[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



South America tried to into dreadnoughts edition.

Talk about botes, bote based wargaming and RPGs, and maybe even a certain bote based vidya that tickles our autism in just the right way.

Games, Ospreys and References (Courtesy of /hwg/)
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/lx05hfgbic6b8/Naval_Wargaming

Models and Manufacturers
https://pastebin.com/LcD16k7s

Rule the Waves
https://mega.nz/#!EccBTJIY!MqKZWSQqNv68hwOxBguat1gcC_i28O5hrJWxA-vXCtI

Previous: >>55187570
>>
File: moreno_david_buell.jpg (85 KB, 744x486)
85 KB
85 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>
File: 1177042055502.jpg (63 KB, 943x554)
63 KB
63 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55344009
I never understood having 6 2-gun turrets: would it truly have been so difficult to have the same total number of guns redistributed into 4 3-gun turrets? Surely the heavier turrets and larger barbettes would be offset by the smaller citadel, consolidated superstructure, and generally smaller profile/better power-to-weight ratio?
>>
>>55347078
Triple turrets were mechanically more complex than double ones, plus there were some major teething problems that took some time to solve. Not to mention that the Argentinian ships were designed and build before US started using triples.
>>
>>55343169

The Brazilians' experience with those things makes you think the Ottomans were on to something about taking care never to have their government "under the guns" of one of their warships.
>>
File: USS_Nevada_1943.jpg (52 KB, 1095x348)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>
File: 1368223231.jpg (747 KB, 4086x2493)
747 KB
747 KB JPG
>>
>>55347438
The big guns Brits used for their dreadnoughts (also applies for states that used guns derived from those guns) didn't really get decent until 13.5//45s.
>>
>>55349525
Also Greenboy shells.
>>
File: NH 60419.jpg (167 KB, 1280x1030)
167 KB
167 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55347438

>brazillian dread what do
>don't commission the cray-cray son

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolt_of_the_Lash
>>
File: 5Y2w7QW.jpg (422 KB, 1450x978)
422 KB
422 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55345187
Monitors a sex.
>>
>>55351931
I love this. Brazilian government tries to prove they're all big and bad by acquiring modern ships only to get them stolen out from under their noses by a bunch of dindus and made to give concessions at main gunpoint.
>>
>>55354559

yandere brazillian brown beachbunny shipgirl when?
>>
>>55354582
All of my yes.
>>
>>55354559
South America, the promised continent of meme countries. Well at least Bralizians didn't manage to turn themselves from a potential great power into a borderline 3rd world country that is only remembered because of a lost war and internet maymays like Argentinians did.
>>
>>55354950
Especially hilarious considering Argentina and Chile's dreadnought designs were both more powerful than the Minas Geraes class. The Rividavia class was better armored AND faster, and the Almirante Latorres were super-dreads with 14-inch guns instead of 12s.
>>
File: QgjVGxb.jpg (326 KB, 2048x1450)
326 KB
326 KB JPG
>>
Can the anon with the lovely ww2 ships on the pill shaped bases please post some pictures? I've just got some ship miniatures and I want to steal your design. Thanks
>>
File: KZ2vEOJ.jpg (602 KB, 1450x908)
602 KB
602 KB JPG
>>
Thanks to these threads, im starting an RtW game this week. This seems like it should be an enjoyable little clusterfuck.
>>
>>55357079
Ha! That's USS Oregon parked along the south waterfront in Portland. I recognize the hills in the background.
>>
>>
>>55354582
>modernized Brazilian dreadnoughts with trunked funnels
Tingly.
>>
>>55360034

Tubetop for the remodel version, I think.
>>
>>55356134
I'll post some in the morning, along with a how-to. I'm away from all my stuff right now, and won't make it there any time tonight that I'll still be reasonably clear thinking.
>>
>>55361247

Thanks, anon, and post when you can As long as your posts are in the naval general, we'll find them.
>>
File: n45orAT.jpg (238 KB, 1450x777)
238 KB
238 KB JPG
>>
File: rs6pOmH.jpg (553 KB, 1450x1840)
553 KB
553 KB JPG
>>
File: 80-G-K-4523.jpg (206 KB, 1280x864)
206 KB
206 KB JPG
>>
File: 1768287.jpg (756 KB, 2048x1407)
756 KB
756 KB JPG
>>
File: Four Stacker Stacks.jpg (2.22 MB, 5444x3762)
2.22 MB
2.22 MB JPG
>>55364315
Normally I never save pictures of the Iowas, because they annoy me for the sheer amount of wank they receive, but that's actually a pretty cool pic. I've always enjoyed pics of ships docked, and seeing the rest of the harbor around them like that.
>>
>>55366034
For me it's all about WW2-era pictures of the Iowas. 9 out of every 10 Iowa pics you find are, naturally, gonna be of the 80's refit.
>>
File: 6766337751_6c4e4f9abd_b.jpg (317 KB, 1024x792)
317 KB
317 KB JPG
>>
How viable is a no capital ship (BB, BC, CA) game in RTW? Has anyone here tried? What are other fun challenges that people do?
>>
>>55367183
>How viable is a no capital ship (BB, BC, CA) game in RTW?

Enjoy getting fucked over by navy league screeching about cruisers and prime minister/kaiser whining about not having enough battleships.
>>
>>55367231
What if I only build really shitty battleships when people start complaining about them, and just mothball them?
>>
>>55367257
You could probably get off with 6k coastal battleships with 9 inch guns.
>>
>>55367183

Subspam isn't quite fun-level.
>>
>>55367348
Alright, so which country should I play as? Japan has the torpedo bonus tech, but it's kinda far from Europe, where all the fun is.
>>
>>55367387
I'm not going to subspam, ok.
>>55367391
P-please reply
>>
>>55367391
If you want torpedoes Austria also gets a bonus to that research.
>>
>>55367666
>Being a literal K.u.K
>>
>>55367387
>Subspam isn't quite fun-level.

Spamming u-boats can be pretty effective tactic against UK if you can build up a critical mass of medium range submarines.

>>55367703
>not wanting to fill up adriatic sea with wrecks of pasta boats
>>
>>55367735
>wanting to destroy those beautiful works of Roman art
>>
File: battle[1].jpg (563 KB, 800x600)
563 KB
563 KB JPG
>>55362948
>>55356134
Right then. So a little bit of background first. Galeforce 9 produced some really nice looking acrylic bases (which are now OOP) for the defunct Axis and Allies: War at Sea game (Pic related). This was where I got the idea to do lozenge style bases. There is still an active WAS community, and there is somebody that makes new acrylic bases still. So if you're wanting the least amount of work, then you could try asking here> https://forumini.boards.net/ to see if you can't track down someone to make acrylic for you.

