The terrible accuracy before late game might be quite realistic

[goduranus]

I am not an expert on naval equipment, but when was ship mounted gun stabilizer invented? I imagine trying to hit a 10m tall ship's side would be quite hard at 3km when the ship is rocking with the waves, without some sort of stabilization. For reference that is the thickness of a ~3mm line at 1 meter from your eye, I've been on a freighter once, and I'm pretty sure the ship rocked around a lot of more than that amount.

[RedParadize]

You should read about these four man:

Percy Scott
Frederic Charles Dreyer
Arthur Pollen
John Fisher

Their work massively improved accuracy during the 1890 - 1920 period.

[Tortue Agile]

there is a simple but concise article on wiki about gun control system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_gun_fire-control_system#History_of_analogue_fire_control_systems

 

And Dreyer here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederic_Charles_Dreyer

Edited October 31, 2019 by Tortue Agile

[sRuLe]

11 hours ago, goduranus said:

I am not an expert on naval equipment, but when was ship mounted gun stabilizer invented? I imagine trying to hit a 10m tall ship's side would be quite hard at 3km when the ship is rocking with the waves, without some sort of stabilization. For reference that is the thickness of a ~3mm line at 1 meter from your eye, I've been on a freighter once, and I'm pretty sure the ship rocked around a lot of more than that amount.

ROFLed... sorry. U probably compare an inflatable boat with an 50k long-tons monster with a 5 degrees roll once in a 5 minutes.

[Pedroig]

Based upon the historical accounts, normal or average battle between capital ships:

Spanish American War <5% hit rate, ranges under 3k

WWI <15% hit rate, ranges between 7.5-10k

WWII <25% hit rate, ranges 15-25k

Modern <50% hit rate, ranges 30k+

Edited November 2, 2019 by Pedroig

[kadm]

Either we understand hit rate differently or you took those number out of your poop deck. 

 

[sarrumac]

hit rate data from Campell’s tome ‘Jutland’. It has just emerged with the following information on heavy calibre shooting:

Germany
1st Scout Group - 1,670 shots, 65 hits (3.89% hit rate),
HSF Battleships - 1,900 shots, 45 hits (2.37% hit rate),
Total - 3,570 shots fired, 110 hits (3.08% hit rate).
(excludes shots fired at HMS Black Prince)

Great Britain
1st & 2nd BCS - 1,469 shots, 21 hits (1.43% hit rate),
3rd BCS - 373 shots, 16 hits (4.29% hit rate),
5th BS - 1,099 shots, 29 hits (2.64% hit rate),
Rest of GF - 1,593 shots, 57 hits (3.58% hit rate),
Total - 4,534 shots fired, 123 hits (2.71% hit rate).

Overall, not that good by modern standards. Also, 3rd BCS appears to have the best results – probably due to their recent gunnery practise up at Scapa Flow just prior to the battle.

[sarrumac]

I would say the game is very generous with accuracy, which i'm fine with as it would be boring otherwise.

[sarrumac]

For anyone interested, my source:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080527132243/http://webpages.charter.net/abacus/news/jutland/cont.htm

[RedParadize]

@sarrumac Is right about this. In the last few days I read quite allot about this. The main driving force toward bigger gun and longer range was the increase in torpedo range. The Accuracy, even if it improved, remained the same because the new battle range was longer.

For that reason all the complain about secondary guns have to be looked trough the perspective that by the time of WW1 they were no more a option for anti torpedo boat duty. This task became dedicated to other class of ship, mainly DDs and CL.

But this is a game. IRL battle were taking hours, we do not have that.

 

Edited November 1, 2019 by RedParadize

[Steeltrap]

2 hours ago, Pedroig said:

Based upon the historical accounts, normal or average battle between capital ships:

Spanish American War <5% hit rate, ranges under 3k

WWI <15% hit rate, ranges between 7.5-10k

WWII >25% hit rate, ranges 15-25k

Modern >50% hit rate, ranges 30k+

I'd be interested to see your sources for those numbers.

In the Battle of the Denmark Strait, Hood fired 10 salvos at Prinz Eugen from 22.8km first to 14km last and scored no hits. That's 40 shells, given she was using only her forward turrets.

Bismarck scored 2 hits in 5 salvos on Hood from 22km down to 15.7km. She could use all 8 of her 15" guns, so potentially 40 shells for 2 hits. That's 5%.

And so on.

That's just one battle, albeit a terribly famous one.

Alternatively we could look at the Battle of the River Plate.

WW2 gunnery was NOT very accurate in terms of % hits at significant ranges.

WW1 was even worse.

1 hour ago, kadm said:

Either we understand hit rate differently or you took those number out of your poop deck. 

 

A trifle undiplomatic, lol.

[Steeltrap]

9 hours ago, sarrumac said:

I would say the game is very generous with accuracy, which i'm fine with as it would be boring otherwise.

Absolutely. Within that, too, there's room to tamper for purposes of balance.

I do, for example, think the sorts of accuracy that some YT vids of "The Modern BB" battle show is frankly totally over the top.

The issue of your main guns pretty much always being the way to kill DDs and TBs, regardless of range, is also something I think ought to be looked at.

But, yes, it is meant to be fun, after all, so I've no problem with general liberties being taken with that in mind.

[kadm]

21 hours ago, Steeltrap said:

A trifle undiplomatic, lol.

Really? 

I would say it was super diplomatic. Poop deck is a part of a ship. That would fit a roughly maritime nature of this forum.

[Pedroig]

@Steeltrap I used the "less than" symbol for a reason, I did not find any notable exceptions to those max rates, which are rounded to nice numbers.

