NAR BETA 3.0.3 "Major Powers update" for UAD 1.6.0.6 opt x4

[NathanKell]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

 

It seems it removed the possibility of seeing side main guns near the bow and stern, but is still happening in the middle. I also applied your instruction to another 2 lines, and from what I'm seeing this is related to "G2" ships, so there are probably many more similar lines where I need to apply this rule.

Yep, apologies, I was working off an old version of randParts. Here's the relevant rand part names:

388/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
389/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
414/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
417/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
418/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
421/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2])
431/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2])
486/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g1];tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
513/gun/p/mg2///s/main_cal, !casemate/
514/gun/p/mg3///s/main_cal, !casemate/

Since the USA Exp Dreadnought I has g1 and g2 tags, all those rules apply. Indeed 421 and 431, and 513 and 514, apply even without a tech setting the techvar use_main_side_guns.

 

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

Also, a "BIG" improvement would be to also remove any possibility of using barbettes for the secondaries in the sides. If you have any tip, it would be much appreciated. I will upload the files and DM. 

As far as I can tell, here are the rand part rules that add side barbettes:

154/barbette/p/d/sec_super_side//s//or(tag[Side_Barbettes])
243/barbette/p////s//or(tag[RussianCenterline])
452/barbette/p//sec_super_side//s//and(!tag[g2])

You can try just deleting them. (There are a bunch of other rules relating to barbettes that don't have a 'c' in the Center column, but they all involve deleting unmounted barbettes so they should not be relevant.)

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

 

I tried playing around with this modifier "aiShipbuilding" in the aipersonalities file, but it seems is been applied during the campaign, not when the game starts, which can be already a good thing. Also tried increasing the budget, but I didn't notice any major difference and ofc now I am creating an unrealistic economy value for one nation. Creating a new problem.

 

I will send the British 1890 campaign. Just open the shipyard and look at the CA design.

correct, aiShipbuilding only affects the amount to build once the game has started (and note lower numbers mean more shipbuilding, according to the code). So yes it sounds like the issue is Britain is already creating all the ships it can during the chances it has during campaign loading. That means you need to give it more chances by increasing the number of pregame turns or increasing the chance for building to occur (the fleet_generation_xxxx params). Once you increase the opportunities, only then will budget start to impact--it sounds like right now Britain is not going over-budget so increasing budget won't help. As I said above, there is a hard cap of 5 ships per pregame turn, so if Britain builds all 5 ships every chance it gets, no matter what you do it is already at the limit. So you need to add more turns for it.

[o Barão]

2 hours ago, NathanKell said:

 

388/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
389/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
414/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
417/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
418/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
421/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2])
431/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g2])
486/gun/p/ms/main_side//s/main_cal/or(tag[g1];tag[g2];!zero[use_main_side_guns])
513/gun/p/mg2///s/main_cal, !casemate/
514/gun/p/mg3///s/main_cal, !casemate/

Since the USA Exp Dreadnought I has g1 and g2 tags, all those rules apply. Indeed 421 and 431, and 513 and 514, apply even without a tech setting the techvar use_main_side_guns.

Also, 427/430, it seems:

427/gun/p/ms/small_side//s/main_cal/and(tag[g2]),,"bb, bc",,4,4,gun,p,ms,small_side,,s,-0.35,0.35,main_cal,and(tag[g2];!tag[NoSideGuns]),,

430/gun/p/ms/small_side//s/main_cal/and(tag[g2]),,"bb, bc",,4,4,gun,p,ms,small_side,,s,-0.35,0.35,main_cal,and(tag[g2];!tag[NoSideGuns]),,

Those can be the ones responsible for the side main guns looking at the rangeZ modifier.

But I still didn't see any related to G3/G4 ships, and that is puzzling me.😒

Bingo!!! Now I need to apply this new parameter to the vast majority of all capital ships.

But now, the autodesign refuses to place secondaries in the lower deck near the main gun, strange... 🤔

 

2 hours ago, NathanKell said:

 

154/barbette/p/d/sec_super_side//s//or(tag[Side_Barbettes])
243/barbette/p////s//or(tag[RussianCenterline])
452/barbette/p//sec_super_side//s//and(!tag[g2])

You can try just deleting them. (There are a bunch of other rules relating to barbettes that don't have a 'c' in the Center column, but they all involve deleting unmounted barbettes so they should not be relevant.)