If you're up for a bit of work, then here's how I go about it. cont.
>>
>>55367703

>Be KuK
>design a low-freeboard, short ranged, cramped, -1 x4 11-inch/6-inch secondary battery for 10,000 tonner, start with two and 2 building
>get lazy and AC design is that with some legs, less armor, 10-inch guns and a forecastle, start with two
>lay down two more B's at game start
>right about the time have 6 B's, realize have re-errected 3-emperor's league- alliances with Russia and Germany...
>WAR WITH BRITAIN
>here's the plan- stick and move in the med, Willie and Nickie smother the north sea in under-gunned B lard, win on blockade
>opening engagement a 6-6 B match, sure, I do it. I'll fuck off for port if Ican't gang up on something
>sink a cruiser, decide to leave with the laurels...
>B GETS TORPED
>BLOCKADED
>next fight, 5-6 ok, risk it
>B SUNK BY GUNFIRE
>BLOCKADED
>meanwhile not-BC's are keeping the VPs roughly even because they own anything they encounter
>12 British B's now in med fighting inconclusive battles every month
>North Sea finally being blockaded
>super-cruiser gets torped finishing off a raider CL, the victory-point engine starts to wind down
>unrest at 9, two B's left, no CLs, two CAs... send in a revolutionary
>BRIT GOVERNMENT COLLAPSES-SORT OF, victory with 5 points!
>get egypt

whew

>scrap unrest-spewing deathtraps, lay down -1 11-inch 20,000 ton BB's
>keep cruisers
>>
File: Basessteps.jpg (749 KB, 1008x756)
749 KB
749 KB JPG
>>55368256
So I have large amounts of scrap matboard leftover from framing posters and pictures and the like. It's easy to cut, fairly low profile, and for me, was essentially free, because scrap.

Ideally you'd have a t-square, triangle, or a carpenters square, and you'd take and mark out a bunch of blanks to the size you desired. A steel ruler and a utility knife with a fresh blade will do nicely for cutting them out. (Don't waste a good x-acto blade on this, it will wear them out quickly).

Previously, I would take a coin that was approximately the right size, and mark my round ends, then rough cut with a pair of scissors and then shape with a soft sanding block until I had as close to a circular rounded edge as I could manage. However, someone in /hwg/ turned me on to using semicircular leather punches, which can be had for pretty cheap off amazon, and nowadays that's what I use to do the rough cut. I still have to shape it with a sanding block, but it's overall less work to make it look nice.

Next is basecoat and then rough waves with a piece of sponge, followed by blacking the edges with a sharpie.

Last up, I add a battle jack name of the ship, the wake, and then brush over the whole thing with some future wax, which is basically gloss acrylic medium for cheap.

I don't permanently attach ships, because I like being able to take them off for pictures or other things, and because I want to experiment with water effects somewhere down the line, so these may not be permanent bases.
>>
>>55368495
Now I don't know what scale ships you have, so pic related may or may not be of use to you. However, the idea behind it should be. I've tried to standardize on two lengths of base in three size categories: Super short small for things like corvettes and coastal subs, and longer for TB's and DD, a short and long cruiser size, and a short and long capital ship size. You'll have to play around for a while to find what feels right.

If you were doing 1/1800th, I could give you more specific measurements and post my PDF with the flags if you'd like.
>>
File: 1.jpg (440 KB, 1920x1080)
440 KB
440 KB JPG
>>55367666
>>55368397
Fine, I'm starting an Austria run with the following rules:
No building capital ships (BB, BC, CA) except for the ones at start, unless some losers start clamoring for them, in which case the cheapest, shittiest, coastal battleship shall be built.
No subspamming unless we're really fucked.
Historical tech
Game budgets
Legacy Fleet
Is it even possible to get fleet battles without battleships?

January 1900
Admiral Ribbentrop, the new Commander-in-Chief of the Kaiserliche und Königliche Kriegsmarinee, took office as the year began. A firm believer in the Jeune École doctrine, he ordered the prioritization of light forces over the heavy and unwieldy battleships and armored cruisers so famed in modern times. Will this radical naval theory bring glory back to the K.u.K., now just a shadow of its former self? Only time will tell...
>>
File: 2.jpg (36 KB, 913x315)
36 KB
36 KB JPG
>>55369074
To lead the new fleet, two Bravo class light cruisers, 6900 ton ships armed to the brim with 6 inch guns and torpedoes, were ordered.
>>
>>55369074
>Is it even possible to get fleet battles without battleships?

I remember getting few in my battlecruisers only runs.
>>
>>55369241
The SMS Kigio, a legacy destroyer design, was discovered to be too slow against modern standards, reaching a max speed of only 27 knots. Such incompetence!
Our scientists have invented the improved hydrostatic valve, increasing the speed and range of our torpedoes, the backbone of the new fleet.
As the foolish construction queue from the previous minister begins to clear up, two more Bravo class cruisers were ordered in November.
Our relationship with France has taken a sudden turn for the worse, a fact not helped by a recent policy failure by the Kaiser.
>>55369371
For some stupid reason, I am only going to use CLs and DDs. I'm not even good at this game.
>>
File: 4.jpg (84 KB, 566x549)
84 KB
84 KB JPG
>>55369407
On March 1901, the Salamander class Destroyer was designed, due to the invention of the 600 ton destroyer and the worsening relationship with France. 12 ships were ordered to begin the production run.
Bastards! France has sabotaged and sank DD Panther! June 1901 is a month that shall forever live in infamy. Hopefully our training in night fighting and torpedo warfare shall pay off.
Our first battle takes place in Cattaro, where the French Fleet intends to raid our coast.
>>
File: 5.jpg (364 KB, 1065x824)
364 KB
364 KB JPG
>>55369544
Contact is made with the French Fleet at 02:20, 06/16/1901. We'll show them the might of the our Empire! Gott erhalte, Gott beschütze, Unsern Kaiser, unser Land!
>>
File: 6.jpg (88 KB, 931x661)
88 KB
88 KB JPG
>>55369626
Although we have lost many brave sailors, the French B Trident was sunk by our torpedoes! Hurrah!
>>
>>55369801

The jeune-ecolle can probably manage to not sound like crazy-people buoyant on a sea of blood that got lucky if they sell that as heavy-ordinance is most effective in land installations, that's where we put the guns and then hammer-and-anvil with the modern fleet.
>>
>>55369801
12 more Salamader class destroyers were ordered as a reaction to our losses in the previous battle.
Small battles continued for the next few months, leading to small losses on both sides.
The movement of the French main fleet to the Mediterranean has lead to the blockade of our beloved empire! Something must be done! But must we abandon our core principles so quickly?

>>55369860
The Admiralty acknowledges the suggestion from our loyal citizenry!
>>
>>55369074
>Not going for a Capital-ship-only run.
Pleb detected.
>>
>>55370079
Capital ships are boring, DDs are cuter
>>
>>55370147
>DDs are cuter
>cuter

>3" guns
>cuter than
>13" guns

Do you even Rule the Waves?
>>
>>55370147
And id love to see those puny little 4"ers kill a legacy CA. All Caps or bust!
>>
>>55370301
>>55370372
>Not wanting to be penetrated by a torpedo below your waterline
What are you, gay?
>>
>>55370408
>Not putting a full stack of light anti-DD guns on all of your Capitols.

