Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 381
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Admirals, We would like to share information about the upcoming major update of Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. Here is what is included: Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts Alpha-5 SPECIAL

Tomorrow we release! Sorry for waiting so long captains!

Guys, the team needs a little more time for testing. We want to make sure that the new damage system is not containing any bugs. Thank you a lot for your patience!

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Steeltrap said:

I really have to ask, on what grounds are these changes being made?

I spent some time looking through the list of all the BBs I could find ever to have been sunk, regardless of cause.

Having done so, I have to conclude the data supports the following conclusion:

  • By FAR the greatest EFFECTIVE danger posed by torpedoes was rapid, uncontrolled loss of stability leading to capsizing.
  • MUCH more common, however, was flooding that exceeded pumping capacity and that damage control was unable to halt, ultimately causing the ship to sink.
  • Magazine explosion due to torpedo strike? Virtually NONE.
  • Much the same is true of BBs hitting mines.

Is this a case of "if you don't pay the cost and weight to fit appropriate TDS on your modern BBs then you can expect trouble"? OK, fair enough.

But that's NOT what it says.

On the one hand "they can cause ammo detonations IF THEY PENETRATE THE HULL",  yet also "even to large and well protected battleships". So if they penetrate the hull, how can the large, WELL PROTECTED BB be regarded as "well protected"? Those two things seemingly contradict each other.

At the very least I for one want to know the mechanics around torpedoes penetrating hulls. I then want to know how they can detonate a magazine. VERY SPECIFICALLY, HOW the game does it.

If it becomes a case of BBs designed with even good levels of TDS, with all that entails in cost, weight and manoeuvrability, STILL randomly going "pop", then I have a BIG problem with it.

I am not suggesting it ought NEVER be possible IF you fit the best TDS, although I AM suggesting the chances of it ought to be vanishingly small.

On the face of it, however, I fail to understand the rationale when the OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE points in entirely the OPPOSITE direction. "Well protected" Battleships, EVEN PRE-DREADNOUGHTS, did not commonly, in fact barely ever, blow up because of torpedoes detonating magazines.

OK, we have to wait and see. The frequency with which this happens will be the deciding factor,

In summary, my main issues are the threat applies even to "well protected" BBs, we don't know HOW or what chances apply, and real world evidence points very much in the opposite direction such that it ought to be VERY unlikely IF you spend the resources on TDS. This is EXACTLY the sort of thing in patch notes that drives me nuts, LOL.

By all means tell me how I'm incorrect, however; I'm certainly not claiming to be infallible.

Cheers

Remember about costs and risks of using large torpedoes, for example your 610mm torpedoes can sink a Battleship with the best survivability designs you can get, including torpedo protection, but ships using large torpedoes can also have very limited design due to the weight and cost of using bigger torpedoes, and also there is a bigger risk of ammo detonation, especially if you installed a bigger magazine for them.

Besides, it's hard to balance "bigger torpedoes" because there is a lack of information about their effectiveness in hitting bigger targets like Battleships or Aircraft Carriers.

The biggest ship that was sunk due to usage of large torpedoes was USS Hornet, BUT she was already sinking due to coordinated and effective attacks of dive bombers and torpedo bombers (and they were using smaller 533mm torpedo), latter when she was abandoned by her crew, IJN warships that were closing in, fired a salvo of 610mm Long Lance torpedoes finally forcing her to sink in the ocean.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hangar18 said:

Any chance on seeing propellants and fillers separated?

Yes, we will do so as soon as possible.

8 hours ago, Donluca95 said:

Saving custom battle designs, for not having to make them all over again and lose a great amount of time

Yes, we will do this too, we try for next patch but if it needs much time, later, because crew is top priority now.

8 hours ago, Donluca95 said:

Setting weather and time for each battle.

First we need to make weathers work consistently and offer more variants.

9 hours ago, skg02 said:

Saving custom battle designs, for future pull up.

As above, we will do asap.

10 hours ago, skg02 said:

. Designing more than one ship on your side, same thing for other sides. . . . So we can actually fight Hood verses Bismarck.

3. Picking intial conditions - including night, and positions, not just distance for battle start.

Designing more than one ship can be done a bit later, probably some complexities will delay us to take this task now.

