Early Armor Weight is not Right

[HistoricalAccuracyMan]

No, I'm not wrong. No, I'm not missing something. What I'm about to describe was tested in a custom battle/shared design tab, not the campaign...but that shouldn't matter (this way, the devs and anybody else who is curious can go and check this for themselves and get the exact same situation I am using). The picture below is a direct comparison where all I did was elect different armor types.

In 1894, my battleship (Battleship I hull) is 9750 tons, with 97% of that displacement used (no modules that increase armor weight like barbette or citadel have been selected).
When I switch the armor from Iron Plate, to any other option available (compound, nickel-steel or harvey), the weight jumps up to as much as 11,607 tons which is 122% displacement.

For exact values:

• Compound: 11607 / 9750 tons (122% displacement)
• Nickel-Steel: 11375 / 9750 tons (117% displacement)
• Harvey: 10911 / 9750 tons (112% displacment)

Now, directly from the game's description and stats/values for those armor options:

• Compound: +5% armor cost, +35% armor strength
• Nickel-Steel: -5% armor weight (all types), +25% armor cost, +40% armor strength
• Harvey: -15 % armor weight (all types), +50 % armor cost, +50% armor strength

Notice how none of those armor types actually increase weight. One doesn't (or at least isn't supposed to) change it at all while two actually lower the weight (or are supposed to lower the weight) of all armor types. So why, then, whenever I choose a stronger and (allegedly) lighter armor type, does my ship suddenly gain almost 2000 tons at worst and about 1200 tons at best? Since this is a custom battle, there shouldn't be any tech bonuses from research that effect the armor weight, and the ship isn't excessively armored (even if it was over-armored, Nickel-Steel and Harvey armor should bring the armor weight down).

I am on the latest release (not the beta), I haven't edited save files, I haven't messed with the game code. I am literally just messing around in the ship designer for custom battles. I'm not going to call this a "bug," but there is something definitely wrong here (unless I'm missing something, which I shouldn't be) and this "problem" has been around for a while. Whenever I do a pre 1900 start (or at least until I get Krupp I armor, because starting at Krupp I, all the armor weight modifiers work correctly) I find that you have one of two options when it comes to ship design: make severely under-gunned ships because your armor is (incorrectly) being made heavier, or make your ships glass cannons because you have to skimp on the armor to fit the guns you want.

Has anybody else noticed this or experience this with early (pre-Krupp I armor) dates, either in the campaign or custom battles?

@Nick Thomadis I know I've said it before about not liking to ping the devs and I don't want to direct message you because you guys are probably busy enough, but seriously: what is wrong here? If the in-game text is actually supposed to read +XX% armor weight instead of what it currently reads, that seems like it's an easy fix (and that also seems like the more likely issue here, if I had to guess). If that is actually how the text is supposed to read, then something is wrong with the code pertaining to the multipliers for armor weight. I hope (and would appreciate) you answering this question, or at least looking into it and seeing if there is anything wrong here. Thank you in advance (I hope...).

Edited June 25, 2023 by HistoricalAccuracyMan

[Suribachi]

Just pointing out something since the rest of your post is extremely through and I do not see this next bit mentioned: 

Taking your post at face value, I am assuming that your are doing nothing other than changing the armor type that is being used.  As such, the amount of armor on the belt and other areas is not changing.  This being said, are you factoring in Iron Plate's effect of "-80% Armor Weight (Belt, Belt Extended)" into your calculations for why Compound, Nickel-Steel and Harvey might be heavier?

[HistoricalAccuracyMan]

@Suribachi I will admit, I did not see that part on Iron Plate that mentions "-80% armor weight (Belt, Belt Extended)" and yes I was only changing the armor type, not thickness--but Iron Plate also has a note that says "+7.5% armor weight (all types)."

Now, if we assume that only iron plate has that -80% weight reduction to the belt armor (and going by the tool tips in game, it is)...then every armor type would make early ships overweight, since even Modern Armor II only mentions a -50% armor weight (all types).

Now I'm wondering, why does only iron plate armor get that special weight reduction while every other armor type doesn't? Why is it that solid iron reduces the belt armor weight, but once you upgrade armor to a stronger AND lighter armor (every other armor has the -XX% armor weight (all types) note on it)...you suddenly lose the belt armor weight savings? That doesn't make sense to me, and I personally think that should be the other way around where Iron Plate is the heaviest regardless and you can only get lighter from there.

Idk, it's just weird to me how early ships have to cut a fair bit of armor to save weight while more modern ships seem to have few problems in this area. Maybe it's because early ships have such low displacement that armor weight is a large percent.

[Dave P.]

Honestly, I'm not sure why there's much, or any, weight savings with different armor types?

