BB's

[Gmatt]

Interesting for sure, but I expect finances will be even tighter than in HoI II, they implemented debt just for us who play the British.

Does anyone recall seeing if the hull can be changed about? Or will it just be whatever is needed for the armament, engines and other stuff we choose?

I am certainly looking forward to the new naval war for sure. At times you got glimpses of it in HoI II, when the German fleet (Bismarck, Tirpitz, Graf Zepplin, the Battlecruisers and heavy cruisers) broke out together and you had to chase em down on sea and by air, but it looks like it will be even better here.

 

[unmerged(34050)]

Triple turrets are better, as it means a shorter citadel and so you get thicker armor for the same weight of armor. A 40,000t BB with triples will have a belt about 2" thicker than a 40,000t BB with twins if all the other weights are equal.

The 14" was chosen for the KGVs in part because the Admiralty didn't want to wait and see if the larger calibres would be allowed--it wanted those ships in service by late 1940/early 1941 so the designs had to be finalized and the orders placed ASAP.

I'm kinda partial to the earlier 3 quad 14" KGV design myself--armor was about 2" less belt, 1/2" inch deck (still more than other modern BBs of similar size though), but that's a lot of guns. : )

 

[Gmatt]

I read though that the third quad turret would have made it unstable? It was either that or put it over the limits, I cannot recall which. (Perhaps it was both.)
I wonder if that will be possible to do, 3 quads, the 14" had it's own advantages, but I am just partial to the 15" myself. (I love those Queen Elizabeths.)

 

[unmerged(34050)]

Does anyone recall seeing if the hull can be changed about? Or will it just be whatever is needed for the armament, engines and other stuff we choose?

I believe it's AA and radar and ASW that can upgrade, while hull, engines & main guns are fixed.

However, Johan did say you can mod what aspects of ships are upgradable, so perhaps we'll be able to sim things like the big rebuilds (new engines etc.) that ships like Warspite rec'd.

EDIT: I think the 3 quad 14" + the preferred armor scheme did have stability issues, which meant thinning the armor as I described, and the Admiralty wanted super thick armor and couldn't have both on 35,000t, so that's why 1 quad became a twin.

 

[egslim]

Discounting the part about one of the parties breaking the treaty and allowing up to 16", the Nelsons would be allowed under the Washington Treaty and disallowed after the Second London Treaty.

It seems you're right about the calibre, but the Washington Treaty also included a battleship holiday. During that period only the British were allowed to build the two Nelsons, because unlike the Japanese and USN they lacked any 16" battleships.

 

[egslim]

I'm kinda partial to the earlier 3 quad 14" KGV design myself--armor was about 2" less belt, 1/2" inch deck (still more than other modern BBs of similar size though), but that's a lot of guns. : )

Yeah, but a 15" shell does a lot more damage than a 14" one. You want your shells to pierce the enemy's vital parts, not merely wreck the superstructure.

 

[unmerged(85298)]

in hoi2 i scrab all navy and go for submarine tech. in eary 1940 i researched all tech about submarine (exclude nuclear sub) (if you lucky you got an event that give you blueprint for them )
and build massive submarines and this is it . the whole navy of world going to sunk all the way.

the waters now germans karl donitz love me when i talk to him

 

[Gmatt]

I believe it's AA and radar and ASW that can upgrade, while hull, engines & main guns are fixed.

However, Johan did say you can mod what aspects of ships are upgradable, so perhaps we'll be able to sim things like the big rebuilds (new engines etc.) that ships like Warspite rec'd.

EDIT: I think the 3 quad 14" + the preferred armor scheme did have stability issues, which meant thinning the armor as I described, and the Admiralty wanted super thick armor and couldn't have both on 35,000t, so that's why 1 quad became a twin.

In regards to the hull, I meant more at construction, ie, could I ostensibly lengthen the hull to fit a fourth turret?

Were the British 16" much better in range than the British 15"? I know they were only slightly better in penetration and had a much shorter gun life, but was it actually worthwhile using 16"?

