Yup, I do admit the Invincible is a very capable ship.gaiasabre11 Indeed you can. But as said, the Invincible was a nifty carrier for her time.
The realm rejoices as Paradox Interactive announces the launch of Crusader Kings III, the latest entry in the publisher’s grand strategy role-playing game franchise. Advisors may now jockey for positions of influence and adversaries should save their schemes for another day, because on this day Crusader Kings III can be purchased on Steam, the Paradox Store, and other major online retailers.
Yup, I do admit the Invincible is a very capable ship.gaiasabre11 Indeed you can. But as said, the Invincible was a nifty carrier for her time.
Indeed, even at top 'Run Away' speed no French ship could out run an Exocet, and if running away doesn't work that's the big book of French tactics entirely exhausted.Yup, I do admit the Invincible is a very capable ship.But it might be different if she was facing an opponent with multiple, not just a few, Exocets, though it goes the same for the Clemenceau I guess if she was in the same situation.
![]()
As opposed to the Royal Navy. The term "Royal Navy never runs away" was the reason why the Nelsons had no rear turrets, as they were never needed.Indeed, even at top 'Run Away' speed no French ship could out run an Exocet, and if running away doesn't work that's the big book of French tactics entirely exhausted.![]()
My current read is the quite outstanding;As opposed to the Royal Navy. The term "Royal Navy never runs away" was the reason why the Nelsons had no rear turrets, as they were never needed.
Well, guess what, the Richelieu also had no rear (main gun) turrets, and she packs more of a punch then the Nelsons (in terms of shell weight per min able to deliever to opponent). Below is my calculations:As opposed to the Royal Navy. The term "Royal Navy never runs away" was the reason why the Nelsons had no rear turrets, as they were never needed.
That may be so, but unlike the Richileu, the Nelson can call in Carrier support. No, the Bearn doesn't count.Well, guess what, the Richelieu also had no rear (main gun) turrets, and she packs more of a punch then the Nelsons (in terms of shell weight per min able to deliever to opponent). Below is my calculations:
equation: # of guns * shell weight (lbs) * 60s / fire cycle (s)
Richelieu: 8 * 1949 * 60 / 32 = 29235 lbs
Nelson: 9 x 2048 * 60 / 38 = 29103 lbs
Yeh, the Richelieu won despite the Nelson has one more gun and uses a bigger calibre gun (16" > 15"), though not by much I have to admit.Anyways the Nelson would have to fire a full broadside to acheive her max firepower, while the Richelieu need not. Don't argue with me that half of Richelieu's main battery can be knocked out with one lucky shot since the Richelieu's guns also have a longer range compared to the Nelson (41700m to 36375m)
Yup, the Bearn is of no good use.That may be so, but unlike the Richileu, the Nelson can call in Carrier support. No, the Bearn doesn't count.
Well, I'll have to go into the savegame to say if Richileu was even built in TTL...Yup, the Bearn is of no good use.And I'm not going to argue for the gun school people anyways. What I'm trying to say that Richelieu pawns the Nelsons in terms of awesomeness.
BTW the Richelieu also served in the British Home Fleet, so Richelieu actually served along side the Nelson. I suppose then Richelieu can also call on some carrier support from the RN.![]()
Haha that's true, but I say that Richelieu is a must have since she's so awesome.Well, I'll have to go into the savegame to say if Richileu was even built in TTL...![]()
Richelieu actually fired her guns in anger throughout WWII and in Indochina, so I believe that the combat figures are true. Check the wiki link below.gaiasabre11 On your dodgy calcs
1. No idea on the source of your figures on salvo time, but they are clearly 'best in trials' rather than 'actually obtained in combat'. I accept though Richelieu probably didn't ever fire her guns in anger enough for any useful combat figures.
2. Shells are no use if they don't hit anything. And the Richelieu wasn't much cop at that was it. Not on the extremely limited evidence available anyway (one whole battle and maybe half a dozen volleys, no main gun hits on the enemy but received several herself)
3. Taking that one battle it is noticeable the main guns did more damage to themselves than the enemy pretty much knocking out Turret 2 when two of the guns exploded.
Thus sir I say you have once again proved their are lies, damned lies and statistics. Conversely I have proved the Richelieu was actually rubbish.![]()
Fair enough, I should have realised the French never retreat in the face of facts or logic. They retreat in the face of everything else obviously, but not logic or facts.Now now, lads, let's keep this civil, shall we?
Woot!Update coming in, hopefully before midnight. I'll try to make chapter 100 something special.
Sorry, I got a bit imtimidated.Now now, lads, let's keep this civil, shall we?
Retreat? There's no retreat! There's only... errr... another bottle of wine to open!Fair enough, I should have realised the French never retreat in the face of facts or logic. They retreat in the face of everything else obviously, but not logic or facts.![]()