|
I wasn't familiar with this game before this thread and I'm pleasantly surprised with the graphics and that it seems to get things largely right so far.
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 16:48 |
|
uPen posted:The only thing sadder than that is that there's still a ship with a lower seed in the tournament and she's going up against Yamato. Better to be blowed up, than hollowed out and parked outside a failed tourist trap in LA.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 21:59
|
|
|
bewbies posted:longer ships are faster for reasons I do not understand. This is actually really simple. To move a ship in water at speed, you need to move the water out of the way. Doing this is where most of the power from the engines goes. (This is called wave-making drag, because after the ship has passed, the motion dumped into the water becomes waves. There is also surface drag, which is basically friction, but because of square-cube scaling that is not very significant for large ships.) The amount of work you need to do depends on how fast the water needs to move out of the way. Consider two ships of equal beam and draft, but one is longer, with a finer curve to it's bow, while the other is stumpier. For the longer ship, the work of accelerating water sideways out of its way starts earlier, and it has a longer time to move out of the way, which means the peak speed it's accelerated to is lower. Since E = ½mv^2, the total energy needed to move the water is lower.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Another effect is that for equal tonnage, the longer ship can be less wide and therefore have less water to push out of the way period. Although that's getting into cruiser hull vs battleship hull and true battleships are generally fat as all hell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 22:33
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Man, we've had a bunch of "WW1 design meets WW2 design and gets curbstomped" matches so far. Next one up ought to be more interesting I think? I'm not super up on their specs but I understand that despite being an older design Hood was viewed pretty favorably going into WW2 and might be more of an even match for an interwar design. The initial matches are pitting the top seeds against the bottom seeds. It's not really surprising that there's a bunch of blowouts...really what it's saying is that the seeds have been chosen correctly. Hood was a popular ship in her day, but she does suffer from the battlecruiser problem of inadequate armor. If she's facing a ship with good fire control, she's in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Hood was a popular ship in her day, but she does suffer from the battlecruiser problem of Britain cursed the entire class by naming the first BC ever 'Invincible' and angering Poseidon with their hubris.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 22:50
|
|
|
How did pagoda masts fare in combat? They just look wrong to me- top heavy and fragile- and no one else seems to have copied them. Also is there some way of sending this thread back in time to when I was 12? Tuna-Fish posted:This is actually really simple. To move a ship in water at speed, you need to move the water out of the way. Doing this is where most of the power from the engines goes. (This is called wave-making drag, because after the ship has passed, the motion dumped into the water becomes waves. There is also surface drag, which is basically friction, but because of square-cube scaling that is not very significant for large ships.) That is really helpful. Thanks, suspiciously aptly named poster!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 22:54
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:How did pagoda masts fare in combat? They just look wrong to me- top heavy and fragile- and no one else seems to have copied them. Pagoda masts were a side-effect of upgrading old ships. Rather than find space for radar, fire control, etc in a more compact structure, they just kept packing more rooms onto the old tripod mast that the ship had from day 1. They were vulnerable, especially if you managed to hit the elevator, without which it's a lot harder to move crew around. That said, it's pretty common for most of the superstructure on a ship to not be particularly armored. A lot of superstructure (on most ships, anyway) is for nonessential ship functions like bunks, laundry, etc. During battle, nobody's going to be in those areas anyway, so why waste displacement on armoring it? The ship does have a heavily-armored "citadel", from which core ship functions can be directed during combat. If you tour a museum ship, you should be able to walk through an impressively thick, solid metal door, which is the primary access to the citadel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:06
|
|
|
