Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Suggestions for more British style towers


Recommended Posts

With the advent of The HMS hood, I see great potential ioth possibly adding for WW1 era Battleship and battle cruiser towers designs 

Image result for HMS warspite 1916

Firstly the Queen Elizabeth and iron duke class battleships come to mind when I think WW1 British battleships. I really wish we had more British style towers that represent that classic superstructure. the thing is we almost have these designs, advanced tower XII is quite similar to the tower showed above, but maybe we could could make the British modern tower design (Hood)  with a barbette (and maybe room for more funnels) much like the one shown on the warspite (also made available in 1914). Now if the Advanced tower is supposed to represent the above tower, maybe we can also try to make the rear towers hold up to 15 in guns. At the moment rear towers cant hold 15 inch guns which kinda doesn't work with the front tower which can hold 16 in guns. 

Image result for hms renown

next battlecruisers in the 10's and 20's could use a tower which incorporates a barbette  with the tower (much like the hood tower with a barbette attached to it) which can make battlecrusier designs possible form that era to be built and used in the game. Would definitely like to see more designs like the German or British battlecruiser designs (prefer British at least) which can add a bit more depth for the super dreadnought era

Image result for Hms tiger

Edited by ThatOneBounced
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're going about this the wrong direction, personally. I think "towers" should be subdivided into separate parts.

Right now it's two big blocks that limit turret and funnel placement. We're beholden to these monoliths, and thus on the superstructures the devs have introduced and are planning on. Makes designs look the same.

I think it should have a Lego-like approach. We could have different blocks: deckhouses, bridges, conning towers, masts, fire control tops, secondary directors, and searchlight supports. You slot them together and get a custom result. Want an heavier fire control top? Use a stronger mast or place it lower, where its field of vision is worse. Or, have a light one atop the mast and a heavier one on the conning tower. Want a better bridge? Build up a bunch of platforms on the mast and make your own pagoda, or start from scratch with a big block like the King George V class.

Crucially, blocks could overlap to some extent. No more "wrong-size" barbettes -- just slot in a different one instead. On those hulls with cut down quarterdecks, the barbette could overlap with the hull structure, so no awkward squeezes there either.

Issue is that this would take a lot of work.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 3/25/2020 at 6:12 PM, disc said:

I think we're going about this the wrong direction, personally. I think "towers" should be subdivided into separate parts.

Right now it's two big blocks that limit turret and funnel placement. We're beholden to these monoliths, and thus on the superstructures the devs have introduced and are planning on. Makes designs look the same.

I think it should have a Lego-like approach. We could have different blocks: deckhouses, bridges, conning towers, masts, fire control tops, secondary directors, and searchlight supports. You slot them together and get a custom result. Want an heavier fire control top? Use a stronger mast or place it lower, where its field of vision is worse. Or, have a light one atop the mast and a heavier one on the conning tower. Want a better bridge? Build up a bunch of platforms on the mast and make your own pagoda, or start from scratch with a big block like the King George V class.

Crucially, blocks could overlap to some extent. No more "wrong-size" barbettes -- just slot in a different one instead. On those hulls with cut down quarterdecks, the barbette could overlap with the hull structure, so no awkward squeezes there either.

Issue is that this would take a lot of work.

Agree with this 100%! I really cannot get excited at the prospect of the devs adding new, pre designed towers. They account for a huge part of a vessels character. The difficulty comes in balancing customisation with simplicity. A slightly more restrictive but potentially more implementable solution, would be to split the tower into 3 different parts: Bridge (which would include other auxiliary decks as one unit) Mast, and Top. Upgrading the bridge could improve turning radius and potentially stability, the mast and top would be a mix of cosmetic, and affecting accuracy/spotting etc (this could be both through construction such as cage vs tripod, and height as you suggest). By mixing these three components a much greater variety in style can be achieved.

Can I also take a moment to complain about the towers which include a superfiring barbette as part of them! NO! 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 3/25/2020 at 7:12 PM, disc said:

I think we're going about this the wrong direction, personally. I think "towers" should be subdivided into separate parts.

Right now it's two big blocks that limit turret and funnel placement. We're beholden to these monoliths, and thus on the superstructures the devs have introduced and are planning on. Makes designs look the same.

I think it should have a Lego-like approach. We could have different blocks: deckhouses, bridges, conning towers, masts, fire control tops, secondary directors, and searchlight supports. You slot them together and get a custom result. Want an heavier fire control top? Use a stronger mast or place it lower, where its field of vision is worse. Or, have a light one atop the mast and a heavier one on the conning tower. Want a better bridge? Build up a bunch of platforms on the mast and make your own pagoda, or start from scratch with a big block like the King George V class.

Crucially, blocks could overlap to some extent. No more "wrong-size" barbettes -- just slot in a different one instead. On those hulls with cut down quarterdecks, the barbette could overlap with the hull structure, so no awkward squeezes there either.

Issue is that this would take a lot of work.


Agree with that. However to keep it relatively easy to develop and handle I would propose to split the „Tower” into:

  1. a bridge/conning tower piece
  2. and the mast

That would allow us to make ships a bit more unique — currently the looks are too similar.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More granularity would be great, especially for placing masts, bridges and fire control equipment. 
 

Think of all the issues the British in particular had with placing the fire control masts behind the funnels. It's important that those stages of development and design be present in some way. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...