9:47 Kriegsmarine when designing the numerous variants of the H-Klasse.

Sideways funnels, 18 inch guns out the wazoo, max bulkheads and range. All speeding along at 28 knots. Is this the new meme ship?

@ShiningDarknes

4 жыл бұрын

it is when you suck at commanding it

@aaronsanceda2786

4 жыл бұрын

@@ShiningDarknes oof

@reileydomingo8656

3 жыл бұрын

@@ShiningDarknes yea lol

This funnels are is like a sign that screams "Look at me! I'm special!". Brilliant design, good sir.

RE Turret naming systems. The system used by most navies for battleships in the dreadnought era onwards is as follows. The foremost main gun turret is called the A turret. ONLY turrets that superfire this turret, and each other, are known as B, C etc. Wing turrets use the letters P,Q,R,S, bow to stern, alternating port and s'board, starting with P on the port side, ending S on the starboard. Centreline midships (between the towers) turrets also use PQRS from bow to stern, however if there is only one,it is designated Q. All other turrets use the letters at the end of the alphabet, again bow to stern, X if one, XY if two, all letters used if 3+ So for your ship, it would be A-B P-Q-R-S X-Y Interestingly your original design, with 4 centreline bow turrets and 2 stern, since only the B turret superfires the foremost turret, the other 2 bow turrets class as 'all other' turrets, so the designation would be ABWX (towers) YZ, not ABCD (towers) XY.

@lucajohnen6719

4 жыл бұрын

This is different for other navies tho. The German navy just goes from A down the list, with wing turrets being named.... Clockwise? I think?

@madalheidis

3 жыл бұрын

Psst, Debbie, that's only the British system. Americans and Frenchmen lettered them forward to back, Germans lettered them clockwise.

@xirensixseo

2 жыл бұрын

good read, that was interesting

@antimatterinc.7026

2 жыл бұрын

i like your funny words magic man

@glauberglousger6643

2 жыл бұрын

XYZ for three turrets, but what about for four?

Keep away from destroyers, take them out first. The torpedoes slows you down too much and makes you the fish in the barrel.

@ghostarmy1106

4 жыл бұрын

Wait, you guys dodge them? I Just slap impossible to pierce Torpedo bulges and amor on My boat and still at 99% HP after taking 6 Full Torpedo salvos (no im Not making that up)

27:36 ah the Bismark experience

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

The Chitose did manage to cause significant damage in her last stand, quite unlike the Bismarck.

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

@xellossaxon It's difficult to call it a lucky shot, when literally all main turrets, the bridge and both main and aft fire control were destroyed or incapacitated within ~15 minutes. The British (Rodney to be specific) scored the first hits (obviously, since Bismarck didn't hit anything) and that was waaaaay before any of the cruisers and destroyers showed up. I also woudn't really call Bismarck's rangefinder superior. Their optical systems were very comparable, but the British had better Radar. If there hadn't been the design flaw with the vulnerable fire control she may have gotten a handful of hits, but it wouldn't change much, as the officers and main turrets themselves were very quickly taken out.

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

@xellossaxon I meant that it's hard to talk about a "lucky shot", because Bismarck was hit by multiple salvoes that destroyed all of her offensive capability before she maanged to get a single hit in. It's not a lucky "shot" if we're talking about dozens of shells spread across multiple salvoes over the course of ~15 minutes that hammered her to hell and back. Her deep hull was well protected and massively overweight, which is why she stayed afloat so long, but the area between the main belt and the weather deck, as well as all of her upperworks (including her turrets and conning tower) proved to be very vulnerable. The cabling between the fire control station and the fire directors was mostly unprotected and she paid the price for it. Her fire control was roughly equivalent to Rodney and KGV, except that KGV had better Radar. Bismarck only had two encounters in WW2, in one of them she got a hit that somehow detonated Hood (something that could actually be defined as a "lucky shot") in the other one she failed to hit anything. Her track record isn't anything to write home about. The most accurate BBs of the period would be the KGVs and NC/SDs as they had the best Radar equipment and you could make a case for the Japanese who probably had the best optical systems (albeit their Radar was far behind). The best hit rate of any BB was achieved by HMS Iron Duke at Jutland. Prince of Wales suffered a devastating hit to her bridge, which took out most officers. She took basically no structural damage to the ship itself, but getting your officers killed is obviously still a very bad thing (the same later happened to Bismarck). Prince of Wales was still fully operational and had taken no serious damage (other than the hit to the bridge). I'd argue that Bismarck got off much worse than PoW because of the hit to her bow that cut off part of her fuel supply (forcing her to return to port much sooner than anticipated) and the below-water hit that damaged Bismarck's machinery. PoW was hit 5 times, two of those caused noteworthy damage (destroying her rear Radar station and her bridge). Bismarck was hit three times, two of those caused noteworthy damage (cutting off her frontal fuel supply and damaging her machinery). PoW retreated because she was having gun malfunctions and Leach decided it would be better to retreat and wait for a better opportunity. His ship wasn't suffering from any considerable structural damage when that decision was made.

