Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

arkhangelsk

Members2
  • Content Count

    315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

144 Excellent

1 Follower

About arkhangelsk

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

349 profile views
  1. 😆😆😆 Do you remember a time when the AI actually did that? IIRC it started cutting and running when it had over half its health bar left, which is not unreasonable because if you aren't making commensurate progress by the time your ship gets to that point honestly you aren't going to win. Further, the mechanic was a great way to increase the difficulty level, for it ensured the player had to be careful with his ship, so it keeps enough of its speed for the pursuit phase (rather than burning its life to the last knowing it's only Naval Academy and their ship only has to last one mission), a
  2. Just 8 more percent to go. This game has a point when the ship will give up the ghost, and it's not 8%, it's 0%. And please don't think changing this is a good idea. When it is YOUR ship and it sinks before the bar hits zero, you will scream. Regarding the ship's unkillability, first, you've covered up the displacement and caliber of biggest gun, but based on its near 700 man crew, four inch armor, I'm going to guess that's at least a light cruiser of over 4000 tons. You've opened up about 80 little holes and threw grenades (the amount of bursting charge in a small caliber shell can be tr
  3. Oh, this part is actually very realistic, at least for the WWI and before era that everyone wants this game to put more emphasis on. Friedman, Norman. Naval Weapons of World War One: Guns, Torpedoes, Mines and ASW Weapons of All Nations (An Illustrated Directory) (p. 17). Pen & Sword Books. Kindle Edition.
  4. I've been refraining because I don't play this game as much as some others, but for what it's worth, so far crew quality is enticing me as much to use it as secondary guns (not at all). Sure, I've maxed out the ship's displacement I'll spend the spare change on it b/c it can't hurt, but if it's between say 5 crappily trained battleship, 4 moderately well trained battleships or 3 well trained ones, so far Naval Academy isn't exactly punishing me for choosing the 5 crappily trained battleships. But then, maybe it won't be an issue in the campaign. Maybe in the campaign there won't even be a
  5. This is not a ship, but a reminder that sometimes the AI can make good decisions: Couldn't decide how to evade the two torps on the left, so clicked AI button On. Then the AI fired another torpedo (one on right) at my destroyer. AI dodged them all beautifully.
  6. In general, I prefer just using my main armament on those things. I have no trouble with the conclusion that I don't actually need secondaries. Maybe the campaign and needing to fight more than one battle with a ship per sortie will change my mind, but right now I just use the weight of the secondary battery on a bit more padding.
  7. Beautiful. Are the penetration values for Iron Plate armor?
  8. Game, I don't think you can ever go wrong if a) You just lock the bulkheads to maximum. b) The fore / aft guns are always at least as big as the side guns. c) This is a Custom Battle. We have infinite money, so start with Quality 100 crews. BTW, I'll believe a 44803HP engine can push a 20000 ton thing at 28 knots when I see it.
  9. This relates to a matter of "law" - whether this game should have National Characteristics (countries having inherent advantages or disadvantages beyond budget, industry level or geography). My thinking is that whether we like it or not, it has been clear for a long time we will be having a degree of "national characteristics", and you don't even have to peer at "Resistance" to see it. Just take a look at that first Chinese battleship (from 1890). Do you notice you can put three main gun turrets on it? Most of the other countries have designs that only allow for two. Of course, those turrets a
  10. I'm a bit half and half on this point, because it's also possible that different designs (and also crew practices ... that has to go into "Resistance") might mean some engine rooms can take more damage before they completely crap out, or some magazines are less likely to blow up (flash fire) than others. We also have to factor in how "modular" damage sometimes doesn't do justice to the way a real ship is interconnected. It may be possible, for example, that the British turret itself is as tough as the German one. But the electrical systems are not and when that goes down the turret will b
  11. The first step to being nicer is to assume less than the worst of your opponent. Yes, darn it, I have that book. In fact I have the paper version, too. Also, what do you think I was referring to when I said: Doesn't that imply I'm aware of the less than safe crew practices aboard British battlecruisers? Doesn't that imply I might just be aware of the mitigating factors that can be put up? And while Wikipedia might not be the most glamorous source in the world, I'd like to point out I replied to a post that had no cited sources of any kind. I will also point out t
  12. Doug, I applaud you for the effort in typing up so much text (I have NOT been able to find an Ebook version of On Seas Contested). However, none of what you quoted refutes the possibility of a good hearing system which is the debate at hand. All your text says is that they don't have very good active sonars or "fire control systems" or trained operators to use them. Your own text concedes that Hood was "tracked" well over the horizon, and I don't know how you can "track" something without bearing information. Hydrophone or passive listening gear still formed the backbone of underwater loc
  13. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00SS5XGCS/ref=wl_mb_wl_huc_mrai_3_dp https://www.amazon.com/Battleship-Bismarck-Design-Operational-History-ebook/dp/B07WWP9V8K/ref=sr_1_11?dchild=1&keywords=Prinz+Eugen&qid=1633405017&s=digital-text&sr=1-11 https://www.amazon.com/Heavy-Cruisers-Admiral-Hipper-Class-ebook/dp/B00SGC4YGA/ref=sr_1_14?dchild=1&keywords=Prinz+Eugen&qid=1633405017&s=digital-text&sr=1-14 That reminds me. I've been giving you free credit so far, but I still don't know the number of that stupid U-boat who said he can't hear jack, exactly what the
  14. You, sir, are not thinking it through. For your first point, again you are ignoring the sheer scarcity of heavy ships and the abundance of U-boats in the German navy. Suppose I have 10 ships, 990 U-boats and 1000 sonarmen to put on them. If I put my best ten sonarmen on the ten ships, then the U-boats start with #11. The average of all the U-boat sonarmen will be (11+1000)/2=505.5. Meanwhile, I've significantly improved the survivability of my ten surface ships. If I put my ten best sonarmen on the U-boat and deliberately give the ten worst sonarmen to the surface ship because the U-
  15. The German Navy in World War One was the second biggest navy. Its shipbuilding industry no doubt is not as strong as the British, but to say it is "without a strong shipbuilding industry" is a bit much, and since Versailles doesn't happen in UAD, the "25 years out of date" doesn't apply. As for the "ships they did manage to build". Today, we are mostly looking at Resistance, the abstraction of everything that makes a ship tougher, which may even extend beyond structural points to include crew practices. Let me remind you of the "quality" produce in this regard from a nation that I assume
×
×
  • Create New...