It is a good thing that the thread title is not 'Are you going to use BB's' just 'BB's' or otherwise we would be way off topic. :rofl:

 

[GarfunkeL]

I will sink the entire RN with German SHBBs. And it will be most cool.

YES! MUA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HAAA!

Naturally, ze Tirpitz shall bombard Portsmouth to ze piezes as well!

 

[unmerged(34050)]

In regards to the hull, I meant more at construction, ie, could I ostensibly lengthen the hull to fit a fourth turret?

Were the British 16" much better in range than the British 15"? I know they were only slightly better in penetration and had a much shorter gun life, but was it actually worthwhile using 16"?

It is a good thing that the thread title is not 'Are you going to use BB's' just 'BB's' or otherwise we would be way off topic. :rofl:

Not sure about the hull... I think in-game you're just picking "hull" (which is about armor I think) and "guns" (just calibre, not how many in how many turrets)--more detail would be a different game, Pacific Fleets or whatever it's called.

The 16" could make 37,500yds at 40 degrees elevation (just under 35,000 at 30 deg).
The 15" could make 33,000yds at 30 degrees elevation (that was the max elevation for any ship with 15").
The 14" could make 36,500yds at 40 degrees elevation.

 

[Gmatt]

Hmm, I just remembered that they were working on a new 15", of the same type as the 14", all steel I think they said.

Looking here they said it could get about 39,150 yards at 40 degrees. If that is the case, it would work well on a newer ship, but of course it would not have been around to arm the Nelsons.

Too bad you don't get to customize it more, perhaps that will be moddable. (e.g., by adding new gun types, instead of 14", 15", 16", you would have 14"x8, 14"x9, 14"x10, 14"x12, 15"x8, 15"x9, 15"x10, 15"x12 &c.)

 

[egslim]

Were the British 16" much better in range than the British 15"? I know they were only slightly better in penetration and had a much shorter gun life, but was it actually worthwhile using 16"?

That probably also depends on whether you use the Nelson's 16", or the Lion's 16".

ETA: Penetration power is much more important than range, since the record for the longest range hit was some 26,000 yards. With a 15", btw.

 

[Gmatt]

Yes, that is a good point too, the 16" for the Lions would be much more advanced.
I was just trying to figure out if it would have been worthwhile for the Nelsons to have been equipped with 15" originally, with penetration only marginally better, the range is the one factor that could tip it either direction.

 

[unmerged(34050)]

Yep, the Lion 16" was heavy shell + lower velocity = better penetration, whereas Nelson 16" was high velocity + lighter shell--a mistake as it turned out.

It sure sounds like this game will be a modders dream so it may well be possible to add different choices of gun arrangements. I was even thinking it'd be cool to mod the AA guns to include different combos of light and heavy AA, as now it looks like the AA for some BBs is 40mm Bofors, while for others it's 5.25", whereas really all ships had a combo.

 

[Raptor1]

The Nelson's design philosophy was based on German guns from WWI, where a lighter shell would be fired at higher muzzle velocity in order to achieve maximum penetration and range. This wore the barrel out very quickly and the idea was scrapped later, but they didn't get around to modifying the guns so in the end they had to shoot the lighter shell with a slower muzzle velocity, making the whole thing inefficient compared to other nation's 16" guns.

The Lion's guns would have been designed with heavier shells in the first place, and so would technically have performed better.

Or so I heard.

 

[egslim]

Yes, that is a good point too, the 16" for the Lions would be much more advanced.
I was just trying to figure out if it would have been worthwhile for the Nelsons to have been equipped with 15" originally, with penetration only marginally better, the range is the one factor that could tip it either direction.

Well, the original 15" was in a double turret. Since a triple turret is better, then either way the Nelsons required a new turret design. May as well go for the 16", then.
In hindsight the Nelsons would have been best off not with 15" guns, but with a better 16" design.

ETA: Some more information on the different gun designs:
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_15-42_mk1.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk1.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.htm
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_16-45_mk2.htm