Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Upcoming patch Alpha-2 v62


Recommended Posts

Its not a question of main vs secondary. Its a question of accuracy at +5000m range for all gun under 14inch. That's most of light and heavy cruiser but also battleship. Lets not forget that in real life big guns are not necessarily more accurate: American 16"/50 gun had greater accuracy than Japanese 46cm/45(18"). Scharnhorst sunk the Glorious at 24,000m with its 28cm(11") gun.

Secondary should not get buffed. The difference between caliber accuracy should be lessened at equal Mark. The Mark rank should be the thing that differentiate between old pre-dreadnought 12" and modern one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Admirals, We deeply thank you for all the support and feedback you are providing. We would like to inform you about our work for the next patch, which is scheduled to arrive next week. Firs

I used a huge cluster of triple 5 inch guns in the 'modern battleship' mission, and they killed absolutely zero destroyers, in fact the huge clumsy 18 inchers did a much better job at it.

Sorry but why is there a nerf for small guns? We want realistic rates of fire for both big and small guns, not a "rebalance", we don't want unrealistic balances in this game, I don't understand the ne

Posted Images

52 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

Its not a question of main vs secondary. Its a question of accuracy at +5000m range for all gun under 14inch. That's most of light and heavy cruiser but also battleship. Lets not forget that in real life big guns are not necessarily more accurate: American 16"/50 gun had greater accuracy than Japanese 46cm/45(18"). Scharnhorst sunk the Glorious at 24,000m with its 28cm(11") gun.

Secondary should not get buffed. The difference between caliber accuracy should be lessened at equal Mark. The Mark rank should be the thing that differentiate between old pre-dreadnought 12" and modern one.

Whats the point of secondaries then if my main guns can do everything?

Might as well remove them altogether.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

I just do not want the low caliber main being outclassed by the top secondary. 

They won’t, just by the nature of how caliber works. It gets exponentially more powerful with size.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedParadize said:

Its not a question of main vs secondary. Its a question of accuracy at +5000m range for all gun under 14inch. That's most of light and heavy cruiser but also battleship. Lets not forget that in real life big guns are not necessarily more accurate: American 16"/50 gun had greater accuracy than Japanese 46cm/45(18"). Scharnhorst sunk the Glorious at 24,000m with its 28cm(11") gun.

Secondary should not get buffed. The difference between caliber accuracy should be lessened at equal Mark. The Mark rank should be the thing that differentiate between old pre-dreadnought 12" and modern one.

But if secondaries stay useless then the game would become a big gun game only with little combat tactical needs. It also means NO versatility in designs, very ship will just have mains guns and nothing else.

Giving batteries of secondaries short to medium range firepower equivalent than of main guns will ensure versatility with ship design. And so forth versatility in tactical combat.

 

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

There is no qualitative distinction between main and secondary, only the purpose is different. Note that CL can have caliber under 8" as their main. Are they gonna be buffed too?

 

Well there literally is. Main armaments are the biggest guns on the ship designed for engaging similar sized in fleet combat and are the primary weapons and most important weapons of a ship.

Secondarys are litteraly that, secondary. They supplement the main batteries by either adding low caliber but high ROF's to help take down a big ship, or allow the ship to target other smaller vessels without needing to waste main battery ammo on smaller ships.

The names tell you the difference fam, don't see how you fail to make a distinction between both of them.

You also fail to understand that a 5inch gun on a DD is still a main gun regardless, wheres as on a bigger ship like a heavy cruiser or bigger its a secondary gun due to how big the main armaments are and what ships those guns can target.

I mean this is obvious when the game seperates guns into primary and secondaries regardless of ship class. And the fact both guns have different roles. This being more pronounced on Battleships.

You also contridict yourself by saying there is no difference, but then highlight a difference.

 

ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cptbarney

I do not get how you go the impression I fail to understand the distinction, I literaly pointed it out!

I said there is no "qualitative" difference in the gun themself. Qualitative as in the gun propriety. Because they are literaly the same. 

You seem to have missed my core arguments here. I trough I made it clear:

There should be less diference in accuracy between caliber, regardless if they are main or secondary.

Edited by RedParadize
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

 what i said also apply to secondary. If the fix is only applied to them then 9" to whatever is the second most accurate gun will not be used.

Except for the consideration of penetration, range and shell damage!

42 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

That also mean DD, CL and CA wont have usefull gun. 

Not against each other nor as supporting roles.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RedParadize said:

Secondary should not get buffed.

interpreted as oppose to buffering low calibre guns accuracy, I assume overall performance too.