Error: Pleb detected. Not enough Dakka.
See >>55370301 for further details.

Also:
>What are you, gay?
Asks a 'man' who doesn't like having lots of big guns.
>>
>>55370647

Austrians do start with a +1 3-inch, small but cute as a button
>>
>>55370818
... I'll give you that one. Also Germans.
Who are totally not my favorite nation partly because of that.
>>
>>55370818
I always wondered what that gun is supposed to represent. I know that the Germans have a +1 3" because of their 88mm guns, and the Italians probably because of their 90mm guns, but what about the Austrians? The closest thing I can find is this thing, but it's only 66mm in caliber.
>>
File: qK9ncUw.jpg (314 KB, 1450x963)
314 KB
314 KB JPG
>>
File: RwR08nT.jpg (414 KB, 1450x983)
414 KB
414 KB JPG
>>
>>55368580
>

Hey anon, thanks for this! Hadn't thought about standardising base sizes. Also really like the painted bases.

I've picked up some 1/3000 navwar ships.
>>
>>55373114

Another hideous French beast. At least this is a new one I wasn't familiar with.
>>
File: 1368331904.jpg (809 KB, 3090x2022)
809 KB
809 KB JPG
>>55373831
Frenchies are an acquired taste.
>>
File: 2832908_orig.jpg (70 KB, 958x538)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>>
>>55373114
>>55374510

I am firmly convinced that every French naval architect in the latter half of the 19th Century was suffering from tertiary syphilis.
>>
File: 6366b-brest13-10-13-08.jpg (419 KB, 1500x1139)
419 KB
419 KB JPG
>>
>>55357613
join the battlecrusier masterrace. Dreadnoughts are for losers.
>>
>>55377541
>Dreadnoughts are for losers.

No, they're not!
They're just ... sitting in the port, doing nothing and looking pretty ... seriously, wtf's wrong with the RtW design team - battlecruisers tend to get included into battleship battles, and BB's never get to show up in BC's battles? Even when my BB's are just as fast as BC's ...
>>
File: Uss_idaho_bb-42.jpg (5.17 MB, 4369x3276)
5.17 MB
5.17 MB JPG
>>55377541
bitch say what
>>
File: 9c954-brest13-10-13-03.jpg (191 KB, 750x866)
191 KB
191 KB JPG
>>
File: 6746465_f496.jpg (99 KB, 496x503)
99 KB
99 KB JPG
>>55379506
From the thumbnail I thought this was a cargo sub, pic very related.
>>
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH RTW2 WHEN
>>
File: 555.jpg (89 KB, 1524x178)
89 KB
89 KB JPG
>>55379641
Maybe next year.
December 2018, probably.
>>
>>55378464

I can safely say that BB's will show up to BC battles, moreso if you don't have BC's or CA's (or CL's for that matter).
>>
>>55379682
Maybe next decade.
December 2017, anyone? It'll sure make MY Christmas.
>>
>>55379939
I've had a couple of BB-only runs in which ALL of my late-game Cruiser battles were 2 5kt CL vs. a 48kt BC affairs ...
>>
>>55380004
Sounds like it is a time to spam 8k ton kitakamis.
>>
Playing an almost exclusive big boat AH game.

>Early 1910
>France(and not Italy surprisingly) has been eyeing us for over two years.
>Finally go too far for them apparently and they declare war.(probably had something to do with us making an alliance with the US)
>AH immediately gets blockaded of course.
>Over the course of three months my smaller but far better trained fleet roflstomps two French squadrons.
>1BB, 2B, 5CA, 2CL, and 8DD sunk for the loss of 1CA and 1DD on our end.
>Up nearly 10k and each time peace comes up they want to keep going.

Happily Frustrated.
>>
File: 6800345259_48094318d5_b.jpg (374 KB, 1024x843)
374 KB
374 KB JPG
>>
File: 526d1-brest13-10-13-05.jpg (208 KB, 750x999)
208 KB
208 KB JPG
>>
>>55380422
>kitakamis
That's not how you spell Kamikaze's, anon ...
>>
What's your favorite ship with a story behind it?
>>
>>55377084
Fat French aft.
>>
>>55382158
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_William_D._Porter_(DD-579)
>>
File: 007_uss_illinois_1905.jpg (257 KB, 1450x875)
257 KB
257 KB JPG
>>
File: RH26l9A.jpg (404 KB, 1450x1047)
404 KB
404 KB JPG
>>
File: 5JYgZ7h.jpg (1.41 MB, 2469x1500)
1.41 MB
1.41 MB JPG
>>
>>
File: rMhHYAm.jpg (289 KB, 1450x924)
289 KB
289 KB JPG
>>
File: Deutschland-1200-web.jpg (169 KB, 1200x878)
169 KB
169 KB JPG
>>
So why exactly did French pre-dreads be so weird?
>>
File: sOgehOt.jpg (466 KB, 1450x1058)
466 KB
466 KB JPG
>>
File: 20170914160922_1.jpg (585 KB, 1920x1080)
585 KB
585 KB JPG
There is a distinct lack of Scharnhorst in here.
>>
File: 20170914161243_1.jpg (520 KB, 1920x1080)
520 KB
520 KB JPG
>>55391528
I aim to fix that.
>>
File: gneisenau_02[1].jpg (53 KB, 625x343)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>55391528
>>55391600
>Cursebote posting

Carry on, the Scharnhorsts are the only German WW2 botes I actually like, if we exclude submarines.
>>
File: 20170118051802_1.jpg (469 KB, 1920x1080)
469 KB
469 KB JPG
>>55391812
Not liking Bismarck?

Is Zere SomeZhing Wrong with Glorious Wotan Steel Hauptmann?
>>
File: ersatzyorck03[1].jpg (140 KB, 640x290)
140 KB
140 KB JPG
>>55391835
I don't really like post-WWI ships all that much, with a few exceptions. Guess I'm just a dumb botehipster.
>>
File: 20170520074641_1.jpg (403 KB, 1920x1080)
403 KB
403 KB JPG
>>55391835
Terrorist your game is through...

Cuz now you've got to answer too...

MUUHRRIICAAHHH! FUCK YEAH!
Coming again to save the motherfuckin day yeah!
>>
>>55391924
Well dreadnoughts are pretty awesome.
>>
File: 20170914165317_1.jpg (275 KB, 1920x1080)
275 KB
275 KB JPG
>>55391924
I've got photos of that Bote!
>>
File: 20170914165516_1.jpg (378 KB, 1920x1080)
378 KB
378 KB JPG
>>
File: 1259660578051.jpg (71 KB, 318x220)
71 KB
71 KB JPG
>>55391936
A North Carolina, arranged like a Nelson, wearing British flags.