Matchup #6: HMS Hood (1920) vs Scharnhorst (1939) HMS Hood  Belt Armor: 12 inches Deck Armor: 3 inches Main Battery: 8x15 inch guns Speed: 30 kts History’s most famous secondary explosion, and one of only a couple proper battlecruisers in the tournament. Hood was a long, lean, fast, and very pretty ship, the ultimate expression of Jackie Fischer’s “greyhounds.” Hood became the pride of the Royal Navy after WWI, and was arguably the world’s most famous ship when Bismarck put a round into her magazine and blew her in half. Before that though, she had a gunfight with the French in one of history’s weirder naval battles. Hood’s speed, firepower, and belt armor are all quite good, and she got a rebuild just prior to WWII that will be replicated here. Her deck armor is very thin for her size and remains a major vulnerability, but she can probably trade fire with her battleship cousins and not blow up…immediately. Ironically enough, I think she’ll be best served closing to a range where she can take shots off her belt armor rather than her deck while letting those big 15 inch guns do their work. Scharnhorst  Belt Armor: 13.8 inches Deck Armor: 4.1 inches Main Battery: 9x11 inch guns Speed: 31 kts Scharnhorst (pictured here flipping the bird to someone) is easily the weirdest mix of capabilities in this competition. The Germans, when making that tough decision of firepower/protection/speed (pick 2), were possibly the only navy in history to pick “speed” and “protection.” The result is a full-sized battleship with the smallest main guns in the competition. There were plans to give her proper 15 inch guns at some point, but the Germans lost interest in this for some reason. The result was a ship that was exquisitely fast and well-protected, but that seriously lacks fangs. Her 11 inch battery will fire very quickly and probably accurately, but her ability to seriously threaten a contemporary competitor is pretty limited. As such, she’ll have to choose between keeping her distance and ineffectually plinking away at her targets, or getting up close and hoping her crazy thick belt armor can make up the difference in firepower. The Battle  This is a bizarre matchup: two big modern ships that both have serious flaws in their design. Hood isn’t designed to take much of a beating (especially at long range), but Scharnhorst can’t give much of a beating (especially at long range). I think this is probably something of a tossup. If both ships go for the “slugfest” tactic, the fact both have heavy torpedoes may actually come into play at some point, crazy as that might seem.  Hood is very long.  Scharnhorst seems confident.  Hood opens up first, at around 25km. She misses by a fair amount.  Scharnhorst has to close the distance a bit before she’s in range (which I believe is a bit ahistorical, but whatever). She opens fire as soon as she gets the range.  Scharnhorst’s long range gunnery is better. She pokes a few holes in unimportant parts of Hood’s belt, but is able to penetrate her deck even from a long ways out.  Hood makes what seems like a smart decision. Her belt can hold up to Scharnhorst, but her deck cannot. Plus her long-range gunnery has been pretty inconsistent. She turns directly towards Scharnhorst and tries to close the range as quickly as she can.  As she pulls nearer Scharnhorst and lands a couple of shots, the alarm goes off: TORPEDO, PORT SIDE. She tries to evade, but she’s already at flank.  The torpedo hits the very end of Hood’s stern. Initially, Hood breathes a sigh of relief: she avoided a devastating torpedo hit to her midsection. But soon, the news comes up from the engineering spaces: her rudders are all gone. Hood can now steer only by engine differential.  Through all of this, Hood never stops firing. And her guns are doing work. She knocks out ‘Bruno’ turret.  Ah, gently caress, this is not good.  BANG  POW  Other ships might’ve just quit right there, but Hood is made of grittier stuff. She keeps pouring fire on Scharnhorst, and destroys turret ‘Caesar’ creating a flash fire. The damage to Scharnhorst is severe, but not lethal. Scharnhorst loses rudder authority thanks to the blaze.  Which leads to this absolutely bizarre situation: two battleships, fighting at point blank range, neither of which can turn. They’re locked together at about this angle, both crawling forward at about 15 kts. Hood is a huge ball of flames and wreckage, but her gun turrets are still firing. Scharnhorst only has one functioning turret…and it can’t quite train onto Hood. She hammers Hood with her 6” guns, but to little effect. She takes a beating from Hood’s 15” guns, though Hood misses many shots due to her serious damage and flooding. If Hood can just keep things here, she’ll probably win…  Scharnhorst regains just enough rudder authority to get her one remaining turret trained on the wreck of the Hood.  Hood could’ve taken a lot more 6” fire, but the 11” guns at close range finish the job started by the torpedoes: Mighty Hood simply can’t take any more water, and she founders. Unfortunately I’m an idiot and didn’t grab the rollup page before I clicked “OK” or something, but holy hell, what a battle. I legit thought Hood was going to pull it out before somehow Scharnhorst got her one remaining tiny battery aimed at Hood’s bow. Scharnhorst used nearly her entire magazine of 11” rounds and didn’t score any truly devastating hits (eg, all of Hood’s turrets were in working order when she sank) but her protection held up and her fire was very accurate. Her torpedoes were also incredibly effective…unlike Hood’s which I don’t think she even used. She’s going to be a tough one for SoDak: her guns won’t be much of a threat, but she’s going to take one hell of a beating, and she might get lucky with a torpedo or two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:08
