|
does the game simulate the differencies in steel?
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
ChubbyChecker posted:does the game simulate the differencies in steel? It does. There's a variety of armor qualities to choose from, from simple iron plates to advanced krupp steel. Also, I think the Standards are pretty. But then, I like my battleships extra thicc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
Another surprise USN standard win! Let's see what happens next match when Richelieu fights... let's see here... oh good, yet another 1910s USN ship with 14" guns. Gaius Marius posted:Starting to think the US was pretty good at this Navy thing. To be fair, the USN gets docked major points for this. bewbies posted:
I'll be fascinated to see how the standards do in round two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
gohuskies posted:Another surprise USN standard win! Let's see what happens next match when Richelieu fights... let's see here... oh good, yet another 1910s USN ship with 14" guns. tbf the New Yorks are decidedly pre-Standard, without the all-or-nothing armor scheme that made them such tough nuts to crack. I would be absolutely shocked if Richelieu doesn't eat it for lunch. It'll be interesting to see what happens when the Standards get pitted against the 1930s fast battleships. My initial instinct is to say that their 14" guns and inability to pick the range would work against them (and also, the modern fast BBs are just larger), but then again both Nagato and Queen E had bigger guns and the speed advantage, and it wasn't enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:35
|
|
|
That was an absolute nailbiter of a fight. Shame about the QE, I was a bit of fan of that class after reading about HMS Warspite and how she led a squadron of destroyers into a fjord in northern Norway to absolutely blender a bunch of German destroyers, and got out again unscathed. Oh, and her floatplane sank a submarine. Never did like the US standards, especially back when I played WoWS. So slow, squat and ugly. Just... Ugh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:36
|
|
|
bibliosabreur posted:tbf the New Yorks are decidedly pre-Standard, without the all-or-nothing armor scheme that made them such tough nuts to crack. I would be absolutely shocked if Richelieu doesn't eat it for lunch. Colorado probably advances, matched-up versus Dunkerque, but Yamato should have no trouble with New Mexico. Vanguard should dismantle Tennessee, but that is probably the one to watch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 00:41
|
|
|
Matchup #16: Richelieu (1940, #5 seed) vs USS New York (1914, #28 seed) Richelieu  Belt Armor: 13 inches Deck Armor: 6.7 inches Main Battery: 8x15 inch guns Speed: 32 knots I have to disclose that Richelieu is probably my favorite battleship, because it is very pretty, and smartly designed, and just a lot of fun. She was built to kill Littorio, and would have, probably. Her speed/protection combination is nearly as impressive as Iowa, and her main battery hits hard for 15” guns. As built Richelieu was pretty nasty, but after the Allies brought her on board and upgraded her, she went to straight top-shelf. Originally hesitant to put high-end electronics on her, the British finally put top of the line gear on her later on in the war. This is a little ironic, as the British attacked her several times earlier in the war. She’s one of the newest and best equipped ships in the field, with a very efficient protection scheme, screaming fast top speed, and plenty of firepower. USS New York  Belt Armor: 12 inches Deck Armor: 2 inches Main Battery: 10x14 inch guns Speed: 21 kts New York is a bit of a transitory ship: they were the first ship to feature big-kid guns, but were also coal fueled, like an old timey train. They were quite capable as designed, but show up rather poorly next to the Queenie and German Bayern class that were commissioned shortly after. Despite being Old As gently caress both the New Yorks fought in WWII, with the Texas making quite a famous contribution as a floating artillery battery in support of the D-Day landings. New York would be nuked, while Texas, god bless her, is still around as the oldest dreadnought museum ship. New Yorks don’t have the hefty build of the standards, but they’re still pretty thick, and have good guns. They were very quickly rendered obsolete historically, and they’re among the poorest-equipped ships in the field. The Battle  New York isn’t a standard, but…still, these dumbass American ships. She can’t hang with Rich, right? RIGHT??  Pretty ship.  I mean, honestly, she’s kind pretty in her own right.  That is a shitload of very concentrated firepower.  Rich’s long range gunnery is actually quite poor – she does not score a hit until around 20km. But, the hit is a very bad one, straight through the deck.  New York finally starts to bring her turrets around to play.  And loses one almost immediately after.  Right as she’s about to open fire, Rich puts a round into NY’s conning tower. These hits are devastating – they can bring the ship to a screeching halt. NY’s captain is killed, and she’s momentarily paralyzed.  To give an idea how bad NY is hurt, look at where Rich is, and where NY is aiming. She is unable to fire for several minutes.  Meanwhile, Rich’s mid-range fire is absolutely murderous. There goes one turret into orbit…  And another, shortly after. First time we’ve seen multiple turret rockets in a battle. Impressively, NY does not die from this serious damage.  But she…uh…has some problems.  There seems to be something wrong with our ship today.  The end is less dramatic than the middle.  Probably the dominant performance of the first round. Despite her poor long range gunnery, Rich sinks NY without NY even firing a shot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:02