WTF.
>>
>>55392112
>>55392067
Sometimes I just really wish they would have finished the Mackensens and/or Ersatz-Yorcks.
They just appeal to me in every way.

Man, now I made myself sad again.
>>
File: 20170914165235_1.jpg (379 KB, 1920x1080)
379 KB
379 KB JPG
>>55392341
Here's a photo of me wrecking a Nevada's day with 15 inch cannonfire to cheer you up.
>>
File: 20170314110348_1.jpg (619 KB, 1920x1080)
619 KB
619 KB JPG
>>
>>55391936
..are those ALL superfiring?
>>
File: 20170520074433_1.jpg (429 KB, 1920x1080)
429 KB
429 KB JPG
>>55392605
You're god damn right they are! (Mostly)
>>
>>55392779
Just imagine this thing in a RodboЯ setup...
>>
File: L2.png (48 KB, 1721x531)
48 KB
48 KB PNG
>>55392605
Gotta love it when designers go crazy with the superfiring.
>>
File: 20170401104524_1.jpg (478 KB, 1920x1080)
478 KB
478 KB JPG
>>55392811
Looks right for a german ship, more firepower running away then going forward.

Unlike the Royal Navy, where it is ADVANCE ALL THE TIME.
>>
File: 20170914162837_1.jpg (387 KB, 1920x1080)
387 KB
387 KB JPG
>>
File: 20170122172838_1.jpg (314 KB, 1920x1080)
314 KB
314 KB JPG
>>55393384
Battlecruisers 4 Life.
>>
File: 2005-07-06-2231.jpg (170 KB, 800x780)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
>>55343169
>>
>>55393694
no
>>
>>55393840
yeah, real kancolle musashi is way hotter than that
>>
>>55393384
That prow gets me hard.
>>
>>
>playing RtW
>unlock All or Nothing armor scheme
>well I'm playing as americans, lets go full AoN for capital ships
>get in war
>lose most of my BB/BCs to crits/magazine explosions
>okay.png

I'm confused, wasn't the whole point of the AoN scheme specifically to prevent that sort of thing from happening? Or did I just underarmor my ships or something (I gave them around 13-13.5" of belt, timeframe is 1921)?
>>
>>55395782
How thick were your decks and turret tops?
>>
>>55395782
This late in the game you're sometimes better off skimping on belt armour and making your deck stronger, then staying at range. Closing range in 1921 makes gun penetration go up VERY fast.
>I'm confused, wasn't the whole point of the AoN scheme specifically to prevent that sort of thing from happening?
Sort of, but not really. The thing about AoN is that it removes the sloped deck behind the belt, which gives you a pretty big boost to your belt. One of the reasons why early dreads and pre-dreads are so hard to penetrate early in the game.
>>
File: 20170726162437_1.jpg (332 KB, 1920x1080)
332 KB
332 KB JPG
>>55395782
Armour was defeated by Armament when the British introduced the 15 inch gun.
>>
File: 20170914163034_1.jpg (355 KB, 1920x1080)
355 KB
355 KB JPG
I don't care what people say, WoWs has nothing on this game.
>>
File: 20170915010232_1.jpg (323 KB, 1920x1080)
323 KB
323 KB JPG
>>
>>55397409
What game is this? Looks quite nice.
>>
>>55397958
I believe this is Steel Ocean. It's kind of...it's like somebody took Battlestations: Pacific and expanded its mechanics a little.
>>
>>55397958
>Looks quite nice.

Looks are deceiving.
>>
>>55395875
>One of the reasons why early dreads and pre-dreads are so hard to penetrate early in the game.

The other ones being shit shell quality and more often than not questionable quality guns.

For comparison between start of the game and end of the game guns.

Penetration for 10 in guns (early)
Range - Side / Deck
5000 - 4,8 / 0
8000 - 4 / 0,6

Max range: 10469

Penetration for 10 in guns (late)
Range - Side / Deck
5000 - 12,5 / 0
8000 - 10,4 / 0,9
12000 - 8,4 / 1,4
15000 - 7,1 / 2,1

Max range: 16800

Both guns were quality 0, the difference between -1 vs 1 quality guns is even larger.

Penetration for 12 in guns (early -1)
Range - Side / Deck
5000 - 6,4 / 0
8000 - 5,4 / 0,6

Max range: 11281

Penetration for 12 in guns (late 1)
Range - Side / Deck
5000 - 20,4 / 0
8000 - 17,2 / 0,9
12000 - 14 / 1,6
15000 - 12,2 / 2,2
20000 - 8,8 / 3,2

Max range: 23400
>>
>>55398902
Jesus.
>>
>>55382158
Hard to pick just one, anon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Susquehanna_(AOG-5)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Laffey_(DD-724)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Edinburgh_(16)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_North_Carolina_(BB-55)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNLMS_De_Ruyter_(1935)

Just a few with stories I've enjoyed.
>>
>>55399632
Hell, I forgot the damn Twins. Dunno how I managed that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flores-class_gunboat
>>
>>55399632
>USS Laffey (DD-724)
My basket ball brother.
>>
File: USS Laffey DD724 full.jpg (2.36 MB, 3288x2536)
2.36 MB
2.36 MB JPG
>>55399709
>>
File: xr6VyRs.jpg (254 KB, 1450x891)
254 KB
254 KB JPG
>>
>>55395817
>>55395875
Ah, that would probably explain it. I was still designing my capitals for close range fights. My BBs still only had 2" of turret top armor.
>>
>>55399304
>>Jesus

Jesus indeed. It pays to know what your tech is capable of. It pays even better to know what your enemies' tech is capable of.
>>
>>55400780

>wince

I kept a pair of 1st-gen 21000 ton Dreads with a HMS Bellerophon gun layout and -600 ton over flotation penalty (refit from -1 11-inch to +1 12 inch as an unexpected windfall) well into the late game just because of that kind of thing. They killed shit. Well, they killed awesome ships twice their size, plunging fire +1 12's is kind of a sweet spot against a lot of things.
>>
>>55401342

Although their finest hour (and the battle that broke the pair, one went where the other couldn't follow) was when they got into a point-blank blastout with multiple enemy divisions in a large engagement when a super-dread lost power in the middle of a battleline clash and somebody had to hold the line and protect the new guy

>I think three of the enemy BB/BC kills were theirs, though
>definitely two of them where
>the superdread survived
>>
File: la2IExi.jpg (307 KB, 1450x967)
307 KB
307 KB JPG
>>
File: AsaXAG1.jpg (287 KB, 1449x1386)
287 KB
287 KB JPG
>>
File: PWOd7v6.jpg (304 KB, 1450x797)
304 KB
304 KB JPG
>>
File: 20170409182300_1.jpg (400 KB, 1920x1080)
400 KB
400 KB JPG
>>55397958
Steel Ocean, free on steam, great little game. Has superior mechanics to World of Warships and requires actual skill to play.
>>
File: 20170123191306_1.jpg (361 KB, 1920x1080)
361 KB
361 KB JPG
And I'm not pro Steel Ocean for no reason, but this is a game where secondary batteries matter, and primary batteries feel powerful on battleships. Where a DD has a role beyond scout, since they are great at taking out submarines, oh, and the game has submarines.

