Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Rate of fire on large guns is too low


KhalAl

Recommended Posts

I've noticed that the rate of fire, particularly on the larger caliber guns, is much too low. For instance in the game I tried a triple gun 18" turret with regular shells and with 1940 latest and maximum autoloader tech, yet the rate of fire was still only around 0.9-1.0 rounds per minute or less. The British 18"/L45 triple turret design meant for the N3 class battleships of 1920-1922 period would of had a predicted rate of fire of 1.5-2 rounds per minute. The 18" designs of the USN firing super heavy shells would of had a predicted rate of fire of 1.5-1.75 rounds per minute. The case is even worse for the 20" guns, typically being only around 0.4-0.6 rounds per minute in the game depending on tech and shell weights. The Japanese 51cm/L45 guns were estimated to have an approximate rate of fire of 1-1.25 rounds per minute, double what is in the game.

The rate of fire seems to drop off too quickly as gun caliber increases, which makes battleships armed with larger caliber guns much weaker than what they should be. Hope this gets fixed in a future update.

 

United Kingdom / Britain 18"/45 (45.7 cm) Mark II and other Proposed Guns 1920-1922 - NavWeaps

USA 18"/48 (45.7 cm) Mark 1, 16"/56 (40.6 cm) Mark 4 and 18"/47 (45.7 cm) Mark A - NavWeaps

Japan 51 cm/45 (20.1") "A" Type 98 (?) - NavWeaps

 

Washington Cherry Trees II./ Part 3 – Warship Projects 1900-1950 - Scroll down and contains a table with some info on some experimental large caliber guns- such as the French 450mm/L45, USN 20"/L45 etc.

Edited by KhalAl
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zuikaku said:

"In reality" in the same sentence with the guns that only existed on the drawing boards...

Silly pedantic response. The draughtsmen and engineers involved would have been reasonably able to estimate the rate of fire. Also, a couple of guns of the 51cm/L45 type advanced to the point of construction and were not far off completion. The USN 18" design was actually built and tested, there is even a picture of it if you bother to check the links.

The 46cm/L45 on the Yamato class, which had an approximate rate of fire 1.5-2 rounds per minute, is in-line with the other 18" class guns I mentioned.

Japan 40 cm/45 (15.7") Type 94 - NavWeaps

Edited by KhalAl
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

"In reality" in the same sentence with the guns that only existed on the drawing boards...

The BL 18in was built and used by the Brittish, The American 18in was tested and of course the Japanese had an 18in gun. Truth is ROF wouldn't have really increased once shells got to 12in and up because no one used auto loaders but did use hydraulic rammers ect, now shells carried would decrease per hull size as guns got bigger but ROF would be based on how quickly you can move a shell and ram it, which was all by hydraulics on battleships by the 1900's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still fail to understand why are you insisting on this mega-gun improvements while  we stll do not have basic game elements functioning properly? I can hardly see this stuff as priority along with 100k superhulls. For me this is in the same fantasy category like quad 20" super long guns. And yes, most of the time things didn't worked as planned on drawing boards. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zuikaku said:

I still fail to understand why are you insisting on this mega-gun improvements while  we stll do not have basic game elements functioning properly? . 

The devs are aware of this issue and already mentioned that would improve if possible in time for the next update. If not for another future update.

 

But to be clear. The issue is not only the reload time. Is also the default caliber and the visual 3d model scale and the gun range. (Big guns only issue)

 

Update: Going to quote me here about this and also the devs answer, so it is easier to understand the issue.

Source:

[Is it possible to change the default barrel length number designation on the big gun calibers, to be more historical accurate? No need to be the exact numbers, but to feel more accurate.

 

Going to use the Yamato guns as an example.

NbzVUSO.jpg

nmuzgfW.png

SOURCE

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.php

One good thing when applying the same gun caliber and gun barrel length, with veteran crews, Auto reloading II, we can get a time to reload very close to what was possible IRL, however two things.

- The range drops from the historical 42 km to 24 km - 26 km (light / SH shells).

- The barrel 3D model looks small in comparison.

vP0eQUZ.jpg

C8UHEDB.jpg

If we go with the standard length.

- The 3D models looks more close to what was implemented, but now the barrel length is incorrect. 46.1cm/56  when the 3D model in this example should be closer to the 46.1cm/45

- The range is closer to what was possible, but now the reload is higher if we compare the barrel length 3D model to the real gun.

 

The American 16-inch guns

ODOEbkA.jpg

- The reload is ok

- However, the range drops to 28 km from the historical 38 km.

- And the barrel 3D model looks small.

MlB8rqp.jpg

SOURCE

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.php

 

It seems to be an issue with the default barrel length 3D model in game. With big guns in late years, the default barrel length is always xx/56 or xx/55 when it should be xx/50 +/-, to be more accurate.

The solution seems to apply the range and accuracy values from the default xx/56 and the reload times from the xx/50  into the default gun barrel length 3D model to have a more accurate representation based on real data. ]

 

The dev answer.

[I realize what you mean. It can be checked for the next major update but it is something that can unbalance combat a lot, since the caliber indication is not just a nbr, it is something that affects a lot the ballistics of the game.
The next major update will have so many new features to work with, that this will be a very low priority, but it is kept in mind.]

Edited by o Barão
  • 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...