@kadm Well if you don't understand that "hit rate" means a shell hits a ship, then the head needs to get out of the poop deck, and close to the bridge.

@sarrumac Gave numbers which only include the large calibre guns, if the secondaries get thrown in, there only number in front of the decimal is a zero.

[kadm]

1) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

2) Those numbers are still not supported by anything you are able to provide, nor ever will be because they are wrong.   

"Royal Navy Fleet Tactics on the Eve of the Second World War", James P. Levy:

"[...]Bismarck fired 32 rounds at Hood and scored one hit (a 3.1% hit rate) and 61 shells at Prince of Wales, of which 5 hit the target (8%[...]"

So unless we understand " "less than" symbol" differently rethink your life choices. 

 

[Pedroig]

@kadm I see the typo, all three should be less than, will correct that, I was trying to figure out, why there was disagreement when all saying the same thing.  Typo is why...

Edited November 2, 2019 by Pedroig

[Steeltrap]

1 hour ago, Pedroig said:

@kadm I see the typo, all three should be less than, will correct that, I was trying to figure out, why there was disagreement when all saying the same thing.  Typo is why...

Yes, I think that is what caused the initial response.

We possibly could have asked if you weren't sure you meant LESS than, LOL.

Even so, I think the ranges you gave were part of the issue, as it potentially suggests in WW2 ships got close to 25% near 15km when we know it was waaaaay lower than that.

Regardless, no harm done and it did bring out some interesting numbers.

Cheers

[Steeltrap]

6 hours ago, kadm said:

Really? 

I would say it was super diplomatic. Poop deck is a part of a ship. That would fit a roughly maritime nature of this forum.

No, I'd say the use of "poop deck" made it particularly consistent with the theme.

Given it helpfully contains the word "poop", however, I think the underlying message is still questionable when it comes to diplomacy.

;-D

[RedParadize]

Its simple, do not throw numbers around. If you do not know just say it. If someone knows he will answer. If you doubt of his answer ask for his source. If he don't have them then it's on him as he was the one to make a claim.

[sRuLe]

On 11/1/2019 at 1:59 AM, sarrumac said:

hit rate data from Campell’s tome ‘Jutland’. It has just emerged with the following information on heavy calibre shooting:

Germany
1st Scout Group - 1,670 shots, 65 hits (3.89% hit rate),
HSF Battleships - 1,900 shots, 45 hits (2.37% hit rate),
Total - 3,570 shots fired, 110 hits (3.08% hit rate).
(excludes shots fired at HMS Black Prince)

Great Britain
1st & 2nd BCS - 1,469 shots, 21 hits (1.43% hit rate),
3rd BCS - 373 shots, 16 hits (4.29% hit rate),
5th BS - 1,099 shots, 29 hits (2.64% hit rate),
Rest of GF - 1,593 shots, 57 hits (3.58% hit rate),
Total - 4,534 shots fired, 123 hits (2.71% hit rate).

Overall, not that good by modern standards. Also, 3rd BCS appears to have the best results – probably due to their recent gunnery practise up at Scapa Flow just prior to the battle.

Nice statistics...but,can we see an amount of hits, and hit "by what" on both sides capital ships? Cause I got serious doubts about Campell's calculation.

[Mycophobia]

Well, even when considering earlier portion of ww2...battle of Java sea shows how atrocious mid-long range gunnery still are even with better optics. Granted, Japanese cruisers don't have quite the same level of FCS capability as capital ships, but Japanese optic were quite good to my knowledge. 

http://www.navweaps.com/index_oob/OOB_WWII_Pacific/OOB_WWII_Java-Sea.php

[Cptbarney]

Im fine with the somewhat high accuracy as this would make the game unbearably boring and immensly frustrating just trying to basic things. Also most of the fun is watching the fat metal things blow each other up.

For the sake of game balance i guess modern accuracy could be tuned down but not too much and maybe close range to knife range accuracy could be increased considerably (i mean i doubt you can miss a ship 0.3km away from you unless your a stormtrooper or just aiming at something else entirely).

[RedParadize]

@Cptbarney I agree.

 

I always smile when people ask for realism.

You see I work in the movie industry. I know for a fact that a true and accurate movie about ww1 would repeal people. It would take a amazing cinematography and acting to make a story were a guy wait in the cold mud interesting. Just to have him to run across the killings field in the last 5 minutes. 

What people want is a good representation of reality, not reality itself.

 

Now, for this game what does it should means? 

Edited November 2, 2019 by RedParadize

[sarrumac]

4 hours ago, sRuLe said:

Nice statistics...but,can we see an amount of hits, and hit "by what" on both sides capital ships? Cause I got serious doubts about Campell's calculation.

I would suggest reading his book as linked by myself then. It is detailed how many shots were fired per ships as recorded by the two navies arsenals and also a combination of hits recorded by both forces. It is also mentionned in the book which ships were hit and how many times, and which ships recorded hits.

I can't see of a better method besides also breaking every hit  by range. However such an information can be estimated through the study of both fleet courses to some extent.

I stand by my comment, accuracy is VERY generous in UAD. And I'm fine with it as I don't want each battle to last an entire day.

[TAKTCOM]

4 hours ago, RedParadize said:

@Cptbarney I agree.

people want is a good representation of reality, not reality itself.

Now, for this game what does it should means? 

I have bad news for you. The main thing that people want is interesting story. “Representation ” is important, but without a good story,it's  like a beautiful but empty dish in a restaurant. And yes reality is unreal.

Regarding the game, increasing the accuracy of casemate 2-6 inch guns at a distance of one mile or less is definitely necessary.