Cruisers are multi-purpose, but not overpowered, since fire isn't as ridiculous as in WoWs.
>>
>>55404657
>>55404873
I remember trying that out a while back and it felt really janky and unintuitive to play, have they improved that since then?

Also, how bad is the grind for free players, and does it have any sort of pve mode?
>>
File: 20170520080327_1.jpg (402 KB, 1920x1080)
402 KB
402 KB JPG
>>55404919
Tiers 1-3 are PvE. It only feels janky when you start, everything makes sense after about ten games.

Key to remember: You are more easily spotted when moving fast, or shooting. New courses affect accuracy, so BBs have to sail straight while engaging. Cruisers are mobile and aim faster, for a DD, turning is life.

It all makes sense after a few games. The tutorials are pretty crap though.
>>
File: 20170625135341_1.jpg (331 KB, 1920x1080)
331 KB
331 KB JPG
>>55404919
The grind is actually pretty easy. 3x exp for first ship, and if you play 100% free, you should be tier 5 in 50 battles or so if you are good.
>>
File: 20170915133958_1.jpg (284 KB, 1920x1080)
284 KB
284 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55405588
That's a badass angle. Really does look like a castle of steel.
>>
File: uboat-courierpost.jpg (379 KB, 1500x1100)
379 KB
379 KB JPG
>>
Just tried out World of Warships

How the fuck do you stay alive as a DD? The instant I get spotted some fuckstick in a battleship drops 12 rounds on my ass and that's me done. Speed is no defense, people are just too accurate no matter how hard I jink. And the concealment mechanics are super unintuitive.
>>
>>55407857
From my experience (which admittedly isn't super high level or anything), your best bet is to limit how long you stay spotted using terrain, smoke, distance etc and try to use your speed to get to a position where you can ambush enemy ships (eg. wait behind an island and torp anyone that passes it). Anything more specific than that probably depends on what line you're playing, and I'm only familiar with the IJN DDs

>the concealment mechanics are super unintuitive
Basically, concealment is one of the circles around your ship on the minimap. If an enemy is within that circle and can draw LoS on you, you get spotted. Certain factors such as skills/equipment, firing your guns, whether they are a ship or a plane, using radar/smoke, etc can change the exact numbers. There's probably a more specific explanation on youtube or a wiki or something.
>>
Really miss RtW lads
Computer is dead, and while I could just get a real cheap one to play it I am saving for something better.
Very sad.

Any recent news on the sequel? The advancement into WW2 territory gives me a semi. Pushing the time back a bit to 1890 or so would be cool too, spend more time with predreads.
>>
File: 20170123191929_1.jpg (422 KB, 1920x1080)
422 KB
422 KB JPG
>>55407857
I just don't play that game.
>>
>>55408922
what makes steel ocean better than wows
>>
>>55408871
I'd want more pre-dreadnoughts, pushing into WW2 makes me worried the late-game is just gonna be more torpedo spam from everything.
>>
>>55409452
Might make a post on the forums. Pushing the game start back a few years surely can't be too hard to implement.
>>
File: 20170520080521_1.jpg (467 KB, 1920x1080)
467 KB
467 KB JPG
>>55408992
In my opinion (and take that for what it is worth)

Steel Ocean has better defined roles for ships. A Battleship is a heavy hitter, with a light cruiser on each side in the form of secondaries. A cruiser is a true jack of all trades, master of none. DDs are the eyes of the fleet, and the escorts. Subs are overwhelmingly powerful but vulnerable. Aircraft Carriers are rapid response glass cannons.

A lot of the tactics you see being used in game actually reflect real naval tactics (to a point.) The weaponry feels effective, and you seem less at the mercy of RNGesus then in WoWs, so playing a good game feels (to me) like more of a personal accomplishment then just a roll of the dice. Coordinated teams will stomp enemy teams. Lone wolfing destroyers don't last long, as do BBs that think they don't need the rest of the fleet.

Seeing a flotilla steaming at speed on the maps, the distances and ships feel epic, unlike WoWs where it feels like a bathtub rather then the open ocean.

Hard to explain perfectly, but it seems to hit the feel of naval combat better somehow.

Oh, and the heavy guns sound like heavy guns. WoWs has really bad sound design when a DD popping off sounds more epic then a 9 gun broadside from an Iowa.
>>
>>55409733
My only real complaint about steel ocean is that it seems like everybody and their mother can pop smoke at any time and it's always perfectly effective even in ships that ought to have radar for that sort of thing.
>>
>>55410345
Put a spotting plane over top of them, then wail on them. Also, if they pop smoke, they reveal where they are, and they can't shoot, since they lose the benefits of smoke.

It can be annoying, but there are tactics to deal with smoke, chief among which is waiting them out, they can only carry a limited amount of the stuff.

And usually they are stopped in the smoke, so you get a spotter plane over them, and you're going to be able to smack them with a heavy salvo.

Radar I agree would help, but think of smoke as smoke and chaff if you need a more realistic explanation for the in game mechanic.

I still like the implementation over WoWs as well.
>>
>>55408871
>>55409452
>>55409479
IMHO, pushing it back all the way to 1860 and first Ironclads would be goat.
The entire tech progress from 1860 to 1900 was even more insane than the one from 1900 to 1925, IMHO.
>>
>>55410830
It would be great, but that's exactly the reason why it would be less realistic that it would or could happen. Pushing the timeframe back only a few years though to get a bit more time with predreads is relatively straightforward and wouldn't break the engine.
>>
Crossposting from /hwg/
Wondering where you lads would place a razee in this table?
>>
(Also crossposting from /hwg/)
My take is >>55411263
>>
>>55411314
Cheers cobber
>>
>>55411238
I'd be inclined to agree with >>55411314
>>
>>
>>55411238
Just as a follow up to this, how often would squadrons of frigates meet? 2x2 is going to be a pretty common game for us, I can see going up to 4x4 though which would, from my casual knowledge, probably be more appropriate for ships of the line
>>
>>55412680
>how often would squadrons of frigates meet? 2x2 is going to be a pretty common game for us, I can see going up to 4x4 though which would, from my casual knowledge, probably be more appropriate for ships of the line

Not really.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lissa_(1811) for more info.

Also (as counterpoint) see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Raz_de_Sein

Exceptions to the rules always exist.
The rule of thumb, however is:
Main Theatre = mostly battleships with frigates in support
Secondary Theatres = mostly frigates & corvettes with a battleship or two making a guest-star appearance.
>>
>>55412881
Nice. Could justify going either then.
>>
So what age of sail rulesets do you guys play with anyway?
>>
File: HMS Conqueror.jpg (545 KB, 1600x800)
545 KB
545 KB JPG
>>
>>55412680

To expand further on >>55412881's excellent answer, Nelson's famous lament was entirely accurate: There were never enough frigates to handle all the jobs the fleet needed frigates to do. Frigates either scouted for the battle line and stayed the hell out of any resulting battles or were dispatched on a variety of independent missions.

