Microscop

He is against designs that could exist on paper but were physicly impossible in reality you genius. But thats not even his main point, he is against focusing on paper super battleships when core mechanics clearly don't represent reality properly which is especially visible on more historical designs that don't work as intended.

Oi cmon now, don't be a cunt

Thats racist, i am 1/2 aussie

You are just a shill cunt m8

This combines main and 2ndary armament. Those 5 american inch guns could pump out alot of shells. Iowa could reload in 30 seconds and Yamato 35 at combat range, also japanese shells had twice the bursting charge aside from pure weight.

heavy cruiser is just rebranded light cruiser pretty much, like Pensacola etc.

Treaties limited what and how much could be built and money was a bigger issue so there was not much room to experiment and play around.

Aside from obvious being able to pick your engagements what speed is protection meant to Fischer was that a fast battlecruiser can make small course changes to confuse enemy gunnery, the faster the ship is the bigger the effect will be. This has smaller effect on your own gunnery because you are aware of your own course changes more precisly than the enemy is. Also british at that time had superior fire control so this give them aditional adventage while doing that. Also hhee tough guy Goben "I wil destroy the russian black sea fleet" but in reality i will get spanked and ran away from pre drednoughts.

Resistance is an absurdly stupid concept. It shouldn't be a single value but depend on your ship design aka subdivisions, number of bulkheads, redundancy of some systems, damage control technology and crew training. As for reality the resistance of british and german ships dogger bank and jutland ilustrates it perfectly. British removed safety measures and germans added them after Dogger bank when Seydlitz barely avoided exploding. Lion took a beating but had only 1 dead and was not in danger of sinking.

Bismarck and Hood opened fire at fa 24kmr range but british were closing in rapidly. Duke of York could open fire at far longer range but a choice was made to hold fire untill they got closer. In the last action Bismarck was spotted at 23km. British had percieved adventage in all of those 3 engaements so they closed in to descisive range rapidly.

You need battleships to prevent enemy invasions, british tend to send qutie hefty bb squadrons and force invasion battles on you. Especially important when defending a possesion with oil for example or if you want to use that possesion for invasions later. Germans bearly had any colonies worth defending nor could they spare ships todo so but british for example had Force Z in ww2 and spanish (in 1890s) and dutch fleet were meant mainly for defending colonies. Also 3 super bb vs 9 ai bb sounds like a strangely small fleet action, british fleet is much larger than that, about 30-40 capital ships. But i agree that it's too easy to wittle down enemy fleet in smaller engagements using better designed and more powerfull ships than ai uses. And to be honest you could easily build 5 still very decent battleships for the cost of 3 super bb and also win without a problem vs 9 ships. Still overall i agree that ai should get more bb templates and pose a bigger chalange in the late game and should be reponsding more to what player does.

In RTW2 AI uses templates but has a degree of freedom to utilize the technology they have at the moment. If they have smaller guns researched they will use free tonnage to uparmor the ship or make it go faster etc. So in the end all ai ships make sense. Superbattleships are generaly dumb for both player and AI to build unless you are playing easy mode max fund game as USA or something like that. You need ships to defend your home waters (often mroe than 1 zone) and valuable colonies, ships get damaged and take months to repair or they get sunk by subs or mines. This basicly means neither you nor ai can affoard to build super battleships and have enough of them to both defend your colonies and form a proper battleline to combat enemy fleet. Also Guns above 16 inch have very diminishing returns, 17 inch is quite nice but above that it's really pointless. Also for the cost of 3x 12 gun ship you can build 4x 8 gun ship so there are alot of economical considerations, you get 2 guns less but whole 1 more ship.

Sad truth is that WOWS playerbase is the no.1 target audience of most naval related things nowdayes including this game. Nothing has ever done as much harm to naval community as wows.

Yes really worked like that in ww2... where Glorious was sunk at over 20km, Hood and Bismarck duked it out at long range and Scharnhorst was also hit at long range.

Bit stupid question, or rather poorly formulated. Depends what year is it, how fast and armored it is and what role is it supposed to fill. Also considering that by defult there are no naval treaties heavy cruiser pretty much doesn't exist in this context.

Yeah just go on calling yourself a nazi, imagine getting mad about it.

Wehrmacht was genocidal organisation conduction ethnic cleansing and you call yourself wehraboo? You think wehrmacht was clean? You shoud learn some history and check on what was their official wartime policy and practice.

Talking about armor the game is also missing stuff like ammo boxes which were common on treaty cruisers

AoN had bigger citadel because it was supposed to have enough bouyancy to keep the ship afloat on its own, aside from that it protected more of the important systems of the ship aside from machinery spaces and magazines that would otherwise be outside of the citadel space. Overall it was still lighter than distributed armor scheme and provided betetr protection to important systems of the ship. Turtleback means deck has slopes it's not oposite AoN as AoN can have deck slopes. What AoN is oposite to is distributed armor scheme.

All or nothing has bigger citadel so maby thats why

3d is fine but i agree that for a team studio it makes ship design and ship models harder and more time consuming to implement. What i meant is that the combat engine can run on 2d logic and be more abstract, we don't need fully simulated 3d world. 3d can be just a visual overlay, thats what i meant. As for wows it has warped the idea of naval combat for a huge ammount of people which are the potential playerbase for this game. Things like bow tanking, unlimited torpedoes, unrealistic smoke we have now are very wows like and whats worse it might be what majority of people want. You can look at the forum and find out that people are more excited to get 20 inch guns so they can build a snap togeather kit of their ship from wows than to have serious problems that weren't touched or adressed since alpha fixed.

Thats the problem UA:D seems to me to repeat the mistake of total war of adding complexity where it's counterproductive to the game. Naval warfare is mostly 2d and so should be the combat engine with 3d beeing just an overlay. If simulated shells have the same end result as simpler algorithms than what is the point? Total war is terrible in similiar manner where unit isn't a single entity but is made of of individual soldiers which creates more problems than it has benefits. Ship designer on the other hand seems to be flawed from the inception too, the snap togeather aproach sucks and whats funny the ships usually look like ass, especially the ai ones. It limits the creativity and missed key aspects of ship design while having no real beneftis. It's really not hard to make streachable hulls and variable machinery space and citadel size. Hull is not really a complex shape and dynamicly calculating the space which can be used for machinery and barbettes thus creating the citadel is something someone after weekend coding camp could do. It looks to me like amibition of the game is not to do something new or better but just to copy the idea of rule the waves and dumb it down for wows players and people who care about graphics more than gameplay.

So far Ai (both firendly and enemy) is terrible, can't form a battleline, blobs into some fuzzball, charges ahead or runs away Ship designer is limited with some of the most crucial thigns like citadel size/machinery and gun placement is non existant Core combat is strange, feels way too much like world of warships with some extreme overcorrections each update that fix 1 issue by creaitng another one Campaign so far nothing was shown but i expect rule the waves rip off at least since it's hard to mess up copying something good it should be good too. I hope for some improvements over RTW like battlegroup creation and doctrine settings, this might be one of my biggest draws for the game provided that everything else is passable.