That was the first though I had when I was looking to all those lines of code. If we already have ship design styles to tell the AI what to do, why are these being applied global? Strange decision. Apart from some Italian BB, I fail to see many more examples where they are interesting to see. And taking into consideration the way the AI applies them, makes it more interesting just not to use them.

Those are specific modifiers. g2, russianCenterline and side barbettes. I can be wrong, but I am almost sure those are not the ones I am looking for, well the G2 is important.

 

I will test those with a new parameter, "NoSecSideBarbette"

 

2 hours ago, NathanKell said:

That means you need to give it more chances by increasing the number of pregame turns or increasing the chance for building to occur (the fleet_generation_xxxx params).

In the file I sent to you I am using a low value. I was using the ship pack in the test campaign, so this change makes sense. I will revert to vanilla values in the next update for the moment.

 

Thanks for all the great tips!

Edited Tuesday at 12:34 AM by o Barão

[NathanKell]

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Also, 427/430, it seems:

427/gun/p/ms/small_side//s/main_cal/and(tag[g2]),,"bb, bc",,4,4,gun,p,ms,small_side,,s,-0.35,0.35,main_cal,and(tag[g2];!tag[NoSideGuns]),,

430/gun/p/ms/small_side//s/main_cal/and(tag[g2]),,"bb, bc",,4,4,gun,p,ms,small_side,,s,-0.35,0.35,main_cal,and(tag[g2];!tag[NoSideGuns]),,

Those can be the ones responsible for the side main guns looking at the rangeZ modifier.

Oh hah I skipped those because I thought "small_side" referred to small guns, but it includes 11 and 12 inch guns. Oops! Quite right.

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

But I still didn't see any related to G3/G4 ships, and that is puzzling me.😒

Bingo!!! Now I need to apply this new parameter to the vast majority of all capital ships.

But now, the autodesign refuses to place secondaries in the lower deck near the main gun, strange... 🤔

Might be worth adding a new rule then and inserting it somewhere in the middle of the file, to place sec_cal guns on the side with a Zmin of -0.8 and a Zmax of 1, should cover that case?

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

 

That was the first though I had when I was looking to all those lines of code. If we already have ship design styles to tell the AI what to do, why are these being applied global? Strange decision. Apart from some Italian BB, I fail to see many more examples where they are interesting to see. And taking into consideration the way the AI applies them, makes it more interesting just not to use them.

Those are specific modifiers. g2, russianCenterline and side barbettes. I can be wrong, but I am almost sure those are not the ones I am looking for, well the G2 is important.

Yeah I was surprised that there weren't more rules there, but as I understand it the 'delete_unmounted' replaces part generation with deletion so all the other rules wouldn't add barbettes. Maybe my filtering is screwing up somehow? But all the ones with 'c' in the Center column are center-only I believe.

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

I will test those with a new parameter, "NoSecSideBarbette"

 

In the file I sent to you I am using a low value. I was using the ship pack in the test campaign, so this change makes sense. I will revert to vanilla values in the next update for the moment.

 

Thanks for all the great tips!

Gotcha! And happy to help!  

[Fangoriously]

I wonder what combination of that auto design witch craft could create an en echelon gun arrangement lol

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

Might be worth adding a new rule then and inserting it somewhere in the middle of the file, to place sec_cal guns on the side with a Zmin of -0.8 and a Zmax of 1, should cover that case?

The newyork_style doesn't have a line for secondaries, but it was working well before. As you said above.

"Oh hah I skipped those because I thought "small_side" referred to small guns, but it includes 11 and 12 inch guns. Oops! Quite right. "

It probably was me that deleted. But it is working well in the upper deck. Strange.

 

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

Yeah I was surprised that there weren't more rules there, but as I understand it the 'delete_unmounted' replaces part generation with deletion so all the other rules wouldn't add barbettes. Maybe my filtering is screwing up somehow? But all the ones with 'c' in the Center column are center-only I believe.

I just look the entire file searching for all sec_cal entries and there are many with mount_barbette, or something like that.

So I applied "!mount" to exclude all the barbettes, but didn't work. There is something that I am missing. However, I got an idea. Not the best one, but it will work.

In the "parts" file, to remove BB/BC requirements for most small barbettes. Leave only the Yamato style, because I know they only can be used in the center.

But still, I will use this option only if I can't find a solution.

