skg02

Fair points. Would agree that the current pathfinding would have to be fixed before implementing collisions between friendly ships.

Evasive maneuvers - so does this mean that hits now are not precalculated as I think Steeltrap indicated elsewhere and chasing the splash is now possible? Now it works like this: system calculates an aim point based on target behavior at point of system targeting, short delay to when guns actually fire, probability model determines where shells actually land with respect to the targeting aim point, a hit occurs if where the shells actually land coincide with where the target ship actually is where/when shells land? Ramming - can imagine there's a code reason why friendly ships can't damage each other by collison now - but friendly ships should damage each other if they collide at some point - especially for campaign. Historically this happened a good deal especially during evasive maneuvers, Mikuma/Mogami for example, and really affect ship speed - bad news in a battle. For the campaign - this could mean losing a key ships availability right when its needed. Operational Range - have been designing mine with medium-long range anyway to train for campaign, can live with this, but how hard to just allow medium and up? Torpedoes - to the extensive discussion above - how does the system determine if a hull is penetrated by torpedo?

Agreed. Noticed that too trying to build a Takao.

Two good complimentary sources on Ordnance and Fire Control: Naval Ordnance and Gunnery: Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era:

Exactly. Other side benefit would this framework might be best for allowing allied fleets - Java Sea, if at least by ship, if not by flag. Be possible to fight an Iowa verses an Iowa too.

Really like this feature, used in replaying Brit campaign to bring Richmond in to fire into village to good effect. Would wonder how well pulling a ship to unground it work. Wind direction would of course be key, but enough? Are the devs ready to give us tides? 😎.

Would suggest position, not barrels is the key. Have to xperiment.

Steam version though can be played offline though, correct?

Great news and thanks for all the work so far with so few resources. Haven't had this much fun with ships since Fighting Steel. Some critical questions to custom battle options, in the category, how many alphas to/how hard to accomplish: 1. Saving custom battle designs, for future pull up. 2. Designing more than one ship on your side, same thing for other sides. . . . So we can actually fight Hood verses Bismarck. 3. Picking intial conditions - including night, and positions, not just distance for battle start.

Assuming you had the non steam early version and we're playing it, did the steam one install over the other one, or separately?

Thanks. Did a trial myself and bayonet gets you more bayonet rifles than were available before, but its limited. The Marine units didn't seem like anything special, but I didn't play much with their rifles either - decided to get bayonet, but not Marines too.

Like the latest tech tree. Question is what is effect for researching Marines, Spike bayonet? Does this mean ie you auto get bayonet or more of them muskets in your shop to arm troops? Can Marines be part of maxing out your non troopship crews, or otherwise what are Marines capabilities in game terms? Want to know to make choices for Snakes & Powder mission as I replay Brit campaign.

Posted in thread above, the secondary behavior can be made use of as a feature. Going try and win the Hood mission with two twin 16s up front, small enough sec tower to use the step as barbette, then 3x2 9s, and a very aft twin 16. Makes for close balanced ship. Counting on targeting 9s on CA and 16s on BB, even though all guns are c.l.mains. In this way you can get super Renown and a super CA on one hull. Pretty sure if you mix 2 barrel # on one MG size, the lower barrel # turrets, will fire with the secondaries also when you have actual secondaries. Until we get multiple ship targeting by director, I'll take and like this.

Have seen the Olympia long time ago. Thinking about taking penetrating hit, it seemed fragile. Wonder how many of the other 7 US BBs saved are regarding their hull conditions.

Looked again at Ise and was wrong, Just two towers. Director aft/fore, each side, sides for secondaries. Interesting to see where 14 in. turret rangefinders are, Super-firing fore/aft turrets have them, but both mid-ship have them. Would guess that fore/aft 2 turrets work together as a set, and mid turrets can support together or separately. Most importantly shoot to opposite broadsides.

That would follow.

I Scouting Group: Looks like the twins will bundle with secondaries if you have them too. Just built a BC with AB triple 16s then aft 3 twin 9in mains, and aftmost triple 16, will see if 9s fire as secondaries. Way it should work is you'd have fore/aft, and two side directors, or something like. To your point Drach covered the point about turrets on the Ise class - Japanese went 6 turrets to fight outnumbered, engage more targets. Seems like here that might mean two secondary towers for 3 main directors, and then the barbette's to support as requested already on this board.

Have seen some discussion below about side mains acting like secondaries, but just discovered something with an all big gun ship - something like the former, but more of "its not a bug, but a feature". Playing and losing, again after many times, the Hood "Prove Your Might" tried a 10 gun Nevada configuration. The triples could target and fire as main guns and the twins could target and fire as the secondaries. Didn't see what would happen if I used real secondaries yet. In this case though was able to fight against the CA and the BB at the same time. Coming alphas like to see targeting and firing by director, make directors a separate buy, and the towers have mount points like guns do now, better/more advanced towers more director mounts - and they rotate as suggested elsewhere as they target.

4x2 18s with SH-Tube Powder seem to do the trick. Seems like game rewards pen.s with ammo sets more now. Same with US super BB, that one complete in under 40 min at 34-36 km, not a scratch to me, 3 ammo det sinkings, 2 within 5 minutes, those sank right next to each other. Can't win the Hood mission yet though, tried a lot of things, Germans over buffed seems like. Correction: close copy h41 incr. tech. 4x2 17s, istr 18s lower mark.

The Great War at Sea: A Naval Atlas, 1914–1919, Naval Institute Press: War at Sea: A Naval Atlas, 1939–1945, Naval Institute Press:

HMS Repulse, Burrard Inlet, Vancouver, BC, Late June-Early July 1924, as part of the Special Service Squadron Empire Cruise:

Most probably the last word in book form on Japanese Cruisers. Lot of other ship design, ordnance, propulsion information too. This was published before Kaigun, but incorporated material that went into it.

In the early naval academy I used Ballistite, but then found White Powder really effective when it became available. I went along with the Hi TNT always notion, until I noticed the extra pen 5% verse 1.5% with TNT - which is cheaper and has less ammo detonation chance. Its only red side is slightly more chance of fire. Doesn't hit as hard as High TNT, but almost as good for damage in general 8% verses High TNT 12%. For HE damage/fires TNT only gets +10% verses High TNT's +25%, but still TNT for me comes in overall as a better choice. With the other Damage Control features the small extra fire chance doesn't matter, and with super heavy shells the TNT damage is still massive. Understand all the appeal of Lyddite, but ammo detonation risk seems to big a price to pay.

RedParadize: Thanks for your work here, would be helpful if developers could confirm your first pic is what's happening now in Alpha 3 patch of game. Summarized, with questions for devs. Belt is side armor on the hull where citadel is. Extended Belt is side armor on the hull elsewhere from where the citadel is. Deck Armor is deck armor where the citadel is, corresponds to where Belt is. Extended Deck is deck armor where the citadel isn't, corresponds to where Extended Belt. Conning Tower - is that armor for the whole of Main and Secondary towers? Turret armor - is that all around the sides of the turrets? I second the motions for accurate definition of bulkhead and barbette armors. Also, reading today Sumerall's Naval Institute Press "Iowa Class Battleships" and see the belt is discussed in terms of upper and lower belt which seemed from the reading more where a change in thickness occurred rather than lengthwise along the ship at least for that class of ships.

I have the Commodore version of Age of Sail and Limited Edition of Dreadnaughts. I think my anti-virus doesn't recognize the handshakes the way it recognizes and has no problems with playing on Steam. Its activity it seems, not real viruses. Again just need to know specific websites to exclude.