Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

captinjoehenry

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by captinjoehenry

  1. Lots of good points from everyone One thing I will say is BBs and other big gun ships definitely did carry HE shells. Both for shore bombardment. And for use VS light ships like DDs. This is going off of the battle of samar where if the japanese used their 8" HE shells they would have destroyed the DDs easily but instead they were using AP shells which didn't do anywhere near as much damage. So BBs and other such ships should definitely carry HE as they do have valid uses in naval battles. Strictly vs really light targets when there aren't bigger heavier targets that they need to be sho
  2. HE are contact fused. They should go off more or less as soon as they hit anything. Frankly they shouldn't even penetrate a target considering how they surface detonate. There is technically SAP Semi Armor Piercing which is HE that has some AP power. But even that should easily fuse inside of a DD or any other light target. Frankly HE shells should have 0 chance AT ALL to over pen. With how they detonate on contact.
  3. Christ. I mean I get how you can see a AP shell over penning. After all just look at Taffy 3 where the destroyers shrug off tons of AP shell hits because they don't fuse. But if they were hit by 8" HE shells they would just be deleted. Honestly it's just SUPER annoying that high explosive shells of all things are even capable of over penning considering they explode on contact. After all heavy cruisers should just cast deletus on DDs when using HE shells.
  4. First of all I do agree that the ammo detonations happen rather too frequently espicially from torp hits. Other than that the update seems like a pretty good step in the right direction. The AI still doesn't make well balanced BBs but that hasn't changed since the start really Honestly the main thing I really want is someway to control the designs that I get in custom battles. Heck even just being able to have a fixed enemy fleet I can test multiple designs against would be great. Instead of trying out a new design and then just getting a bunch of weird and rather useless enemies
  5. So I've been messing around with some nice 8 inch secondaries on my super BBs. And I've noticed that when they are fighting DDs and are firing HE they do a rather piddling amount of damage. The reason is the High Explosive shells are overpenning DDs. Which should just be impossible. These are contact fused high explosive shells. They should hit a destroyer and detonate almost immedietly with devestating effect. Which is exactly what happens when the 8 inch super heavy HE shells actually pen a DD and go off properly. They delete the DD as they should. But somehow almost all of them over
  6. Cool that's what I thought. Wanted to double check as I haven't played in a while
  7. Is all or nothing realistic at this point? As in previous versions even using All or Nothing if you got rid of all extended belt and deck armor as you see in real life All or Nothing would mostly just lead to sadness and sinking ships?
  8. Thanks. As some missions are fun. I just don't like the basic low tech ones.
  9. That's how it used to be but now I have these lovely ??? instead https://imgur.com/a/qoHA3F5
  10. Is there a file or something I can change to access all the naval academy missions? As I'm not really interested in redoing them all
  11. Not really? The damage South Dakota took didn't put it in risk of sinking or anything so the ship wasn't in danger of being lost. But both of them explicitly say the ship took enough damage to render it largely unable to fight until damage control could be done correctly.
  12. I totally agree that the AP performance of low caliber guns is out of whack by quite a lot. The HE performance of secondaries in the current patch feels fine though and effective against the targets that they should be effective against. The problem is that low caliber guns have far too much pen. This honestly might also be a problem all the way up to the low end of BB guns but if so it's to a vastly lesser extent
  13. I think those pens are probably on the unarmored super structure? Or other unarmored parts of the ship?
  14. personally I've found that High TNT is probably the best. The hull weight saving is really nice and it gives a bunch of extra shell damage and a bit more pen. But it is really expensive.
  15. Also I think the modern BC have a problem of being flat out impossible especially in the era we are talking about. As the modern BCs can get up to 49 knots on a 51,000 ton warship using 540,000 SHP which is more than any ship that's ever existed. Even the Nimitz class aircraft carrier has less than half that much power at 250,000 SHP
  16. @Nick Thomadis I feel you were a bit excessively harsh on @RAMJB as while he does repeat himself a bit he's stayed rather civil about the whole discussion and provides plenty of sources and other information to back up his point and has largely engaged in civil and productive discussions.
  17. Totally agree with you. I only think this massive amount of flooding is appropriate in the case where a BB HE shell hits an effectively unarmored waterline location. Which would mostly just be on DDs and CLs where they don't have armor. As I can easily see a high caliber HE shell blasting open a massive hole in an unarmored waterline part of a ship leading to mass flooding. But when an area has a good amount of armor the impact really should be slim to no flooding.
  18. On playing some more in the new patch I do definitely feel that BBs are quite a bit too squishy. Especially from non penetrating hits. Also flooding does end up feeling rather excessive for heavy ships from gunfire. As while I can see a BB shell causing massive flooding on light ships like DDs and CLs from HE waterline hits it doesn't really make any sense for heavy ships.
  19. Honestly I don't disagree with you. But at the same time getting the last 5%~ of a ship down in the past took an ungodly amount of time. Which means in the last version ships were super tanky as I feel is more proper but they got FAR too tanky once they were nearly dead making it excessively hard to do that last tiny smidge of damage to actually knock out the ship. As in most of the compartments of the ship last patch were totally destroyed but the ship wouldn't die as your shells would just hit the already dead parts of the ships. So basically I guess what would be more ideal would be
  20. For your first point I'm honestly not sure. I guess the game might more be showing theoretical accuracy instead of actual accuracy? Frankly though I'm not really sure. I know that I like the gameplay where you can actually design ships around long range fire where various real world designs were intended for even if it wasn't actually possible. As for the Bismark and the bounding it took I don't really have any great experience of that. I mainly mess around with end game super BBs with 12 18 inch cannons and an ass ton of armor. And in that case my BBs have no problems what so ever p
  21. I do not have any of those numbers mostly due to not really knowing where to look for them. My opinion more comes from guess work to be frank. But taking 10+ high caliber shells into the citadel and explode in there is going to mess up and destroy all sorts of important combat needed systems which I would think would kill a ship fairly quickly. Sadly I don't have any sources to back this up so I could well be wrong as I'm simply going off of the power of the explosives within high caliber BB shells going off inside of the area of the ship that holds all of the ships most important parts. W
  22. I do agree but personally I think when it comes to 1940 and big BBs slugging it out are about right. Ships might be a bit too squishy but taking a whole bunch of 18inch AP penetrations to the citedal probably should kill a BB rather quickly. And when it comes to super BBs they are still tough but can actually die to BB shells that cannot pen the main belt which I am a bit so so on. On the one hand having a butt load of BB shells hitting any ship should mess it up but failing to punch into the citadel or turrets or even the secondaries does make me think that maybe non penetrating hits are t
  23. This type of performance does sound rather incorrect. I more felt the performance of secondaries are good for 1940s. As at that end of the tech line it feels right. The problem is more at the start of the timeline now. The biggest issue I think is that the impact of rangefinders / gun marks might be too low. As I think gun marks are supposed to bake in new generations of fire control added to in part by the rangefinder / radar you choose. The overall total impact feels correct for 1940s but I think the base stats at tech level 0 are probably too high and the impact of improved fire contr
  24. I cannot speak for the magnitude but the smaller ship should have an easier time hitting a bigger ship than the reverse. As the bigger ship is a far bigger and easier to hit target while the small ship is much harder to hit due to being smaller and usually also due to being much faster.
  25. All I can say is things feel a lot better! Secondaries seem to actually work and be effective against DDs and other ships! Also it's really nice how ships are a bit more fragile. No more enemy ships running away at 10%~ and never dying. It still takes a while but it doesn't feel nearly as hard to pull of now. All in all Great Job! The game feels a TON better with this hot patch
×
×
  • Create New...