Edited Tuesday at 02:05 AM by o Barão

[Maximus Tyberius]

13 hours ago, VadimAleks said:

Since in 90% of cases we don't have the option to "attack the convoy", but only auto-battle,  there are no "easy wins" here. Where my pair of BCs would sink 100% of all transports, having a complete advantage in speed and guns, auto-battle destroys 2 transports out of 10-12. And I get a ridiculous 10-14 VP. What "easy wins" are we talking about here?

It would be nice to always have the option of attacking manually.

[visitor223]

I am a bit confused about what changed in the updates in the game recently. Before, I could place barbettes anywhere on the hull as long as they were available and wouldn't clip or obstruct anything. But now, it changed. I reverted to the version that allows me to put barbettes anywhere (I forgot the version number). Is there some kind of file that manipulates that? I am curious. 

 

Edited Tuesday at 07:25 AM by visitor223
typo

[o Barão]

@NathanKell No barbettes for small guns and a new style created and already look much better.

 

975/tower_main///////or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_main,,,,,,-0.2,0,,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
976/funnel///////or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,funnel,,,,,,0,0.2,,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
977/tower_sec///////or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_sec,,,,,,0,0.2,,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
978/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,0.6,1,main_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
979/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,0.3,0.6,main_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
980/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,-0.6,-0.3,main_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
981/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,-1,-0.6,main_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
982/gun/p/c1///s/sec_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,3,6,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.1,0.1,sec_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
983/gun/p/c2///s/sec_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,3,6,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.1,0.1,sec_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
984/gun/p/c3///s/sec_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,3,6,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.1,0.1,sec_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
985/gun/p/small1/dual_tertiary///s/sec_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,3,6,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.1,0.1,sec_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,
986/gun/p/small2/single_tertiary///s/sec_cal/or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,"bb, bc",,3,6,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.1,0.1,sec_cal,or(tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]),,

 

But the secondaries lines are not working. The global values are being applied. Maybe you have a possible solution for this?

I think it is possible to fix this by editing the global values zrange for all the secondaries entries, and then create a new hull paramater for all the ships that use 2" guns in the bow and stern. (mostly american ships) or maybe better...

and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG]) to all side secondaries lines.

 

 

Edit

Sadly the towers are not placed all the time where I want, and I found what is probably the reason. I am using also parameter No_Barb for this ships, and this comes with a complete design language that is overrind my new design :

205/tower_main///////or(tag[BC_Modern];tag[No_Barb]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_main,,,,,,-0.1,1,,"or(tag[BC_Modern];tag[No_Barb]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,
206/tower_main///////or(tag[No_Barb]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_main,,,,,,-1,1,,"or(tag[No_Barb]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,
207/tower_sec///////or(tag[No_Barb]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_sec,,,,,,-0.75,0.01,,"or(tag[No_Barb]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,
208/barbette//b/main_super/c///and(tag[barbette_need]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,barbette,,b,main_super,c,,0.2,1,,and(tag[barbette_need]),,
"209/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/mount(barbette), or(tag[barbette_need];tag[No_Barb])",,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,0.2,1,main_cal,"mount(barbette), or(tag[barbette_need];tag[No_Barb])",,
210/gun//mc/main_center/c//main_cal/or(tag[barbette_need];tag[No_Barb]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,gun,,mc,main_center,c,,0.45,0.95,main_cal,"or(tag[barbette_need];tag[No_Barb]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,
211/tower_main///////or(tag[No_Barb];tag[barbette_need]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_main,,,,,,-1,1,,"or(tag[No_Barb];tag[barbette_need]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,
212/tower_sec///////or(tag[No_Barb];tag[barbette_need]),,"bb, bc",,1,1,tower_sec,,,,,,-0.75,1,,"or(tag[No_Barb];tag[barbette_need]), and(!tag[NAR_GG_TFT_GG])",,

 

However, doing this the autodesign doesn't use the main tower anymore. I am lost.

I will copy all the No_barb lines to create a new one. A big list, and should fix my issues. I hope.🙏

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:22 PM by o Barão

[o Barão]

3 hours ago, visitor223 said:

I am a bit confused about what changed in the updates in the game recently. Before, I could place barbettes anywhere on the hull as long as they were available and wouldn't clip or obstruct anything. But now, it changed. I reverted to the version that allows me to put barbettes anywhere (I forgot the version number). Is there some kind of file that manipulates that? I am curious. 

 

Taf dll.

