Balance change: fires can cause minor, but cumulative, flooding

[Lobokai]

A million times no

bit of a repost, but this was not something that happened.  I know of no single cruiser or larger ship lost in combat (during combat) due to deck or internal fires (other than carriers).  IF there is one or two that I'm not thinking of, they're anomalies and not a thing worth putting into this game.  These are metal boats sitting in rather large concentrations of water... fire fighting and pumping were pretty well trained things.  While many of the ideas and reasoning above sounds good, it simply wasn't that way.  Even the examples given are not happening during an engagement.

[sRuLe]

29 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

A million times no

bit of a repost, but this was not something that happened.  I know of no single cruiser or larger ship lost in combat (during combat) due to deck or internal fires (other than carriers).  IF there is one or two that I'm not thinking of, they're anomalies and not a thing worth putting into this game.  These are metal boats sitting in rather large concentrations of water... fire fighting and pumping were pretty well trained things.  While many of the ideas and reasoning above sounds good, it simply wasn't that way.  Even the examples given are not happening during an engagement.

U mean SMS Seydlitz? xDDD

 

 

[Lobokai]

37 minutes ago, sRuLe said:

SMS Seydlitz

That ship would be a prime example of what I am talking about... that fire was contained, secondaries would have been fine, and that ship survived for 2+ more years, seeing a half dozen later engagements and was only sunk infamously at Scapa Flow

edit: on the off chance this is the Jutland aftermath and not Dogger... this ship twice had massive fires, but proves the durability and survivability of these vessels by weathering them both

Edited November 1, 2019 by Lobokai

[WafflesToo]

I'm gonna have to side with Lobokai here; fires should not sink ships, fires should disable, damage, and destroy equipment in ships through various effects (a flooded magazine is kind of useless for the gun it services).  I can only think of two ships that were nearly sunk solely by fire (or rather, by the copious amounts of water being pumped onboard fighting those fires); USS Forestall and USS Franklin.

What happened to the SMS Seydlitz looks to be more the exception than the rule for turn-of-the-century capital ships; and even then she weathered it and lived to fight another day.

[sRuLe]

2 hours ago, WafflesToo said:

I'm gonna have to side with Lobokai here; fires should not sink ships, fires should disable, damage, and destroy equipment in ships through various effects (a flooded magazine is kind of useless for the gun it services).  I can only think of two ships that were nearly sunk solely by fire (or rather, by the copious amounts of water being pumped onboard fighting those fires); USS Forestall and USS Franklin.

What happened to the SMS Seydlitz looks to be more the exception than the rule for turn-of-the-century capital ships; and even then she weathered it and lived to fight another day.

SMS Derflinger than or SMS Moltke... there is so many exceptions  that "rule" look more exceptions as real so called "exceptions".

[Lobokai]

1 hour ago, sRuLe said:

SMS Derflinger than or SMS Moltke... there is so many exceptions  that "rule" look more exceptions as real so called "exceptions".

I’m confused. Neither Derflinger of Moltke ever had long sustained burning fires that took them out of any combat action and both are prime examples of German field repairs, damage control, and big ship durability. Both made it, with distinction, to Scapa