@aviationgaming1564

4 жыл бұрын

groeny tell me, where are the Swordfish dive bombers

@aviationgaming1564

4 жыл бұрын

Weeb Extraordinaire the Bismarck sank the Hood in one shell cuz it hit the ammunition box, but yes it had a hard last stand cuz more ships were attacking it, and unlike this battle, the Bismarck was attacked by Swordfish dive bombers carrying torpedoes

"Hubris is a coward's word." -The Imperial Japanese Navy, probably

Build hint: Middle button copies the object. No need to re-open main guns -> centreline guns -> 18" -> triple, just point at one of the 18" triples you already have, middle mouse button, click where you want the new turret. Saves a lot of clicks. (Alternatively, using the keyboard is an option.) Two funnels next to each other you risk both of them taken out by one single hit. Not that _that_ mattered in the end! In the Super US warship facing a Japanese fleet scenario (with technology, not funds) I found that 9" main guns have incredible high 20km accuracy. Sure, they are short ranged (for main guns) but near perfect as a bane of DDs and CLs. Except using oxygen torpedoes (in which case you change course every few minutes), DDs will rue coming into 20km range, smoke or not.: One or two hits will kill them. And with the 9" being more accurate _and_ faster firing than your 16" or 18" ... The 9" guns also fit on the tall secondary barbette, so you can have a ~330° firing arc with them. Just bring enough ammo. Finally, you have the short and normal barbettes for secondaries ... use them to fire over the other secondaries .. 13:15 : your turning circle is ~900m and a full circle will take almost 11 minutes! Can turn on a dime, if a dime is 3/4th of a mile ... it's all in the stats. 18:40 : Go to flank ... from 20.8 to 28 knots will only take (and that is assuming no turning at all) 24 minutes ... it's all in the stats. 18:55 : The "first" set of guns (however defined) are main guns, everything else, even of the same calibre, is secondaries. This is clearly a shortcoming in the game ...same calibre should be assumed main guns, too. And maybe a "secondaries, select your targets independently per calibre, please" button. 30:10 : "Maybe slow down" ... from 12.2 (actual speed) to 12 knots (target speed). ~1/60 slower will _not_ do anything and, as said above, your ship acellerates like a glacier. (It is also not very good at slowing down.) 31:19 : "All engines" ... nope. You have at least 4 engines in these things ... as shown by the speed control being not red to zero, but actually still allowing at least 10 knots. 34:03 : "Should have kept my distance" ... with every last ship of the enemy capable of outpacing you, how do you think you can do that? You do need better DD defence --- 3x3 6" guns on each side is simply not enough and the 3" are only for close-in work or making encouraging sounds. Drop a few 18" turrets (as you can see, you don't need that many to kill battleships!) and use more modest guns in the 8-10" range to hold off DDs. Being shorter and faster also helps. Also: Torpedo defence level V. That huge an investment in a battleship deserves it --- it's not a DD or CL that are a dime a dozen.

I wonder how viable a ship could be built with unlimited budget, any/all tech BUT limited to 8" guns. Things I mull over waiting for this game to hit steam

@advorak8529

4 жыл бұрын

Viable depends on what role it is meant for and what it is used for. A DD or CL can certainly be very good with an 8" gun limit, and CAs can be viable too (the Washington Treaty did limit CLs to 6" and CAs to 8" and both to 10,000 tons, excepting water/food for the crew in a nod to the Brits and their wide-flung empire). A B with 8" guns can be viable, by being armoured beyond anything the enemy can throw and either HEing them to death or coming close and torpedoing/shooting them full of holes ... assuming the enemy is in 1880 or 1890. A fast, uber-armored craft with tons of AA protection might be able to run up to a CV and hole it, but would have to deal with air attacks, submarine attacks and of course missile attacks ... if it can be made to shrug these off, it can be viable.

@sovietorca810

4 жыл бұрын

You can almost already do this You have unlimited funds in custom battles, and if you click the "Unlock" button, you'll have all the tech from all nations - sadly except outdated parts

HMS Agincourt: *Nervous sweating*

You could have used all centerline main turrets and giving yourself another three triple 6 inch turrets with tall barbettes doubling your secondary firepower. the way you were saved could have been put into speed and armor. Those three-inch guns for a useless waste of displacement.