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
now that was a strange fight
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:19
|
|
|
 Now this is the edge of the seat excitement that we looked for! All it would have taken was a touch more luck and Hood could have pulled this off, but I guess the German emphasis on "boats that come back alive" paid off in the end. Though it would have been funny if both boats ended up losing steering and driving away from each other into a draw. TooMuchAbstraction posted:The initial matches are pitting the top seeds against the bottom seeds. It's not really surprising that there's a bunch of blowouts...really what it's saying is that the seeds have been chosen correctly. I gotta admit, I don't pay much attention to tournaments of any kind and I don't rightly know what seeding means exactly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:19
|
|
|
What range did Scharnhorst fire the torps at ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:23
|
|
|
Goons sinking the Royal Navy once more
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:26
|
|
|
This is a good thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:27
|
|
|
It is a curse for the naval grog that luck plays so great a role in dreadnought naval combat. I was rooting for ya, Hood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:33
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:What range did Scharnhorst fire the torps at ? I'm honestly not sure as I was furiously switching back and forth between the ships, but I'd guess 10-12k meters? Something like that. I think the reason she got hers off is she had a swivel deck launcher instead of the one in the hull. I had meant to say something snarky about how deck mounted torpedoes probably pose more of a threat to the ship they're mounted on than the enemy but forgot, and good thing because that would've made me look stupid. Tomn posted:I gotta admit, I don't pay much attention to tournaments of any kind and I don't rightly know what seeding means exactly. Its just a preliminary ranking of participants, the idea being you don't have the top players play one another until later in the tournament. I thought about doing a randomized bracket but this seemed more "fair" such as it is. It isn't really a surprise the really close fights are the mid-bracket ones. Colorado and Revenge (up next) should be a tight affair also. bewbies fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jan 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
Man, playing the campaign with lovely 19-century torpedoes made me forget just how dangerous the modern long-ranged torps could be. Hoping we'll see some more hot torp-on-torp action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
This is loving awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
HORST! HORST! HORST!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
And so it is decided by the noble torpedo, bayonet of the sea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 00:08
|
|
|
Tomn posted:
Bewbies already answered this, but in a bit more detail: the #1 seed is the entrant judged (by whoever is running the tournament) to be the best. If you had them face the #2 seed in the first match, then you'd frontload the excitement...and also guarantee that the final match could not include both of the two probable best entrants, because one necessarily got eliminated early. Similar logic applies, to a lesser extent, to any match that isn't #1 vs #32, #2 vs #31, etc. The practical upshot is that the top-ranked entrants have an easier path to the finals, which means that the viewers are likely to get exciting matches in said finals. But early matches tend to be blowouts...or else very surprising upsets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 00:21
|
|
|
gently caress yes torps on fast commerce raiders VINDICATED
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
Damg, I almost picked Scharnhorst for my bracket but thought Hood had the edge. Good battle though, that was definitely a close one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 00:31
|
|
|
I didn't even think of the torps when considering this matchup. What a battle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 00:32
|
|
|
A torpedo kill and it's not even an IJN ship  
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 01:34
|
|
|
Man what a wild result! Would have never picked Scharnhorst to win that in a million years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 01:38
|
|
|