|
|
|
 And with that, round 1 is complete! Before we jump into the quarterfinals, I thought we could do a couple of exhibition bouts. I'll leave this up to the audience: what would you all like to see? I'll ask in general that we refrain from involving combatants still in the competition, but anything else is fair game. I'll propose a GLASS CANNON BATTLE between the Courageous and the Lexington.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
Loser free for all!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:10
|
|
|
North Carolina versus ALL the other losers, at once.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:11
|
|
|
I'd love to see some IJN vs Royal Navy bouts personally. Yamato was "the right ship for the wrong war," so lets see how her little sisters handle the people who were still building for the war Yamato dreamed of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
How many ships can be in a battle? We could pit the losers of both sides against each other.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Loser free for all!!! I just now realized that we... cannot do this. you can only design one custom ship per battle, which is just hugely disappointing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:Starting to think the US was pretty good at this Navy thing.  
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
Battle of Ko Chang redux: Lamotte-Picquet (fairly standard 6" Treaty CL) vs Thonburi (coast defense ship with 8" guns)
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
Can you build one of the Tillman class battleships? Any one of them, and set it against a few contemporaries just to see how crazy it would have been? Edit: Build this- 
Saint Celestine fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:21
|
|
|
Richelieu vs Littorio e: perhaps after they have both lost
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:21
|
|
|
Bewbies one thing you should consider doing is maybe posting this battleship tournament and updates to your twitter, might be a way to rack up your follower count!bewbies posted:I just now realized that we... cannot do this. you can only design one custom ship per battle, which is just hugely disappointing. Pain peko.... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Wasn't Courageous the 'Large Light Cruiser' (because Fisher was told NO MORE BCs but was like well...it will be a large light cruiser. For *battle*!) with 2 single 18 inch turrets?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:24
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Bewbies one thing you should consider doing is maybe posting this battleship tournament and updates to your twitter, might be a way to rack up your follower count! Why would you advocate someone engage with Twitter
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
I propose a "small fry rumble": some combination of the Argentine, Brazilian, Chilean, and Russian ships. They're roughly contemporaneous and generally comparable. Maybe toss the Bretagne in there as well, as well as...I dunno, HMS Agincourt?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:33
|
|
|
Just for fun, I decided to throw together a quick (and I do mean quick...) battleship exhibition match in my indie naval combat videogame, Waves of Steel. Waves of Steel is...not particularly concerned with accuracy, in any respect  It's more like Ace Combat applied to naval combat -- or, more specifically, it's a spiritual successor to the Naval Ops: Warship Gunner games on the PS2. Thus, its armor penetration and damage mechanics consist of "you have a healthbar, don't let it run out". And if you were to, say, line up Ise, Kongo, and North Carolina on one side, and Queen Elizabeth, Nagato, and Hood on the other, then tell them to slug it out, this is what happens:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTzEqd7LOIo
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:37
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Before we jump into the quarterfinals, I thought we could do a couple of exhibition bouts. I'll leave this up to the audience: what would you all like to see? I'll ask in general that we refrain from involving combatants still in the competition, but anything else is fair game. USS Alaska vs the losing ships in ascending order of seed. Find out where that weird-rear end thing sits in the pecking order once-and-for-all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:41
|
|
|
