Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

madham82

Members2
  • Content Count

    464
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

madham82 last won the day on May 24

madham82 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

476 Excellent

About madham82

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I find it laughable how many late game hulls have been added vs. early/mid game hulls for a game that is launching a campaign next. Who disrupted GameLabs in prioritizing those? I don't mind the stuff that has been added. I mind that it was put in before the early stuff which people will spend most of the campaign not having all the hulls that have been added over the past year. How many dreadnaught and pre-dreadnaught era hulls do we have again?
  2. While you have a point on "seeing" torpedo bubbles, that was exactly why the Long Lance didn't leave any. So if the Japanese launched 164 of these wonders, but only achieved 3 hits then seeing really isn't the factor (not to get into weather factors). This goes back to how you get a firing solution. It is the same techniques used for guns. The spread is not that dissimilar to dispersion which gun crews trained to be aware of. Both are trying to "bracket" the expected target's position when the ordnance arrives. As for dodging, ships could and did dodge shell fire. Take a read of the acco
  3. Definitely agree the game is poorly optimized. It would push my GPU (on medium settings) to 70C+ when Elite Dangerous running on ultra settings would barely get into the 60s. Locking framerate definitely helps.
  4. I'd suggest watching Drach's video on the Tillman designs. The US did not "think" they could build them, especially in 1917. Ultimately it was an exercise in futility because putting designs on paper exposed how far from reality they were in cost, infrastructure, and technical ability to build any of the designs.
  5. It is a good point, but there is also a WW2 example that shows that in practice, ship launched torpedoes still were not that effective in mass attacks. "The Battle of the Java Sea One USN CA and four DDs, one RN CA and three DDs, one RAN CL, and two RNN CLs and two DDs attempted to attack the IJN invasion convoy headed for Java. Two IJN CAs, two CLs, and 14 DDs fended off the ABDA ships and inflicted serious losses on the opposing force but failed to destroy it completely. During the action the IJN ships executed 38 separate launches of a probable 164 Type 93 torpedoes, scoring 3 hi
  6. Some kind of morale mechanic would be needed to make it happen. Could be tied in with how much armor the ship in question had to determine the affect on morale from being under fire.
  7. Think it goes back to a point I have made many times since getting the game. Control of the sea (i.e. the battle map) should be the only thing that counts as a victory (in campaign). That would leave your nation's intelligence service as the only way to know if something badly damaged made it back to port unless intercepted again. In custom/missions, it should be control of the sea first, then use a points calculation based on damage dealt/received and a bonus for ships sunk outright. Lots of ways to make this part work.
  8. Couple this with victory conditions all currently revolving around sinking ships with no options of retreat, and you have most of the reasons why the game is struggling to adhere to realism or make it fun. We obviously have to balance the two somehow.
  9. I'm probably reading this wrong, but they were aware they could never armor the deck enough to solve plunging fire. The reality though was being able to hit at those ranges was beyond remote (look at the ranges Warspite and Scharnhorst made their longest hits). So tactics dictated closing to "acceptable" range (to improve accuracy for one), and then the shot fall was within the ability to armor against. But your screen shot definitely looks funny. Lower than 45 degrees would be the ranges 8" deck armor would be adequate, and vertical armor pen would be higher. We used that same 16" grap
  10. Are you saying this is in the game currently? I have seen no evidence that protection is reduced by subsequent hits. Quite the opposite, TDS offers a flat reduction based on level selected (and probably other values). I've dumped over a hundred 24" torpedoes into a 100K+ super and watched 100 damage register as near simultaneous hits occurred. IRL, even the best TDS systems greatly lose effectiveness from multiple strikes to the same side.
  11. Well said, and something I would be fine with if implemented as such for a "historical" campaign option. But at the same time I think there should be an option to disable/pick nation traits and/or randomize them. That would give more replay value. They could also introduce techs that could apply the same perks to new construction (or just more hulls unlock after). Then any nation could build such ships, if they spent the research/resources on it.
  12. Food for thought, I don't think I heard of this before: Torpedowarn (TAG) Designed as an early warning system for incoming torpedoes, the TAG was installed on the Type XXI and intended for future generation U-boats. It was connected to a loudspeaker inside the pressure hull which would give audible warnings on an approaching torpedo. It functioned by listening in to certain pre-programmed sounds, which would trigger the alert status. http://www.uboataces.com/hydrophones.shtml Now if they could make an automated system in '44/'45, you bet an at least competent sonar operator
  13. Cherry picking ships that exploded due to poor safety procedures doesn't back up your point. Neither does mentioning Hood which by the evidence was a 1 in a million hit. PoW retreated b/c of her malfunctioning turrets had made her useless (she continued to shadow). She would also be sunk by 4 torpedoes the next year, mainly due to one hit being in the worst possible spot. But how about Scharnhorst being put out action by a single mine, then spending a year in dry dock? But this is besides the point. The Germans did build exceptional ships. Anyone who reads logs of the final engageme
  14. Was pretty sure observation is the foundation of science. The Germans on two separate ships (probably more if we dig through more records) and the US Navy both validated it's ability to detect torpedoes. Scharnhorst was not in calm perfect seas, it was in the North Sea during winter. Not at all ideal weather/seas. I believe I also heard Yamato had passive sonar for this purpose as well. Originally the game did not feature sonar on BBs/BCs until people posted evidence. But you are free to disagree. I'm not going to argue the effectiveness/testing done on the units.
  15. My bad, my sarcasm was lost. Wasn't arguing about it existing in game, was just being sarcastic that it was in the game to start with. In general hit rates are much higher than IRL already, so no surprise there are issues with balance.
×
×
  • Create New...