• 3.4.4 - Reworked barbette patch and fixed crash. Now no part changes are needed; barbettes behave exactly as they used to in terms of hull requirements and what is needed in their mountPoints and params, but they can be placed freely on the deck. The crash with funnels is also fixed. If it's desired to restrict barbettes to the centerline (like the old behavior), put `center` in the barbette's param column.
• 3.4.3 - [Modder Support] New Feature: when a barbette has `free` in its mountPoints (e.g. "free, si_barbette") then it can mount freely like a gun. Note that it will need excluding from old hulls via adding need/exclude tags to its params.

[visitor223]

Opened an old save, and this is what I saw. I clicked both options repeatedly and it did not stop.....

[NathanKell]

@o Barão I'll try to look through the randparts stuff later. BTW I was debugging the unmounted casemate guns last night and don't know why yet, but I should be able to fix.

 

9 hours ago, visitor223 said:

I am a bit confused about what changed in the updates in the game recently. Before, I could place barbettes anywhere on the hull as long as they were available and wouldn't clip or obstruct anything. But now, it changed. I reverted to the version that allows me to put barbettes anywhere (I forgot the version number). Is there some kind of file that manipulates that? I am curious. 

 

Works for me. Please post your melonloader log and give repro steps.

3 hours ago, visitor223 said:

Opened an old save, and this is what I saw. I clicked both options repeatedly and it did not stop.....

Typo. Fixed in 3.16.1

[o Barão]

18 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

@o Barão I'll try to look through the randparts stuff later.

Not important atm, thanks. I already discover that I need to copy all the data from a design style and then replace with my values to make it work. A big list, and this will take sometime. Then I can, in theory, use that as a reference for future variants.

[PalaiologosTheGreat]

I forget, this mod won't be updated to any newer version right?

[Peksern]

8 minutes ago, PalaiologosTheGreat said:

I forget, this mod won't be updated to any newer version right?

As I understood, it will be updated. The Baron and NathanKell are working for weeks now to make it compatible to the current UAD Version and adds all the features that are necessary for it.

Edited Tuesday at 10:21 PM by Peksern

[Maximus Tyberius]

Great job guys. I wish I could help. But at the moment I have no time... when I get some time I will try to find out how and if the number of provinces and ports can be increased. 

[o Barão]

13 hours ago, PalaiologosTheGreat said:

I forget, this mod won't be updated to any newer version right?

Yes is going to be updated to the new version. It will take some time because hundreds of components' stats are being edited. I am also trying to understand how "randparts" file works to know how I can Improve the AI designs. But to be honest, is also more how not to get crazy with all the frustrating results I am getting from editing that file.😒

I already give up with the idea of creating my own ship design styles, and will instead just be making small improvements. As an example, to edit the "styles" to prevent seeing barbettes close to the bow or stern. (EDITED: already done)

 

A little mod status update:

• The removing of small barbettes from capital ships, improved a lot the AI design language. I know some players will hate this change, but it is so much better now. No more decks cluttered with many small barbettes placed in regions without any logic. And to be fair, only the Littorio and Yamato class had small barbettes IRL, if I am not mistaken. The Yamato will still have access to those iconic barbettes, and I am not sure if I will do the same with Littorio.
• I had to revert my changes to the AI using only big guns because it was affecting also the secondaries. @NathanKell maybe it is possible to add this modifier"ai_min_caliber_main"?

Edited Wednesday at 11:24 AM by o Barão

[Peksern]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

The removing of small barbettes from capital ships, improved a lot the AI design language. I know some players will hate this change, but it is so much better now. No more decks cluttered with many small barbettes placed in regions without any logic. And to be fair, only the Littorio and Yamato class had small barbettes IRL, if I am not mistaken. The Yamato will still have access to those iconic barbettes, and I am not sure if I will do the same with Littorio.

Don't worry. From my game experience, these small barbettes were mostly useless. If you were lucky, they allowed you to install one more small caliber turret on each side of a dreadnought. But in most cases you could directly mount it on the deck as well without a barbette. So.. don't care about the barbettes too much.

[VadimAleks]

On 10/15/2024 at 10:12 AM, Maximus Tyberius said:

It would be nice to always have the option of attacking manually.