@megan00b8

3 жыл бұрын

I agree except the three inchers. My OCD would die with those slots empty, and single barreled 2in wouldn't cut it, that's just cheap.

Ship idea: Make a battleship that will have the best armor that is possible in this game, then put some 18" guns

@darkninjacorporation

4 жыл бұрын

Robo ManPL ... so a normal Yamato?

@mannys9130

4 жыл бұрын

@@darkninjacorporation The Yamato actually wasn't all that heavily armored. Additionally, what armor she did have was relatively poor quality compared to other nations' metallurgy and wasn't equal straight across the board.

@grahamstrouse1165

4 жыл бұрын

mannys9130 Yamato had a lot of armor. It wasn’t very high quality, however.

@phantomwraith1984

4 жыл бұрын

@@mannys9130 Yamato followed the all or nothing principal, she was covered head to toe. Her metalurgy was just of poor quality

Mistake was turning in to second torpedo attack giving less time to avoid and closing range to everything where you had the long range advantage.

Well you see, what happened is you set the brits to 1935 tech so they built these ships to comply with the London Naval Treaty. That's why they have such small guns.

Next Video: 5 Yamatos XD

At 21:55 in the vid, turrets mounted to the side are call Wing Mounted Turrets. Just some terminology for ya.

The main battery turrets on the sides, in pairs are called wing guns/turrets. For example, the HMS Dreadnought had them.

You should remove 4 side 18" turrets and increase 8" turrets to deal with DDs

@not2tired

4 жыл бұрын

I was thinking go with a substantial 4" or 5" battery, no 6" or 8"... with the same general goal

@ShiningDarknes

4 жыл бұрын

or just target the DDs in the first place. Use HE in all of those 18" guns and melt the DDs. Doesn't matter how inaccurate you are it will only take one shot to kill them or cripple them to the point of uselessness. As soon as he saw them he should have started targeting them while sailing away. You only have to get lucky once. Massed secondaries only work if you can get 8" and 10" anything else is too close range, they will have already launched on you and as you saw a ship that big simply cannot avoid massed launch.

@ShiningDarknes

4 жыл бұрын

@@not2tired the range is too short. If you are letting DDs get within 6" range they have already launched so you are fucked even if you kill them.

"the turrets have built-in rangefinders, which is unusual for the large turrets" there you are wrong, its true not all the main gun turrets on battleships had rangefinders built into them but the japanese had on almost all their 14", 15", 16" and 18" turrets, the kongo and nagato class had rangefinders on second and third turret (the superfiring bow and stern turrets), yamato had rangefinders on all 3 main gun turrets, iowa had rangefinder built into 2 of its 3 turrets. i could go on with more ww2 era battleships and battlecruisers with rangefinders in the gun turrets

@Jonathan-fb1kj

4 жыл бұрын

Not to mention Japan's rangefinders sucked hard ass.

@Jonathan-fb1kj

4 жыл бұрын

The Battle off Samar says otherwise, they used dyed shells which might as well be useless when half the fleet is using them and the optical range finders were slow to to use combined with anything the size of a DD or even moving 28 knots or above and you get what might've been a good system pre ww2 but near useless 1942-onwards.

@gothamgoon4237

4 жыл бұрын

@survivaltest 370 and they believe that the VERY near miss on the White Plains would have been the longest range hit in history, almost. They still argue if it was the Yamato's 18.1 inch shell or a cruiser though. Thanks to the damage to the hull and smoke I tend to think it was an 18 inch shell because I don't believe a cruiser shell exploding under the hull would have caused such damage. Only a huge shell could get a near miss like that and still cause alot of damage.

@PrivateHaggard

4 жыл бұрын

Also those are just backup systems in case that the main fire control gets knocked out. With those built in range finders the turrets could still fire accurately in local control with the drawback of a low vantage point (less range because of s nearer horizon) and additional workload for the turret crews

@Jonathan-fb1kj

4 жыл бұрын

Since youtube refused to let me post my paragraph long comment in response to this, I'll just sum it up. The Battle was fought between a small fleet of picket ships of sub hunters, destroyers, minelayers, and a few small escort carriers. The fog was indeed smoke from a smoke screen and they took on a large Japanese fleet that the Yamato was apart of. The reason why I mention this is due to the fact that the Japanese fire control could not accurately hit small and relatively fast moving ships and further proved that dyed shells was a horrible idea semi-modern day with after-action reports stating the firecontrol was too slow and relied too much on the ships being larger sized like capital ship sized. The Firecontrol was severely out of date.

always target destroyers first preferably with HE when using 18," torpedoes have always been bullshit so best to take those out.