The constant need for frigates is why frigates rarely if ever worked in groups consisting of only or even mainly frigates. They'd either work alone or, if support was necessary, with other smaller vessels.
>>
>>55414399

It's the NelRods' great-grandpa!
>>
>>
File: 098651601.jpg (145 KB, 1200x877)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
>>
File: eWXYPTP.jpg (247 KB, 1450x853)
247 KB
247 KB JPG
>>
File: 1385036646.jpg (3.47 MB, 3398x2719)
3.47 MB
3.47 MB JPG
>>
>>55416336

Ahhh... The Stonewall/Kotetsu/Azuma. She makes an appearance in every thread.

While she looks good on paper, she's oddly lacking in Yaquinto's otherwise fine "Ironclads" and in a few other naval rules sets I've played.
>>
>>55417311

I find her quite beautiful. Shes under armed imo and wasn't a great sailor with that huge ram of hers but I think she's probably my favorite of the early ocean going ironclads.
>>
>>55417311
She is a derpy franco-confederate-japanese ironclad so what is not to love?
>>
>>55417730
>>55417822

Don't get me wrong. I love her looks and she gave the Japanese good service during her brief career.

She just looks like a better warship than she actually is.
>>
File: 010137.jpg (209 KB, 2000x455)
209 KB
209 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55420287
And on that day anon learned that freeboard could be low enough to be HELLAFLUSH
>>
File: XRyzyxN.jpg (1.48 MB, 2727x1465)
1.48 MB
1.48 MB JPG
>>
>>55413107
I use Warhammer Historical's Trafalgar.
>>
>>55421469
Hells yeah. Good rule set.
>>
>>55421228
>a photo of a kgv
>she doesn't look fugly in it

What sorcery is this?
>>
File: S4EAdfT.jpg (194 KB, 1450x907)
194 KB
194 KB JPG
>>
1-2 France
3-4 US
5-6 Shitaly
7-8 Russia
9-0 UK
dubs G*rmany
>>
>>55420287

not gonna lie, if I was ever on that bote I'd be swimming for shore as soon as I could kick my shoes off

>if i couldnt control my panic id have convinced myself that shoes could be kicked off in the water
>>
>>55423004
>not gonna lie, if I was ever on that bote I'd be swimming for shore as soon as I could kick my shoes off

If you were on that boat you'd be swimming as soon as the ship was steaming ahead full and a mild breeze kicked up.
>>
>>55420287
I want to see this taken to the limit-maybe have a tumblehome prow/hull so that hydrodynamics push her down as she gets up to speed, with only the bridge and gun barrels above water and air compressors pressurizing the hull to keep water out...speed really would be her armor (in the form of 10 feet of water above the deck and reduced observability preventing accurate enemy fire)!
>>
What does "bonus tech" mean in RtW? for example France has quad turrets as a bonus, does that mean they start with quad turrets at the beginning or they'll unlock it a lot quicker than others?
>>
>>55423683
Soooo... You want a fast version of Surcouf?
>>
Fuck I'm thirsty for RtW2
>>
>>55424081
Easier time to research them.
>>
File: 6803723373_45487bdca3_b.jpg (341 KB, 1024x814)
341 KB
341 KB JPG
>>
>>55427184
What's that chute for? Dumping junk on the painters when they aren't paying attention?
Love it when the belt is visible like that, by the way.
>>
File: nevada800t.jpg (1.19 MB, 2500x1831)
1.19 MB
1.19 MB JPG
>>
File: YZHWbwg.jpg (716 KB, 2765x2132)
716 KB
716 KB JPG
>>
>>55427390
>What's that chute for? Dumping junk on the painters when they aren't paying attention?

It's a garbage or slops chute. It's for food waste and it obviously isn't used when the painters are working beneath it.

You can see a similar one in >>55429309 starboard amidships with 2 crewmen standing near it.
>>
File: 5UJNo8o.jpg (275 KB, 1450x974)
275 KB
275 KB JPG
>>
>>
File: 016108.jpg (568 KB, 3000x2421)
568 KB
568 KB JPG
>>
>>55417311
Because she never actually fought in the ACW and that's all Ironclads covers.
>>
What's this RtW thing everyone's talking about lately?
>>
>>55432282
Rule the Waves, a boat game about naval arms race & battles between 1900-1925.
>>
>>55432282

There's a link in OP.
Download it & play, fer chrissake - it's not even 100MB.
>>
Well after installing WoWS last thread, I'm uninstalling. This game is fucking stupid, the spotting mechanics are dumb as hell, battleships rape everything with pinpoint gunfire, and there's essentially no tactics. I tried playing destroyers, got to tier 4 with Japs and US, and got tired of being deleted in one salvo the instant I was seen.
>>
>>55432378
>>55432308
Can I get a little more info?
>>
File: 1453951385772.png (565 KB, 1000x700)
565 KB
565 KB PNG
>>55432439
>battleships rape everything with pinpoint gunfire
This is how I know you're just shit posting.
Enjoy your you.

Go play Steel Ocean you twat.
>>
File: RTW-sendhelp.png (76 KB, 1897x1013)
76 KB
76 KB PNG
>>55432453
you develop, design, and produce ships during the ww1 naval arms race period. in between wars you try to manage tensions between nations and control the time and place of wars. during wars, you manage your fleets positions in the world, and fight in tactical battles ranging from destroyer skirmishes to full on fleet battles.

the game is run on what looks like microsoft excel but its both in depth and also pretty intuitive.
>>
>>55432439
>playing WoW

You deserve everything you got, you filthy pleb, you.

>>55432453
Basically it's a low-graphics top-down game of kicking ass and taking names on the high seas of the world.

To do this, you need to be good at three jobs:

1. You have a navy to manage - cash comes in, and asskicking has to come out - otherwise the Civilians get pissed and kick YOUR fool ass out. (Seriously, never happened in 2 years I've been playing so far)

2. You have to design, build and maintain the ships you'll be fighting with. Sure, you can leave it to the AI - but he's a moron, and will fuck you over any day of the week. (Hmmm ... AI design only run - not a bad idea - adds some spice into my RtWaifu.)

3. When battle starts, you take over as the Captain/Admiral in charge, and lead YOUR ships (that you designed, build and distributed) to glorious victory (or ignominious defeat) over the dastardly enemy rust-buckets.

Now go download it, install it, and welcome your new addiction with open arms.
Best news: it's as cheap as free.
(But feel free to support the devs, who are working on the new edition of our favourite crack and could use some more inspiration in the form of hard, solid cash in their pocket.)
>>
>>55432709

>but we are the help admiral!