What a bloody brawl.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:The initial matches are pitting the top seeds against the bottom seeds. It's not really surprising that there's a bunch of blowouts...really what it's saying is that the seeds have been chosen correctly. The Hood is a bit strange. It was Maximal battleship when introduced, but because it was the flagship, it spent the 1930s sailing around showing the flag when it should have been getting a refit. By the 1930s, the Royal Navy was acutely aware of what needed improving, but through a combination of depression austerity and general business, she avoided the now badly needed upgrade and refit. When Hood and the Prince of Wales set out to intercept Bismark, Hood is in bad need of a refit, and the Prince of Wales had a novice crew and was still shaking down her systems. Didn't matter much when the Bismark scored a critical hit. Somebody get BalloonFish in here
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
This next one is going to be extremely interesting. Pretty evenly matched WW1 era battleships duking it out
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:25
|
|
|
I'm pulling for the Colorado. I love that ship. And I think she's got an edge over the Revenge if she has her WWII refit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:27
|
|
|
Are there any other battleships slingin' torpedoes? I only know about Nelson's torpedo tubes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:54
|
|
|
I'm really looking forward to the promised WW1 desperado thunderdome. If they can provide anything like the Hood/Scharnhorst drama they'll be pretty amazing. Also we could get to see the oddball old designs actually fire something other than fore turrets while trying to chase down an uncatchable foe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 02:58
|
|
|
Scharnhorst (and Gneisenau) not getting 15" guns was for a very simple reason - they weren't ready yet when the ships were built, because German industry was having to design a new 15" gun from scratch. And plans to swap out the turrets to the same ones as on Bismarck were repeatedly delayed due to the start of hostilities. Ironically, said rearmament plans would also spell the end of Gneisenau, as it was under heavy repair work - including preparation for rearming it with 15" guns - when Hitler threw a fit after the Battle of the Barents Sea and ordered all major surface vessels scrapped. The Kriegsmarine ultimately managed to save their still active ships, but the completely out of action Gneisenau wasn't so lucky - all repair work was ordered stopped, all weapons were taken off, and it just sat in place in its unrepaired state until the end of the war. Lord Koth fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Jan 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 03:08
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Are there any other battleships slingin' torpedoes? I only know about Nelson's torpedo tubes. Pretty much all WW1 battleships had a couple torpedo tubes. They didn't fire them often though. BB fights were usually at longer ranges, and torpedoes fired at long range have to go slower and are wildly inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 03:10
|
|
|
Isn't the coup d' grace on the Bismarck one of the only times a BB torpedoed something in actual combat?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
gohuskies posted:Pretty much all WW1 battleships had a couple torpedo tubes. They didn't fire them often though. BB fights were usually at longer ranges, and torpedoes fired at long range have to go slower and are wildly inaccurate. The only country to operate battleships and have none of them capable of firing a torpedo is Brazil, and since the Rio de Janiero was going to be able to do so it's a massive fluke that it happened that they ran out of money and sold her to the Ottomans and the British wound up keeping her as Agincourt. Everyone was into the things through the dreadnought era. As I remember discussion of period wargaming, the point of them was mainly to confine enemy maneuvering options. Gun ranges kept getting longer, but so did torpedoes, so generally they were considered useful things to have to potentially break up an enemy line if they got close. If I remember right, for one of the US standard classes, they accepted a half knot speed loss in return for torpedoes (due to smaller machinery spaces). And then WWI happened and it turns out that torpedo flats are large rooms that can't be subdivided, which makes them amazing flooding receptacles, as shown by SMS Luetzow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:And then WWI happened and it turns out that torpedo flats are large rooms that can't be subdivided, which makes them amazing flooding receptacles, as shown by SMS Luetzow. Also a submerged torpedo tube is basically a hole in the armor that leads directly to powerful explosives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 03:26
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Also a submerged torpedo tube is basically a hole in the armor that leads directly to powerful explosives. Or a deck mounted one is a pile of explosives on your deck. Even better when said pile of explosives is oxygen fueled as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
You know, guys, this whole "war" thing sounds really unsafe. e: also I went and wiki'd Battle of Barents Sea, and I challenge anyone to find a more German name than Kptlt. Karl-Heinz Herbschleb Tree Bucket fucked around with this message at 06:23 on Jan 4, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2022 06:18
|
|