Torpedo ram battleship vs Jutland era dreadnoughts. Other option: 1890s naval combat, mismatched calibers, no fire control, combat range under 1 kilometre, the works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:It really comes down to bad flooding control it seems. The differences are huge when you consider that flooding can absolutely wreck a ship if not controlled and that the Japanese ships were built with the idea that nothing will get through, so we don't need to worry about flood and fire control. Sadly that isn't the case. Not to be mean, but this is one of those "common sense" myths that needs to go die in a fire. The IJN was fully aware of the importance of damage control, in no way expected their ships to just be magically immune to damage, and made their best effort to see it effectively implemented. There were just issues with both their recruitment pool's skill base and their equipment, and both were things they were absolutely working on. The two biggest examples of damage control failure (Taiho and Shinano) both have huge asterisk marks in terms of what went wrong with them. The four carriers lost at Midway likely would have been lost even if you'd transposed USN crews, because people really underestimate just how badly those carriers were mauled in the airstrikes. Just as a comparison for those "poor damage control practices," Shokaku got badly damaged twice, and both times her damage control crew worked fine. It really needs to be remembered that Japan had been a Feudal era society not even 80 years before WW2, and while the brutally painful course they'd embarked on had mostly brought them up to par with the west, you don't just shrug off that kind of abrupt change. A huge chunk of the recruitment pool they'd be drawing upon had basically never even worked with a vehicle or other machinery before, meaning you basically had to train your conscripts in everything related to their position, rather than just supplementing preexisting knowledge. This is what led to the IJN's focus on specialization for their crew roles, because it simplified a teaching process that otherwise would have been ludicrously long for what were effectively conscript positions. The actual trained damage control crews on IJN ships worked perfectly fine (their equipment wasn't as good, but that's just yet another consequence of just how fast the modernization was - you can't concentrate on everything), mostly on par with their Western counterparts... there just wasn't really any reserve knowledge if they got wiped out (as happened on at least one CV at Midway, possibly more - a bomb landed on a DC ready room). Compare and contrast this with the rural US, where practically every farm would have had a tractor and other mechanical equipment meaning that a lot of your recruitment pool was at least basically familiar with operating and repairing basic machinery as a skill base to build upon. This meant that while you'd still be mostly trained in your specific career field, cross-specialization and basic damage control procedures to take were also much easier to teach. There's one more relevant point (partially related to Taiho and Shinano) in terms of IJN damage control practices, and that was that crews were trained for their specific ship. The IJN had something of a problem of even supposedly similar ships having rather different interiors, so you couldn't just train on one ship and then just transfer that knowledge to another - you would generally have been trained for that specific ship. So ships that had been in service for a while could rely on a DC team that knew every inch of their ship and how to utilize the tools available to them to deal with damage. Guess what trait those two late-war ships both shared? Both were brand new with inexperienced crews unfamiliar with the ship - that both also had major design flaws (just not realized in the case of Taiho due to being a new design, and both a rushed conversion AND incomplete in the case of Shinano) didn't help either. But for a ship with a trained and experienced DC crew familiar with the ship they were on there really shouldn't be that much of a difference between the damage control effectiveness between them and Western navies. Particularly for the battleships, given they generally got priority, had experienced crews, and were far less vulnerable to a decapitation strike of their experienced personnel than a carrier for obvious reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 01:53
|
|
|
Since we had two close fought upsets, I'd be kind of curious to see the two losers (so the Nagato and the Queen Elizabeth) in a fight. And the 80,000 ton juggernaut if you can manage it, though maybe it would be best to match it against the tournament winner. Bremen fucked around with this message at 02:05 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:02
|
|
|
It came from Winston's Correspondence Three exhibition ideas from Churchill's correspondence with Roosevelt. 1. Revenge vs Kongo Churchill to Roosevelt #65, 7 April 1942 posted:According to our information 5 and possibly 6 Japanese Battleships, probably including 2 of 16 inch Guns, and certainly 5 Aircraft Carriers, are operating in the Indian Ocean. We cannot of course make head against this Force, especially if it is concentrated. You know the composition of our Fleet. The 4 Roger (Revenge) class Battleships were good enough, in combination with the others, to meet the 3 Kongos, which was all we believed were over on our side. They cannot of course cope with modernized Japanese Ships. Even after the heavy losses inflicted on the enemy Aircraft in their abortive losses inflicted on Colombo, we cannot feel sure that our 2 Carriers would beat the 4 Japanese Carriers concentrated South of Ceylon. The situation is therefore one of grave anxiety. 2. New York v Conte di Cavour Churchill to Roosevelt #44, 14 March 1942 posted:We have decided to do BONUS, and as it is quite impossible to weaken our Eastern Fleet we shall have to use the whole of Force H now at Gibraltar. This will leave the western exit of the Mediterranean uncovered, which is most undesirable. Would it be possible for you to send say two battleships, an aircraft carrier, some cruisers, and destroyers, from the Atlantic, to take the place of Force H temporarily? Churchill to Roosevelt #50, 17 March 1942 posted:King also mentioned that he was considering sending your two new battleships to the Pacific when my request to you to put a force at Gibraltar was received. We had no idea that your new ships were ready for service, and therefore only had in mind two of your Texas class. 3. North Carolina v Conte di Cavour Same correspondence as above but, in this instance, it is assumed that Washington and Wasp are sent to Gibraltar like Churchill asked instead of to the Home Fleet per King's reinforcement policy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:08