There, now you've made your destroyers cry
>>
>>55432782
those dd's were such heroes that battle. their torps only hit once or twice on that line, but they forced the fleet to abandon its line and avoid torps and let my glorious austrian ships pound them one at a time. 9 german dreads sunk that day costing austria only a dd.
>>
>>55432900
Destroyers do have their advantages.
>cheap to build
>if you make the decently fast since the beginning they never really go completely obsolete
>you can use old ones as coastal patrol vessels and thus don't have to waste money on building ships that will get autoscrapped in a decade anyway
>you mostly likely will end up building a shitload of them during the game anyway
>>
>>55432987
i've never had anything autoscrapped, as long as you do a blank remodel on your ms's every 5 to 8 years they'll be fine for the whole game. my rule of thumb is as soon as a war ends i blank remodel all my cp/asw ships so i dont forget.
>>
>>55432987
Don't forget that they're also the most efficient Blockaders/Anti-Blockaders cost-wise.
12 DD's (of 1500 tonnes) = 1 BB (of 52000 tonnes)
>>
>>55432267

There was an Ironclads expansion, douche nozzle, which covered designs and battles worldwide. She sucked in that too.
>>
File: ONnnZap.jpg (1.6 MB, 5667x4480)
1.6 MB
1.6 MB JPG
>>
>>55432738
Personally I only design CAs and BCs. I just mash suggest for destroyers and CLs until I get a design thats somewhat close to what I want then just I make a few tonnage/caliber adjustments, accept and save.
>>
>>55434964
For CLs I have a few standard designs saved in a folder in the game directory that I modify where necessary
>>
>>55434964
>>55435030
CLs are something that you probably should design yourself if you're interested in using refits to keep them even in somewhat frontline capable state.
>>
>>55435030
I have never been happy with my CL's, not that i've been playing long, mind you, they just seem a little too small for me to use properly. Everything i design always seems to just turn out as a, often too small undergunned CA that doesnt have the punch i want at the end of the day.

Any recommendations to use the little awkward bastards better?
>>
File: torpedo.png (185 KB, 506x582)
185 KB
185 KB PNG
>>55435318
>Any recommendations to use the little awkward bastards better?

Torpedoes, a lot of torpedoes.
>>
>>55435318
I use my CLs as "fuck you destroyers" ships. Cls aren't gonna do shit to capitals but with a good amount of 5 or 6 in guns they'll fuck destroyers up like no tomorrow and prevent enemy torpedo runs. I also usually make a colonial cruiser to compliment my colonial minesweepers and to satisfy the government foreign tonnage requirment.
>>
File: selection.jpg (245 KB, 1920x1040)
245 KB
245 KB JPG
Who to play? thinking either France, SU, or ANZAC. I could also meme it up as Finland
>>
>>55435748
When in doubt go with Italy.
>>
File: 1460924217272.png (44 KB, 658x662)
44 KB
44 KB PNG
>>55435748
>TheAustralian and New Zealand Army Corps
>Rule the Waves
>>
>>55436003
Yeah soft cunt what's up, can't walk on fuckin' water?
>>
>>55436429
I imagine that Australian's don't walk on water but interlink to form giant floating balls like fire ants. instead of steel they use men.
>>
File: 1429394840448.jpg (484 KB, 1024x768)
484 KB
484 KB JPG
>>55436580
Tell them there's a Centerlink in the middle of the pacific, they'll prove you wrong
>>
File: USS_Wisconsin_BB-64.jpg (155 KB, 1280x935)
155 KB
155 KB JPG
>>
>>
>>55436614
What pray tell, is that beauty?
>>
File: YamatoClassBattleships.jpg (140 KB, 1024x768)
140 KB
140 KB JPG
NIPPON ICHI
>>
>>55442537
[hotel intensifies]
>>
>>55435318
Look on the RtW forum at what people have posted and they claim is successful, adjust when you get the feel for it.
>>
>>55443085
>>
What's a good caliber for a secondary battery on a dreadnought? 6 inch guns? 5 inch? 4? Maybe go all the way up to 8?
>>
>>55444894
I tend to go with 6 inchers for earlier dreads but later on switch to using 5 inchers (presuming of course they'ren't stuck on -2 or -1)
>>
File: i4Rpgek.jpg (2.11 MB, 5144x4061)
2.11 MB
2.11 MB JPG
>>
Personally, I would like an extra or two more start dates in RtW2. If they're really adding in WW2 shit, I would like to be able to start maybe in like 1920 or 1930 so I wouldn't have to go through 30 years to try out the new stuff.
>>
>>55446547
If not, you'll probably be able to just change a few numbers in a text file like with RtW as it is and just start with the the tech and so on.
>>
>>55446547
Max docksize could also be upgraded to at least 70k or 80k tons.

>>55446666
>late game aircraft carriers, fast battleships, etc. versus bunch of 14k pre-dreads

That would be pretty hilarious sight.
>>
>>55447442
Whoever's hanging onto it's pre-dreads by the late game deserves everything that happens.
(And that's true even now - with no planes at all)
>>
>>55442537

It's a shame the Japs destroyed so many documents, blueprints, and pictures in a fit pf pique.
>>
>>55441454
>What pray tell, is that beauty?

That was a fanciful proposal which never had a single piece of actual steel or yard space assigned to it. A gifted anon made that wonderful model from the proposal's drawings

The "aviation cruiser" concept was something many nations toyed with between the wars. The proposal that model represents was the "logical" development of the idea as an "aviation battleship".
>>
File: battleship-carrier.jpg (199 KB, 1024x775)
199 KB
199 KB JPG
>>
File: USCruiser.jpg (32 KB, 799x500)
32 KB
32 KB JPG
>>55449377

A far more modest proposal and one that made a bit more sense.
>>
>>55449651

That's the "Half Brooklyn CA/Half Wasp CV" proposal, right?
>>
>>55450023
Close enough. Half Brooklyn/Cleveland-Half Independence basically.

If enemy raiders had been more of a thing...or rather more of an effective thing...or if the US had lost its carriers at Pearl as was planned these could have been a real thing.

I plan to build them if RtW2 allows me to as part of a long range Raider strategy. Minimal Fighters with a larger scout bomber(SBD) contingent and no TBs.
>>
>>55448161

>Whoever's hanging onto it's pre-dreads by the late game deserves everything that happens.