Weather conditions, will be improved first, then we can add them to custom battle (as replied above).

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Steeltrap, no way a torpedo should be able to trigger an ammo detonation. Torpedos do not penetrate anything, they blow the hull open or crack keel. Torpedos do not cause fires directly since they hit underwater. Their explosive force is transmitted through the water to smash the hull open and flood any compartment they hit. So right there you can't flood and cause a flash explosion. Now a torpedo hit could cause a fire to start by rupturing a fuel tank or something else volatile which interacts with another ignition source, sure.  So unless someone can provide an actual example of underwater explosion causing a magazine detonation, this needs to be pulled from the update. 

HMS Barham is a case example of what can happen in terms of a torpedo resulting in a magazine detonation, but it happened four minutes after the hit and was caused by a fire spreading unchecked. Which brings up a suggestion to implement, fires spreading below deck should have a chance to cause an ammo detonation. This could be worked into the existing fire extinguishing/ammo detonation mechanics, making bulkheads that much more vital.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, madham82 said:

no way a torpedo should be able to trigger an ammo detonation. Torpedos do not penetrate anything, they blow the hull open or crack keel. Torpedos do not cause fires directly since they hit underwater. Their explosive force is transmitted through the water to smash the hull open and flood any compartment they hit.

You're describing a modern torpedo.  Early torpedoes actually made contact with the hull and often penetrated.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Angus MacDuff said:

You're describing a modern torpedo.  Early torpedoes actually made contact with the hull and often penetrated.

Also, destroyers and light cruisers often didn't have good torpedo protection. In fact, by placing ammo storages under water line designers often made ships more vulnerable to torpedoes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Also, destroyers and light cruisers often didn't have good torpedo protection. In fact, by placing ammo storages under water line designers often made ships more vulnerable to torpedoes.

Indeed.  A large vessel (heavy cruiser and up) would have her magazines amidships and in the citadel, so less likely to explode from a direct torpedo hit.  It would take out of control fires to cause that and the Captain is likely to flood an area to avoid that.  There should still be a chance of it happening though, cause...Murphy's Law.  If you look at history, you will see very few major warships blowing up, but it did happen.  Considering we will be sinking many times more "game" ships than history ever did, we should see it periodically.  Plus it's cool to see.  Smaller warships should blow up at least ten percent of the time when hit by torpedoes.

Edited by Angus MacDuff
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Indeed.  A large vessel (heavy cruiser and up) would have her magazines amidships and in the citadel, so less likely to explode from a direct torpedo hit.  It would take out of control fires to cause that and the Captain is likely to flood an area to avoid that.  There should still be a chance of it happening though, cause...Murphy's Law.  If you look at history, you will see very few major warships blowing up, but it did happen.  Considering we will be sinking many times more "game" ships than history ever did, we should see it periodically.  Plus it's cool to see.  Smaller warships should blow up at least ten percent of the time when hit by torpedoes.

American treaty cruisers were super vulnerable to torpedoes because of their narrow hulls, thin armor and underwater ammo storages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's one of many pieces of evidence. And some still say (outside of this case) "torpedoes don't explode magazines, ur ignorant!", lol. 

Edited by Shaftoe
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

You're describing a modern torpedo.  Early torpedoes actually made contact with the hull and often penetrated.

Think you are forgetting that dud torpedoes (which happened frequently to US and German subs) didn't penetrate hulls when their contact fuses failed. They simply bounced or dented the hulls. These aren't huge objects travelling at high speed in low resistance air. These are relatively slow speed and travelling through water. They don't have that kind of kinetic force without explosives. Perhaps some did pen some very thin hulls like a DD or light CL, but that implies their contact fuse didn't work since they are not delayed fuses. 

Modern torpedoes use proximity fuses to detonate directly below the ship because explosives underwater work best when they use the force of water being displaced to damage/snap the hull.    

22 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

Also, destroyers and light cruisers often didn't have good torpedo protection. In fact, by placing ammo storages under water line designers often made ships more vulnerable to torpedoes.

 

12 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

American treaty cruisers were super vulnerable to torpedoes because of their narrow hulls, thin armor and underwater ammo storages.

Again how do you get a flash fire in a compartment being flooded? That's how magazines explodes, not by shock. Torpedoes cause shock damage. Indirect fires caused by yes and in every case I have read where a ship has exploded after being hit by a torpedo, it was minutes after not the hit itself.