|
|
|
Richelieu vs the Coward North Carolina could be fun. Other than that ships that were meant to fight each other such as a South American Thunderdome or Italians get clowned on by Everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:13
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Not to be mean, but this is one of those "common sense" myths that needs to go die in a fire. The IJN was fully aware of the importance of damage control, in no way expected their ships to just be magically immune to damage, and made their best effort to see it effectively implemented. There were just issues with both their recruitment pool's skill base and their equipment, and both were things they were absolutely working on. The two biggest examples of damage control failure (Taiho and Shinano) both have huge asterisk marks in terms of what went wrong with them. The four carriers lost at Midway likely would have been lost even if you'd transposed USN crews, because people really underestimate just how badly those carriers were mauled in the airstrikes. Just as a comparison for those "poor damage control practices," Shokaku got badly damaged twice, and both times her damage control crew worked fine. Also: Some of the lessons that kept say Yorktown afloat throughout Midway the USN only knew because Lexington got sunk. Given that Yorktown was badly mauled and Lexington sunk against significant loss of air wing and loss of flight deck for the two IJN carriers, I begin to suspect it's more of a case that IJN damage control was competent, but USN damage control was EXTREMELY good. Sorta like how adults are fine at learning languages, but children are phenomenal. And it wasn't until the 60's and the USS Forestal that the USN would train EVERYONE in damage control.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:13
|
|
|
Can you do a round 1 losers battle royale Edit: my dad was in the navy in the late 70s and they called it the USS ForrestFire
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
uPen posted:Richelieu vs the Coward North Carolina could be fun. Other than that ships that were meant to fight each other such as a South American Thunderdome or Italians get clowned on by Everyone. Seconding the South American Thunderdome. This entire naval arms race was delightfully petty, and has been sadly forgotten in the history books.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:23
|
|
|
SIGSEGV posted:Torpedo ram battleship vs Jutland era dreadnoughts. I like both of these ideas
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:25
|
|
|
Rivadavia vs Almirante Latorre, let them fight the battle they were meant for
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:40
|
|
|
I think we need another  CAULDRON OF DOOM, but I'm torn whether it should be for ships that got completely annihilated in the first round, or maybe those who narrowly lost...
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:53
|
|
|
Urcinius posted:It came from Winston's Correspondence I like #1, especially if it's 4 vs 3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
I also vote for South American battles. Feel free to throw in escorts. I'm curious what these nations thought naval combat would be like and what they wanted to throw at each other.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Just for fun, I decided to throw together a quick (and I do mean quick...) battleship exhibition match in my indie naval combat videogame, Waves of Steel. Waves of Steel is...not particularly concerned with accuracy, in any respect I think a cool feature you should consider is being able to have an "Observer" mode with free look/orbit/pan/zoom/etc camera controls; perhaps also the ability to have time controls/like fast forward/rewind and maybe a camera path editor so you can actually replay a past game but then after the fact define custom camera shots so you can record what happens in the most ideal and cinematic way. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 03:05
|
|
|
Rather not see hypothetical giga-battleships until after the main set is all wrapped up, I think it’s a bit more interesting if the Iowa and Yamato are the boomiest we get to see for now
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
I'd like to see bottom seed loser match ups, see how Bretagne matches Minas Geraes, these close matches have been pretty cool nail biters, it would be interesting to see how two closely matched losers fair, especially ones who got mauled badly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 03:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
Definitely would like a Courageous v. Lexington battle. In general a whole Battlecruiser sub-bracket could be fun, perhaps with the various refitted ships from the main bracket (Such as Kongo, Renown, etc.) in their original WWI configurations. Alternate challenge: Pre-Dreadnought smackdown. Let's see Mikasa and Canopus try to ineffectively flail at each other. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2022 03:51
|
|
