does a ok job at selecting type. Its also more fair toward that poor AI.

@arkhangelsk I think you missed my point. First of, Even if there was just 2 or 3 mark version of the 10" because there was multiple model of them. The Mark number was added once selected by the navy. Also, we are talking about the full turret here, not just the gun. And again, this was not from a historical perspective, but purely about gameplay. At the moment, there is little insensitive to chose a 16" Mark 3 over a 15" Mark 4 outside of damage per shell (rpm cover a good portion of the gap). the 16" Mark 3 is heavier and less accurate. So basically everyone take the 15" Mark 4 or go for two inch above or more. Now,, by going up to 10, you can have a more granular increase. Look at what change between 20 and 30, what does it mean for campaign? If gap move every 2 or 3 years people will wait for them. Note that Rule the wave went the other direction. There is some merit to that too. But the down side is who would built a ship with -1 gun? No... 0 yeah, +1 hell yeah. When I was lucky I could keep some very early cruiser active to the end of the game. Big question is how refit will work, but that's a other question.

@Nick Thomadis If I may suggest, having a more granular increase in guns mark would be great. If it as graded from 1 to 10 instead of just 5 it would make each step smaller. This way a 15" mk 4 would not be better than a 16" mk 3

If by that you mean that they have their own icon on the bottom right of battle screen, then it doesn't mean they are treated as secondary. They are just a separated entity, same goes for turrets that have different numbers of guns

If I may ask, are you answering the title question or the possibility of splitting superstructure and tower in two part?

Awww. I was loving my fast battlecruiser. But it was indeed over the top. Lets see what I can do with this patch!