Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
KiltedKey

Safety Net Engine Efficiency? (Update!)

Recommended Posts

Testing on my end confirmed that going over 100 percent as a safety measure doesn’t work. So don’t feel like you need to do forced air intake if you don’t need too.
 

Let's say that I go way over what funnel capacity that I need for my model, by using forced boilers and two funnels on a super battleship. As the funnels take damage, will my 'effective' efficiency still be over 100 percent? Or am just wasting weight?

And on a random aside, man, these updates just make this game better and better!

Edited by KiltedKey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I saw a YouTuber add an extra funnel incase one got damaged. So I guess it does work like how your asking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Late to this, but it seems that beyond having a backup funnel there is little reason to go beyond 100 percent.
Even just using around 80 percent efficiency can work since all it means is you lose a few bonuses at high speeds.
(just hover over the efficiency percentage and you'll be able to see the bonus or penalty and work around it.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to go max speed you need about 40% funnel capacity. Anything above that will give you better acceleration and some safety margin. Note that most of the speed lost is due to damage to the hull and not funnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

If you want to go max speed you need about 40% funnel capacity. Anything above that will give you better acceleration and some safety margin. Note that most of the speed lost is due to damage to the hull and not funnel.

Oh I don’t even consider building a ship without one hundred percent capacity. At least when it comes to capital ships. A battleship without 100 percent isn’t going to even remotely reach top speed. Although then again I haven’t tried lower range simply because my ADHD wants to max it. Regardless, I couldn’t picture my capital ships not having max 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having done a quick test I have learned that even at only 56 percent efficiency a 27,000 ton dreadnought was able to reach a top speed of of 21 knots or just under, it got hit right before it so it topped out at 20.9 knots. But it did make it's top speed, and did it in only a minute or so on x5 speed.

So it is viable to have a ship, even a battleship without maximum funnel capacity, it just takes awhile to get up to speed.

Edited by Purgato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should consider it. I reach top speed with 40%, it take longer trough. Btw, my meta at the moment is to built BC with top speed of 47knot. But I real aim is to have it go at 37 wich is max aiming penalty for the enemy, its very close to cruise speed and have almost top cruise bonus on my side. Doing so, you can get away with +-37 funnel capacity and minimal/no smoke interference.

NmvPck9.png
In this case 40% engine capacity. I have a safety margin to keep it at 37knot and the capacity to reach 47 if the need present itself.

Edited by RedParadize

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...wow

Your ship weighs around the same as Bismarck, but is 17 (!!!) knots faster, has a belt 50% thicker, has decks literally three or four times stronger, and has four extra 15in guns to boot.

Poor barbettes and torp belt and so on, but... yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, disc said:

...wow

Your ship weighs around the same as Bismarck, but is 17 (!!!) knots faster, has a belt 50% thicker, has decks literally three or four times stronger, and has four extra 15in guns to boot.

Poor barbettes and torp belt and so on, but... yikes.

Yep, and this is why a lot of peeps take issue with these ships making such high speeds, irl that ship's engines would account for 20k tonnage alone, and then the ship itself would have to be bigger, more tonnage, less hydrodynamics etc.

It just wouldn't work. Also the armour values are insanely high for that weight as well. Bismarck with a 15 inch belt had that armour take up a quarter to a third of the entire ship's weight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, disc said:

...wow

Your ship weighs around the same as Bismarck, but is 17 (!!!) knots faster, has a belt 50% thicker, has decks literally three or four times stronger, and has four extra 15in guns to boot.

Poor barbettes and torp belt and so on, but... yikes.

You do not need torpedo belt when you are that quick. You just need to maneuver a bit. As for barbette, I don't experience ammo explosion often enough to justify them.

Latest version have a III aux. engine and props. sooo much better when dodging torpedo. Doesn't cost much too. I went against 2 super BB and 4 destroyer with a redux version of this. Killed the escort and brought both of the 112000t beast down to 30%. Then we were all out of ammo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reaper Jack 47knots does not give more "speed protection" than 37kt. The only advantage of this design is that it can give both max "speed protection" and cruise speed bonus at the same time. In my latest version I moved down to 40kt,  so max protection with a safety margin and no cruise speed bonus. The balance got dumped in even better armor!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...