Having the most secure colonies ever?
>>
File: 8AF74RQ.jpg (518 KB, 1450x1132)
518 KB
518 KB JPG
>>
>>55451676

Those old Omaha-class CLs were almost French in their level of goofiness.
>>
As France, Is it a valid strategy to bully AH for more naval funding? They seem to have a shit navy so what I was thinking is to get into a war with them so I get wartime funding without really losing any ships or being in danger since AH ships are piss poor. I could perpetually sustain the war for prestige and money to build ships to compete against Britain, USA, or Germany
>>
>>55452128
Bullying less powers for money&prestige while avoiding to piss of those who're stronger than you is a perfectly valid strategy, personally I would try to also bully Italy in hopes of getting couple of their colonies. Of course bullying also has it downsides, keep kicking them for too long and they're likely to go for sub spam route.
>>
File: historical budget AH.jpg (369 KB, 1275x997)
369 KB
369 KB JPG
This is actually sorta sad. Playing with historical budget on medium and AH is at an all time low out of all the games I've played. At the start of the war they had 4 Battleships and 10 destroyers and just after 2 battles they lost a Battleship and 5 destroyers and it's gotten to the point where I'm blockading them. Can you take homeland if it's blockaded or no?
>>
>>55452987
>Can you take homeland if it's blockaded or no?

Nah, that is the downside of bullying Austrians, no matter what you do you'll not get any material benefits out of it.
>>
File: image.jpg (285 KB, 1874x1148)
285 KB
285 KB JPG
>>55451889
Negative, the goofiness transfer went the other way. Omahas were the inspiration, at least hullform wise for the Duguay-Trouin class, which I think are sexy as hell. Come to think of it, I love the Omahas too, so don't be talking shit about them either. Sexy four stacker botes.
>>
>>55453227
>PROTECTION PRACTICALLY NIL
At least they're honest about it.
>>
Has there ever been a game which focused on combat between pre-dreadnought ironclads?
>>
>>55453617

Sure, dozens of them, both hex&chit and minis.
>>
>>55453598
>tfw you can't kill it because none of your shells will actually BURST in the fucking thing even if you hit it lengthwise
>>
>>55455413
Time to develop proximity fuses for 6" and above!
>>
>>55455413

It's been known to happen...
>>
>1907, want to start making battlecruisers
>only have 3 centerline turrets and -2 13in
Should I just say fuck it and make BCs that will be obsolete the second they go into production?
>>
>>55456388
50% of your designs will be obsolete by the time they're built, anon.
That's no reason not to build them.
After all - the enemy will have some obsolete designs, too.
>>
>>55456388
Go 12", don't fuck with those obsolete 13" guns.
>>
How do you stop raiders?
>>
>>55457097

Active Fleet cruisers and battle cruisers.
>>
>>55457097
Have some of your own CLs/CAs/BCs in the same area the enemy raider is operating in and pray for an interception.
>>
>>55457097
Mostly I just ignore them as there's rarely enough of them about to achieve anything notable so I just wait for them to run out of fuel and get interned or the like.
>>
>>55457097

This: >>55457289

They're most annoying (i.e.sink the most merchants) in the home area, but >>55457147
(usually) applies there, so it's back to >>55457289, tbqh.
>>
>>55457289
I can't really afford to ignore them since they're driving up unrest like crazy.
>>
>>55457401
Then build fast CAs with CL armour and plenty of 8 inch guns, or if you have triple turrets and superfiring centreline tech, a metric shitload of 6 inchers. I find they mulch the CLs most AI use for raiders, though I mainly use them for Cruiser Battles and murdering DDs in fleet engagments, as I rarely need to delegate much in the way of specialised assets to hunting raiders.
>>
>>55457401
>they're driving up unrest like crazy.

No problem - winning some Major Victories will drive it back down again.
>>
>>55457518
Winning major victories is kind of hard when the AI avoids every fight.
>>
>>55457768
t.japan
>>
>>55457518
Only if RNGesus smiles on you. The actual odds of a major victory reducing unrest are fairly low. Once unrest rises, for the most part the only way to bring it down is to end the war.
>>
Does anyone else love it when capitals get to partake in convoy raids? It's fun watching giant behemonths smash tiny merchants will little regard for the puny destroyer escorts.
>>
>>55449651

That's a workable design, albeit you run into problems with needing two sets of command that have to work together.

An escort carrier + a CA will always work better for not much more in overall cost.
>>
>>55457768
If the AI avoids every fight, then he's already done for, and you just have to wait it out.

>>55457908
I had Major Victories consistently reducing Unrest.
Rule of thumb: 1 Prestige awarded = 1 point of unrest reduced.
>>
>>55458104
> If the AI avoids every fight, then he's already done for, and you just have to wait it out.
Unless your country collapses in a revolution first.
>>
>>
File: HMS_Iron_Duke2.png (5.84 MB, 5256x3080)
5.84 MB
5.84 MB PNG
>>
File: J1h5xh9.jpg (364 KB, 1450x1128)
364 KB
364 KB JPG
>>
>>55460858
Neat.
>>
File: HMS-Queen Elizabeth-1.jpg (540 KB, 1215x880)
540 KB
540 KB JPG
>>
>>55462792

Is that a seaplane tender moored beyond the QE?
>>
I'm pretty new to RtW, is there a guide or general rules of thumb for first time players, or is it more of a 'play it badly and learn from mistakes' kind of deal?
>>
>>55463746
Read manuals, read a LP or two, do not choose a nation like UK for your first playthrough, play on smaller flee sizes, prepare to get your ass kicked until you get better at game and learn all the tricks needed to get an aircraft carrier named after you.
>>
>>55463746
for foreign tonnage requirements consider making a colonial cruiser that is a few thousands tons and has colonial service, colonial service acts as a tonnage multiplier so you need only a few colonial ships to satisfy requirements instead of a lot of ships. If your making a ship that stays in home waters then use low range and cramped accommodations to free up space for more armor or guns.
>>
>>55463746
Older ships not fit for frontline duty can have a second life as a colonial garrison ships, refitting them before hand is optional but probably a good idea.
>>
File: dreadnought design.jpg (220 KB, 1012x722)
220 KB
220 KB JPG
First time actually getting past 1920, hows this for a dreadnought? First time actually getting to use all or nothing armor, the ship is meant to just hang around the Mediterranean and Northern Europe. To me it feels way too big and should have it's tonnage reduced, but I don't know.
>>
>>55464648
If you want it to be able to sail between Northern Europe and Mediterranean during a war you probably should upgrade the rage to medium, quad/triple turrets aren't that great of an idea if you don't have tech that makes them reliable, I would go with noticeably thinner secondary battery armor (personally I tend to use 1 inch for them) and if you've improved triples/quad turrets I would mount them in those instead of double turrets, the main ammo per gun is bit low for my taste and I prefer to have 3 fire control positions but 2 probably should be fine.
>>
>>55464648
Lessee:
Short range is OK only if you plan on keeping it at home. Is Indochina okay? No problems from the Japs? If there are, this baby won't be able to get there, you know.

Deck & Turret top armor is way too low for the late game - plunging fire will go straight to your magazines and your pretty BB will go bye-bye.

Secondary armor is too big - 2" is plenty enough to protect them from splinters. Everything else is just a waste of weight.

Hope your main gun Quad turrets are of the Improved version - or half of your gun will be out of action in battle. Don't be tempted to put them in right when they show up - it's a trap.

Other than that, she's good to go.
>>
>>55465673
>>55465673




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.