I took high school chemistry and know nothing about metallurgy. But they're all >95% iron, so a 10" thick slab of Iron vs. a 10" thick slab of STS steel or Krupp style armor should be about the same mass... right?

[HistoricalAccuracyMan]

Mass and weight are not the same thing. 100 kg of bricks won't weigh the same as 100 kg of feathers

[neph]

On 7/1/2023 at 4:50 PM, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

Mass and weight are not the same thing. 100 kg of bricks won't weigh the same as 100 kg of feathers

God I hope you're making the world's driest joke

[Wowzery]

I haven't figured out this armor either.  If I create a battleship, switching from iron to anything other than Krupp increases weight, some cases a lot.  In a cruiser it seems like the weight decreases.

And this is doing nothing other than changing the armor.

I honestly don't bother creating a battleship anymore until I have a dreadnought hull and Krupp armor.

[ioulaum]

 

Is that really hard to read the bottom line?

[anonusername]

On 6/25/2023 at 7:17 PM, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

No, I'm not wrong. No, I'm not missing something. What I'm about to describe was tested in a custom battle/shared design tab, not the campaign...but that shouldn't matter (this way, the devs and anybody else who is curious can go and check this for themselves and get the exact same situation I am using). The picture below is a direct comparison where all I did was elect different armor types.

In 1894, my battleship (Battleship I hull) is 9750 tons, with 97% of that displacement used (no modules that increase armor weight like barbette or citadel have been selected).
When I switch the armor from Iron Plate, to any other option available (compound, nickel-steel or harvey), the weight jumps up to as much as 11,607 tons which is 122% displacement.

For exact values:

• Compound: 11607 / 9750 tons (122% displacement)
• Nickel-Steel: 11375 / 9750 tons (117% displacement)
• Harvey: 10911 / 9750 tons (112% displacment)

Now, directly from the game's description and stats/values for those armor options:

• Compound: +5% armor cost, +35% armor strength
• Nickel-Steel: -5% armor weight (all types), +25% armor cost, +40% armor strength
• Harvey: -15 % armor weight (all types), +50 % armor cost, +50% armor strength

Notice how none of those armor types actually increase weight. One doesn't (or at least isn't supposed to) change it at all while two actually lower the weight (or are supposed to lower the weight) of all armor types. So why, then, whenever I choose a stronger and (allegedly) lighter armor type, does my ship suddenly gain almost 2000 tons at worst and about 1200 tons at best? Since this is a custom battle, there shouldn't be any tech bonuses from research that effect the armor weight, and the ship isn't excessively armored (even if it was over-armored, Nickel-Steel and Harvey armor should bring the armor weight down).

I am on the latest release (not the beta), I haven't edited save files, I haven't messed with the game code. I am literally just messing around in the ship designer for custom battles. I'm not going to call this a "bug," but there is something definitely wrong here (unless I'm missing something, which I shouldn't be) and this "problem" has been around for a while. Whenever I do a pre 1900 start (or at least until I get Krupp I armor, because starting at Krupp I, all the armor weight modifiers work correctly) I find that you have one of two options when it comes to ship design: make severely under-gunned ships because your armor is (incorrectly) being made heavier, or make your ships glass cannons because you have to skimp on the armor to fit the guns you want.

Has anybody else noticed this or experience this with early (pre-Krupp I armor) dates, either in the campaign or custom battles?

@Nick Thomadis I know I've said it before about not liking to ping the devs and I don't want to direct message you because you guys are probably busy enough, but seriously: what is wrong here? If the in-game text is actually supposed to read +XX% armor weight instead of what it currently reads, that seems like it's an easy fix (and that also seems like the more likely issue here, if I had to guess). If that is actually how the text is supposed to read, then something is wrong with the code pertaining to the multipliers for armor weight. I hope (and would appreciate) you answering this question, or at least looking into it and seeing if there is anything wrong here. Thank you in advance (I hope...).

This is working as designed, iron plate is meant to be thick and light but low quality for belt armor, but heavy and similarly low quality for deck armor.

[Wowzery]

This has been a thing for a while now.  I've only seen this massive weight increase on battleships, not cruisers. Its really to the point you either build a battleship with iron, or wait until you get the first Krupp armor as anything else is too heavy to build a well armored battleship.

[anonusername]

On 11/2/2023 at 9:26 AM, Wowzery said:

This has been a thing for a while now.  I've only seen this massive weight increase on battleships, not cruisers. Its really to the point you either build a battleship with iron, or wait until you get the first Krupp armor as anything else is too heavy to build a well armored battleship.

You have to look at the actual efficiency of the armor, not just the total thickness. Harvey belts may weight more than Iron, but they have twice the strength per inch and are equally efficient for turret armor, whereas using iron can lead to overweight turrets ruining your BB's handling. Also, Iron increases hull and engine weight, further cutting into the weight benefits.