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

then 9" to whatever is the second most accurate gun will not be used

interpreted as by buffering secondaries, higher calibre won’t be used, thus I noted there's more to consider than accuracy.

Please correct me and clarify. 😊

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Skeksis

You have to read the full post. As I stated at the very start is its not a question of Secondary vs Main, but accuracy across caliber. It need to be less punitive to go for smaller one. 

But no special buff for secondary please.

 

Edited by RedParadize
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh.... to clarify the things about the "9inch up to second most accurate gun" comment.

What I meant was that if you buff just the secondary battery then these ones will still be terrible and never get used.

Take "destroy a full fleet" as a example. The drop from 17" to 15" and under is so punitive in terms of accuracy that there is literally no reason to go for them.

Edited by RedParadize
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, khang36 said:

Honestly i would prefer if accuracy was more uniform across calibers as accuracy was largely determined by fire control and gun tech.

My point exactly. Doesn't mean it should be the same across calibers, but difference should be much smaller. In a fashion where someone could opt for smaller,  higher dps guns over hard hitting ones, or  go for a well rounded and balanced design. Big gun would retain the advantage in penetration (at equal tech of course).

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RedParadize said:

 American 16"/50 gun had greater accuracy than Japanese 46cm/45(18"). 

Considering the 18.1 inch gun has the single longest range hit on any warship ever (Hit on White Plains at over 34 thousand yards), I find that dubious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ThatZenoGuy said:

Considering the 18.1 inch gun has the single longest range hit on any warship ever (Hit on White Plains at over 34 thousand yards), I find that dubious.

Did not know that part thanks.

I trough the longest range hit belonged to Scharnhorst at 24km (and that's a 11" gun!). Regarding Iowa 16" being superior to Yamato 18". I saw it in a documentary long ago. It was mainly because of its shell profile but also because of superior gun control and radar range finder. Obviously this would be covered by tech level more accurately.

Anyways. I always have found these speculative documentary doubtful. I gladly can grant you that point. Still, my point remain the same: Caliber help accuracy, but not to the extent we see in this game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ThatZenoGuy said:

Considering the 18.1 inch gun has the single longest range hit on any warship ever (Hit on White Plains at over 34 thousand yards), I find that dubious.

Actually a near miss that got lucky, the longest range confirmed hit in naval gunnery would bee a tie between Scharnhorst and Warspite, each hitting at about 24 km (that's 26 thousand yards)

Edited by Finwenolofinwe
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Absolute0CA said:

Only 10-12, the big thing is though there is a lot more of them and they engage at much shorter distances.

You're correct, I think I was thinking of 2-3 5 inch guns firing at the same time. Or, hell, a single 18 inch triple weighed like 2500 tons, you can afford like 10-20 5 inch guns for that weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the secondary armament argument is overwrought.

Casemated and secondary guns operated under individual (or near-individual) fire control for several decades. That's fully represented here. What should be represented is integration into a coordinated battery, which occurred over the 1920s through the 1940s, culminating in radar-controlled secondary batteries in the early 1940s. That can be efficiently be created through techs which increase secondary accuracy in three tiers, from the 20s through the 40s.

Tech 1: Increases secondary accuracy by 30% for x money.

Tech 2: Increases secondary accuracy by 60% for x money.

Tech 3: Simulates radar-directed secondary batteries and increases secondary accuracy by 120% for x money.

It's really that simple.

Edit: Ideally, secondary batteries would be subject to individual fire control priorities from Tech 2 on, assigned by either the player or AI, but that's a clear dev decision.

Edited by killjoy1941
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the secondaries bit too over ratted.
It is cool to spam ton of 2" gun shells but if we check how many secondaries ships really had and the amount we use in the game. Boosting their accuracy would make the main guns obsolete against lightly armored ships. (RIP my glorious 10x 8" triple turrets and casement). The accuracy as it is now is some what okay. With the mission where you can choose the improved secondary battery accuracy gives 13% hit chance at 4km witch is quite good for mk1 eyeball aiming system. If there is tech that gives them more computer guidance or own range finding equipment (mark 2,3?) then the accuracy boost would be justifiable. (we don't really know what campaign has in regarding secondaries).

For naval academy the secondaries are more or less nice fireworks and small danger. (type 3 shell description?). Naval academy is naval academy and secondaries there kinda cool but pointless (i have seen these 2" monstrosities that makes warhammer 40K orcs jealous). In naval academy i use very few secondaries and fast firing decent caliber guns. Taking the biggest does not necessarily mean the best but taking the inadequate guns is bad as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...