I think you are confusing treaty cruisers being sunk by torpedo flooding and hull damage with magazine explosions. The point of torpedo bulges was to protect the inner hull from flooding, providing a cushion against the shock damage from the explosion outside the hull and water rushing in. So yes any ship without such would be in serious trouble. 

Also ask yourself, what is the first thing damage control does if there is a threat to the magazine, flood it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that is indeed the case, then damage mechanics should be corrected accordingly (delayed). However, until that happens, in my opinion - torpedoes should cause ammunition detonations on ships with weak torpedo protection, in order to bring the general state of the game closer to real consequences of such damage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

USS New Orleans after a torpedo hit that exploded her fwd magazine.  Didn't sink, so props to the damage control organization.

 

 

Damaged_USS_New_Orleans_(CA-32)_reaching_Tulagi_on_1_December_1942.thumb.jpg.e1d275ccd8576910acb6aecdc11b282f.jpg

This was what I was looking for. So I did see something about fuel storage also being located in that part of the ship. It's amazing it survived. I wonder if the magazine was not fully loaded or the propellant used for the 8"s just not volatile. Either way this confirms I think how it should be implemented. Torpedo bulges should effectively eliminate the possibility, but ships without should have a chance. New Orleans was up armored from the preceding classes, but this also shows the importance of bulk heads as that is probably what stopped it from wrecking more of the ship. 

Good discussion guys! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, madham82 said:

Modern torpedoes use proximity fuses to detonate directly below the ship because explosives underwater work best when they use the force of water being displaced to damage/snap the hull.

I know all about modern torpedoes and that is not the discussion.  I refer you to the photo above of the heavy cruiser that is missing it's fwd turret and bow from a magazine explosion that was caused by a torpedo hit.  When a contact torpedo hits a ship, it may not penetrate because of hull thickness (but some do).  What happens is that the explosion is directed into the ship, because the path of least resistance is always through the ship (water can't compress).  This explosion will set off any combustibles it encounters before the flooding can extinguish it. Actually, USS Boise survived a bad torpedo hit because of immediate flooding.  My point is...anything can happen in these circumstances and there should be a dice roll on all possible outcomes. Your point about duds is well taken but we are discussing the result of a good hit...not the frequency of hits.  That's another fight.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:

If that is indeed the case, then damage mechanics should be corrected accordingly (delayed). However, until that happens, in my opinion - torpedoes should cause ammunition detonations on ships with weak torpedo protection, in order to bring the general state of the game closer to real consequences of such damage.

Honestly torpedoes should probably be buffed to be more damaging to "unprotected" ships, since many DDs, CLs, and other light ships frequently sunk out-right even with a single hit. But at the same time this was highly dependent on where the hit occurred, how well the ship was built, and how good damage control was. New Orleans here being a great example. I wonder if the devs can answer how it is being implemented. Is it just a percentage roll each hit or does it take into account where the hit occured. My guess is probably the first. 

11 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

I know all about modern torpedoes and that is not the discussion.  I refer you to the photo above of the heavy cruiser that is missing it's fwd turret and bow from a magazine explosion that was caused by a torpedo hit.  When a contact torpedo hits a ship, it may not penetrate because of hull thickness (but some do).  What happens is that the explosion is directed into the ship, because the path of least resistance is always through the ship (water can't compress).  This explosion will set off any combustibles it encounters before the flooding can extinguish it. Actually, USS Boise survived a bad torpedo hit because of immediate flooding.  My point is...anything can happen in these circumstances and there should be a dice roll on all possible outcomes. Your point about duds is well taken but we are discussing the result of a good hit...not the frequency of hits.  That's another fight.

It just occurred to me that proximity (magnetic) fuses on torpedoes were implemented in the 30's. So a magnetic fusing system would eliminate the chance of one pening the hull then detonating. But maybe that's getting too detailed for the game. They also had questionable reliability but that is indeed another issue.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, madham82 said:

I agree with Steeltrap, no way a torpedo should be able to trigger an ammo detonation.

It certainly did occur, though I do not think it was particularly common. It seems that big vessels and those with good torpedo protection were fairly safe.

