Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

Lots of threads asking for more hulls, but another avenue for ship variety would be adding additional tower options. This would be particularly interesting if there were real choices to be made rather than a linear progression of 'newer = better'.

For example, looking at USA battleships, the 'Modern Tower I' is available at much earlier years than any secondary towers that visually match it. The 'Modern Sec Tower I' and 'Modern Sec Tower II' look really odd next to it.

Living in North Carolina and having a museum ship to visit nearby, I'd love to be able to build her. Existing hulls work fine, but some tower options could bring her to life.

84b0a64648813be49570a908dcb0f1ad.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I would appreciate more towers, or superstructure in general, not necessarily only towers, it is not always "newer is better". For example the chage masts on earlier US battleships have inferior accuracy bonus, but better torpedo spotting.
Or in other cases you might want to have the "worse" main tower, because it does not come with an integrated barbette that can't fit the gun you want.
Also most "better" towers also make you more visible, so if you want a sneaky ship, or one meant for point-blank torpedo attacks, the older towers are the much better choice, since they might not give you the aiming bonus, but make you harder to hit and save on budget and weight.
In some cases I also noticed that the best towers take up so much space that you can't fit an additional funnel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Norbert Sattler said:

While I would appreciate more towers, or superstructure in general, not necessarily only towers, it is not always "newer is better". For example the chage masts on earlier US battleships have inferior accuracy bonus, but better torpedo spotting.
Or in other cases you might want to have the "worse" main tower, because it does not come with an integrated barbette that can't fit the gun you want.
Also most "better" towers also make you more visible, so if you want a sneaky ship, or one meant for point-blank torpedo attacks, the older towers are the much better choice, since they might not give you the aiming bonus, but make you harder to hit and save on budget and weight.
In some cases I also noticed that the best towers take up so much space that you can't fit an additional funnel.

That is a good point I had not thought of, the sneaky ship! I almost always select my towers based on the accuracy modifiers.

You're certainly correct as well about the utility of some towers, either giving more deck room or having a built in gun mounts. Often with those they restrict my main guns to smaller than I want, however.

I am merely suggesting some effectively equal towers in technology or footprint but with varying bonuses, i.e. long range versus base accuracy, etc. and different cosmetic options. Perhaps this is easier to do than new hulls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of towers, apart from more picks like you described, which I am on board with, I'd also very much like some more freedom in how far to the front or back they can be placed. Making ships like the Nelson class, the Dunquerke (if/once quad turrets get added in) or N3/G3 is barely or even outright impossible depending on the hull, because you can't place the superstructure far enough back to fit all the turrets at the front.

This is particularly frustrating in case of the N3/G3s, because there is a hull with that very name, but you can't actually re-make an actual N3 or G3 with the all-forward turret setups...
To re-make a Nelson-like ship, I had to switch to a French hull, because on the front of British hulls there wasn't enough room in front of the most backward position for the main turret to fit three 16" turrets.

Though that being said, a Japanese super battleship with 3 18" turrets front and loads of "secondary" turrets (i.e. 300somethings) in the back was quite fun to design and drive. ^^

Edited by Norbert Sattler
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen several towers which don't fit on a hull, or only fit in one spot despite multiple mounts.

Devs are doing a nice job, hope they continue to make improvements by adding and allowing more flexibility with superstructures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/30/2020 at 4:50 PM, Norbert Sattler said:

This is particularly frustrating in case of the N3/G3s, because there is a hull with that very name, but you can't actually re-make an actual N3 or G3 with the all-forward turret setups...

Well, technically speaking, the N3/G3 didn't have an 'all forward' layout. It had an a/B/Tower/q layout.

N3.jpg.1be262bb071cb66ae1a1ee95ecbda395.jpg

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...