The developers disabled this feature somewhere around patch 1.3
On 1.2.4, the attack on the convoy worked, I didn't try the subsequent versions 1.2.x, in 1.3.x it didn't work anymore

[Lucky Kadono]

3 hours ago, o Barão said:

Yes is going to be updated to the new version. It will take some time because hundreds of components' stats are being edited. I am also trying to understand how "randparts" file works to know how I can Improve the AI designs. But to be honest, is also more how not to get crazy with all the frustrating results I am getting from editing that file.😒

I already give up with the idea of creating my own ship design styles, and will instead just be making small improvements. As an example, to edit the "styles" to prevent seeing barbettes close to the bow or stern. (this will take some time)

 

A little mod status update:

• The removing of small barbettes from capital ships, improved a lot the AI design language. I know some players will hate this change, but it is so much better now. No more decks cluttered with many small barbettes placed in regions without any logic. And to be fair, only the Littorio and Yamato class had small barbettes IRL, if I am not mistaken. The Yamato will still have access to those iconic barbettes, and I am not sure if I will do the same with Littorio.
• I had to revert my changes to the AI using only big guns because it was affecting also the secondaries. @NathanKell maybe it is possible to add this modifier"ai_min_caliber_main"?

the ability to put barbettes anywhere was a highlight of this mod for me sad to see it go away i like having as much secondary guns as posible on my ships cause id rather have my BBs up front with fast firing low caliber guns and heavy armor to take the hits and have my BCs snipe from long range with big guns . if there is a way to turn it on again once you disable them maybe i can change my files to have them on again?

[visitor223]

The barbette thing has been resolved.... but the old campaign save, even with the new TaF file, still gives me the screen. This time, my government placed neverending paperwork.... 

[visitor223]

Here is my save file if you are curious....

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mqngbLbe4WQK9ZBLnW2L4sHfaoZkoj_t/view?usp=sharing

[o Barão]

Mod update:

• edited all barbettes entries in the "randparts" file to prevent seeing barbettes close to the bow or stern from AI designs. It should be impossible or very rare to see it happen, well I hope.

34 minutes ago, Lucky Kadono said:

the ability to put barbettes anywhere was a highlight of this mod

That is from Taf, not NAR, and you can still do that on cruisers, but for capital for the moment this is the best solution I could find to improve the AI designs.

 

There is possible other solution that I will run some tests today, like removing these entries from the "randparts" file:

465/gun/p/c1///s/sec_cal/mount(barbette),,"bb, bc",,4,8,gun,p,c1,,,s,-0.3,0.3,sec_cal,mount(barbette),,
466/gun/p/c2///s/ter_cal/mount(barbette),,"bb, bc",,4,16,gun,p,c2,,,s,-0.3,0.3,ter_cal,mount(barbette),,
467/gun/p/c3///s/ter_cal/mount(barbette),,"bb, bc",,4,24,gun,p,c3,,,s,-0.3,0.3,ter_cal,mount(barbette),,
468/gun/p/c4///s/sec_cal/mount(barbette),,"bb, bc",,4,32,gun,p,c4,,,s,-0.3,0.3,sec_cal,mount(barbette),,
469/gun/p/c5///s/ter_cal/mount(barbette),,"bb, bc",,4,64,gun,p,c5,,,s,-0.3,0.3,ter_cal,mount(barbette),,

 

Or maybe, just limit the zrange from 0,0. I already limited all secondaries barbettes to -0.3,0.3 so it should happen only in the middle.

 

If it works, then I will enable again for the player to use them.

 

Edited: not worth it the trouble to find a solution for this

AI designs:

Before

 

After, and this is not the worst example.

 

Side barbettes for secondaries on capital ships (only the Littorio?) were very rare, but also makes the AI in this game to make incredible bad designs.

Edited Wednesday at 11:38 AM by o Barão

[PalaiologosTheGreat]

6 hours ago, o Barão said:

The removing of small barbettes from capital ships, improved a lot the AI design language. I know some players will hate this change, but it is so much better now. No more decks cluttered with many small barbettes placed in regions without any logic. And to be fair, only the Littorio and Yamato class had small barbettes IRL, if I am not mistaken. The Yamato will still have access to those iconic barbettes, and I am not sure if I will do the same with Littorio.

 

 

No :((((((((((((((( I really love making superstructure for my cap. ship

[Peksern]

1 hour ago, PalaiologosTheGreat said:

No :((((((((((((((( I really love making superstructure for my cap. ship

I'm honestly curious: Why? What's the advantage?

[EDDufa]

43 minutes ago, Peksern said:

I'm honestly curious: Why? What's the advantage?

Fire sectors.