I am aware of the following carriers, battleships, and cruisers which very likely experienced a magazine or fuel detonation or deflagration immediately after being torpedoed or mined. All sank, almost universally with heavy loss of life, except for USS New Orleans. I have not included any destroyers or other types of ships. Note the relative lack of heavy fleet carriers, Dreadnoughts, and super-Dreadnoughts.

Carriers:

  1. Unryu, fuel tanks and suicide plane warheads detonated.
  2. Shinyo, massive fuel deflagration.
  3. Taiyo, fuel deflagration.
  4. USS Wasp, fuel deflagration with possible magazine deflagration.
  5. USS Liscome Bay, titanic magazine detonation.

Battleships:

  1. Hatsuse, pre-Dreadnought, mine detonated forward magazine, sank in 90 seconds.
  2. Petropavlovsk, pre-Dreadnought, mine detonated magazines and probably forward torpedo tube, sank within two minutes.
  3. Suffren, pre-Dreadnought, sank in seconds with no survivors.
  4. HMS Royal Oak, super-Dreadnought, cordite deflagrated.

Cruisers:

  1. Pallada, detonated immediately with no survivors.
  2. Zhemchug
  3. Takasago, mined
  4. SMS Prinz Adalbert, sank immediately with three survivors
  5. Armando Diaz
  6. Java, rear magazine detonated
  7. HMS Pathfinder
  8. USS Juneau
  9. USS New Orleans, survived. Apparently the black powder magazine detonated -- probably the same mechanism behind USS Arizona's loss.

The following ships may have experienced magazine detonation (most likely several did), but it is unclear.

  1. Akitsu Maru, amphibious assault carrier, huge loss of life but unclear if detonation occurred.
  2. Fuso, Dreadnought battleship, not clear if magazine was detonated or if bow separated during sinking.
  3. HMS Majestic, battleship, sunk by "huge" explosion with torpedo hit -- but with few killed.
  4. Tama, cruiser, split in half with no survivors
  5. Cesare Rossarol, cruiser, split in half by mine.
  6. Amiral Charner, cruiser, sank in two minutes with one survivor.
  7. Takachiho, cruiser, three survivors.
  8. SMS Bremen, cruiser
  9. Nachi, cruiser, forward magazines detonated, but exact cause (ie bomb, torpedo, or fire) is unclear due to big number of hits.
  10. Naka, cruiser, broke in two, either a bomb or torpedo.

 

Here's a painting of HMS Pathfinder blowing up after torpedo hit.

Loss_of_HMS_Pathfinder,_September_5th_19

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Donluca95 said:

I'm sorry i do not want to seem rude or ungrateful but i really do not understand why you guys are not givin priority to such Basic and Fundamental feature,

probably because those are not critical to the games function.

Quote

Honestly torpedoes should probably be buffed to be more damaging to "unprotected" ships, since many DDs, CLs, and other light ships frequently sunk out-right

thats how it is in game right now. BBs with the highest TDS and bulkheads, however will eat 2 dozen of the fattest torps we have access to.

Edited by Hangar18
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

....

With respect to saving custom battle designs, and being able to design more than one type of vessel, would it be useful to work these two features together. Basically, have a separate design screen, whose sole purpose is to generate saved designs. Then for the custom battles screen, if you want to use a specific design, just point it to one of these pre-saved designs?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Angus MacDuff said:

USS New Orleans after a torpedo hit that exploded her fwd magazine.  Didn't sink, so props to the damage control organization.

 

 

Damaged_USS_New_Orleans_(CA-32)_reaching_Tulagi_on_1_December_1942.thumb.jpg.e1d275ccd8576910acb6aecdc11b282f.jpg

Funnily enough, getting their bows ripped off seems to be something of a hallmark of the class, and a bit of a feature for WW2 US cruisers as a whole.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PainGod said:

Funnily enough, getting their bows ripped off seems to be something of a hallmark of the class, and a bit of a feature for WW2 US cruisers as a whole.

Yeah, Minneapolis lost her bow in the same battle...No magazine explosion though

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:

Yeah, Minneapolis lost her bow in the same battle...No magazine explosion though

And the Pittsburgh (granted, different class, but a successor design) lost her bow in a typhoon.

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

×
×
  • Create New...