Gunnery and Campaign Questions

[jdkbph]

You might also want to mention the Dreyer vs Argo Fire control system thing....

[Xxzard]

Thanks for the explanations on the gunnery accuracy, especially on things such as smoke and sun, because I have noticed that before, but it was it was difficult to say for sure. I am glad that is as it was historically.

I also read somewhere that German rangefinders and directors were much better at quickly finding the range. On the other hand British employ more powerful rangefinders, but they were slower, so that is accurate.

For the campaign, I am playing with all historical options on, so I have experienced the woes of weak British shells and the tendency to blow up. In the decisive engagement against the German fleet, I engaged the German scouting forces in the morning, just before sunrise with both the British Grand Fleet and BC force. Losses were high, 5 BC's lost and 1 Super Dreadnought for the destruction of their 4 BC's, but With the sun coming up, I outnumbered their BB fleet significantly, so they began to retreat. There the slowness of their old pre-dreadnoughts was devastating, as all seven were destroyed for the loss of one 12inch BB.

I would also agree with the assesment about the AC's, with the German BC's destroyed in that battle, British AC's are running free and have been
obliterating remaining enemy light forces.

One more question: do AV's have any special ability modeled in the game or are they there for historical accuracy only?

[MoToM]

Just for accuracy, plus they seriously slow down your fleets campaign map speed.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Xxzard

One more question: do AV's have any special ability modeled in the game or are they there for historical accuracy only?

I don't think so. I thought that maybe they have a higher sighting range on the campaign map but Bullethead will have to comment on that.

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

I don't think so. I thought that maybe they have a higher sighting range on the campaign map but Bullethead will have to comment on that.

I honestly don't know. When it became evident that we weren't going to get launchable airplanes into the game directly, there was some talk of AVs increasing the daylight spotting range of their TFs on the campaign map. However, I don't know what, if anything, Norm did along those lines. So you'd have to ask him.

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by jdkbph

You might also want to mention the Dreyer vs Argo Fire control system thing....

Well, that's of essentially no consequence in WW1. All the Brits except Queen Mary had Dreyer stuff, and all the Germans had Dreyer-type stuff.

What this all boils down to in game terms is that Queen Mary, alone amongst the initial Brit BCs, shoots as well as the Brit BBs, while the other initial Brit BCs' accuracy sucks compared to both Brit BBs and all the Germans. "Refit" and "Repair", when they arrive late in 1916, also shoot as well as Brit BBs.

[jdkbph]

Hmmm... last I recall it had been established with overwhelming empirical evidence that, in game terms, the Argo system was far superior to the Dreyer system... such that a Dreyer equipped Brit BB, even one of equal or greater firepower and tactical position, was at a distinct disadvantage to any FC equipped German BB.

I also recall that this, according to SES, was absolutely the way it was and therefore the way the game was designed.

Are you saying now that this has been "adjusted"?

And yes... I am curious for good reason. If this has been fixed it may just make this game playable (IMH and Uninformed O of course).

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by jdkbph

Hmmm... last I recall it had been established with overwhelming empirical evidence that, in game terms, the Argo system was far superior to the Dreyer system... such that a Dreyer equipped Brit BB, even one of equal or greater firepower and tactical position, was at a distinct disadvantage to any FC equipped German BB.

You seem to have misunderstood.

Everybody on both sides (except Queen Mary) uses a Dreyer-type system. That was the standard type of fire control system in WW1. It was, of course, only called a "Dreyer Table" in the RN, but everybody's gear was directly analogous. However, it's limits were known and by late WW1, Pollen-type systems were becoming seen as necessary, so that everybody switched to Pollen-type systems shortly after WW1. Pollen-type systems were thus standard by WW2.

Because everybody uses a Dreyer-type system, you don't have the situation you describe, of Dreyer-equipped ships being hosed by "Argo-equipped" ships. The differences in gunnery in Jutland are due to different training standards, different types of rangefinders, and ship design, etc. This is what makes Germans get on target faster and shoot slightly better than RN BBs, and why RN BCs (except Queen Mary) can't shoot very well. Neither can ships with funnels ahead of the foremast, or too few guns for adequate spotting.

I also recall that this, according to SES, was absolutely the way it was and therefore the way the game was designed.

Yup.

Are you saying now that this has been "adjusted"?

And yes... I am curious for good reason. If this has been fixed it may just make this game playable (IMH and Uninformed O of course).

I think rather that you're misinformed. The "problem" you mention doesn't exist and never has. All the various categories of ships mentioned above shoot very close to their historical averages over the long run, but for short periods can shoot rather worse or better, which is realistic because that also happened.

[jdkbph]

DELETE DELETE DELETE


OK I give up. It's your game... you win.

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by jdkbph

DELETE DELETE DELETE


OK I give up. It's your game... you win.

Now don't go away mad. We've been friends longer than I care to remember.

Seriously, just because we're somehow not communicating here doesn't mean you don't have a legit gripe. We've never said the game is perfect.

But it's obvious we're talking past each other, or not speaking the same language, or whatever. So what, specifically, in game terms, do you have a problem with? Until I even know what you're mad about, how the Hell do you expect me to answer your question?

[Trygvasson]

AT LAST a game that explores a chapter in the history of warfare with an absolutely massive amount of what-if's - and with the greatest possible broadside weight ever. These ships, these BEAUTIFUL, loved and cherished creatures of uncompromising destruction have been my keen interest since the days of GNB5.

I sincerely thank the Gods Above, aka the Programmers, for not making this into an 'action-packed FPS' or some other stupid marketing idea. Historically accurate to the point of including brittle AP shells and the like. One would always like more, of course, but that's what wishlists are for.

Phew! Now, down to the nitty gritty:
1. It seems the ships stop accumulating damage after they've reached 'sinking' status - I had half the Hochseeflotte blasting away point blank at a destroyer for 12 minutes, and it still stubbornly took all that time to sink. This is a major problem for me since (as well they should) my fleet keeps targeting the ship until she's well and truly gone.
2. More info! Range circles for primary/secondary guns, visual detection ranges, starshell ranges, torpedo ranges, acceleration rates(aren't they a bit quick?!), armor penetration/distance - and that's only what I can't stop thinking about!
3. I find myself micromanaging division speed a lot. I know a LOT has been accomplished regarding fleet maneuvers, and it's a real joy to behold as I create chaos from order - and then back to order - but why a division would want to keep sailing at 4kts after the ship that slowed them down has sunk, I don't know.

That's it for now - will provide some AAR's when I get some more experience. I'm still on Jan 5th, and already the Harwich Force is destroyed, and I've had an inconclusive meeting with Fisher's favourites...