@jamessteale805

4 жыл бұрын

Bullshit specifically in this game or also historically?

@tnix80

3 жыл бұрын

@@jamessteale805 both

Yes. Please give it another go, either a second chance with the same specs or an improved version of the Chitose.

I forgot this game is how I found your channel. You do a good job. I love WW2 or most war history. I also nuts about ships. So I am hopeful for this game. PVP will be interesting if the software survives that long. LOL 👍😊

17:16 Yeah,The Mighty Jingles explained it best: don't give your enemies your broadside

Now this is some Warship Gunner level lmao.

@shanedoesyoutube8001

4 жыл бұрын

ahhhhhhhhhhh good ol memeship simulator

On the Invicible-Class the side turrets (midship) were called Q and R as far i remember

4:52 he learnt something that he did during the destoryers Mission

8x 8inch triple secondaries on sides, don't turn towards torpedoes, you sail directly into the path that way.

I think it would be interesting for you to try and emulate the Tone class cruiser, though since seaplane launchers aren't in the game, maybe give the ship advanced radar to emulate it's role in reconnaissance? Then see how one or two of them do against an american escort flotilla with some DDs and CLs

Just a thought on firing at the DD's. Aim at the ones that haven't launched torps yet. Once they launch they are a non threat.

24 guns!?!??????

@silviachristandl5874

4 жыл бұрын

But without the secondaries and tactics to match it did surprisingly little

I've watched this video a few times now, but I'm genuinely curious as to whether or not the end result would've been different if you'd maintained control of your rudder? Ah well, you win some, you lose some. Huehuehuehue! Keep up the great work Stealth.

Torpedoes fired, turn away and never in. Repeat that like a mantra ;)

35:33 F I V E Y E A R CONSTRUCTION PERIOD

Love your channel compared to others for this game. Really makes me want to buy it.

@Stealth17Gaming

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

You really have a talent to scroll away as soon as an interesting scene is about to happen. :)

@Stealth17Gaming

3 жыл бұрын

It's a gift.

@karaloop9544

3 жыл бұрын

@@Stealth17Gaming lol indeed

4:50 You can Big Block BBs now, I see

Maybe, when you detect that the DDs have launched at you, *not* continuing the same predictable turn they aimed at, at the exact same speed, might be a good idea?

now we need aircraft that will throw a wrench in the works

You probably can cut a bit on weight if you go for stema turbines. They have more horsepower per ton, so if your engine needs to be very powerful you're better off with steam

@wolfsruhm

4 жыл бұрын

i do agre diesel is made for med speed long range cruising

Functionally speaking, you got nothing "special" out of the C1/C2 and D1/D2 turrets by pairing them up like that - doing that kind f thing is only really useful when you're using the to add additional forward weight to a battleship - meaning you mount them beside and behind as side batteries from the barbettes. Also, your X and Y turrets didn't add much; I think you'd have spent the weight better on 5- and 6-inch secondaries that could have done something against the destroyers more effectively.

So your turret question, when you have main calibers mounted on the sides like that, The main center line guns would be A, B C D. And the side mounted I believe would be Z Y X W turrets there has only been a few ships in our time line with that set up, and most of them were on the dreadnought and early dreadnought era, then they phased out as it is alot of weight and limited in fire direction

Too cool watching those guns go off.

For a lark, I played this one out recently. Had good success with: 28 kts 4x3 18" in A B X Y config 22x3 6" (at the exact right angle, 42 would be brought to bear on a target; 33 was more typical) 12x3 3" 6x3 2" (eh, why not, fill some space in the tower tops) 16"/10" belt 8"/5" deck 13.9" conning tower 15"/5" turret 6" secondaries Wasn't often something closed into 3" range, thought about trying it with nothing below the 6". One game, I saw a single BB launched torpedo and nothing from the CA, CL or DD flotillas. Never felt a need for more 18s.

Don’t mean to fear monger, but that’s quite a dry cough there buddy, take care of yourself and whoever is coughing in the background! I’m loving your videos and can’t wait to see more 18” gunned monsters

@Stealth17Gaming

4 жыл бұрын

Don't worry, I'm alright. It's a remainder of a cough I had 2 weeks ago. Those things always take a while for me to completely disappear.

I wish you could fire over other turrents when the angle allows it. This way the first side mount mains are useful for head on attacks, but the second pair is just a waste of displacement. If you could fire over you could possibly even make a build with maximum batteries all firing in a single salvo. That'd tickle me the right way for sure.

Superb, sounds like it was made for the washington naval treaty with some smudging on the weight. 35k tons vs 38.5k tons it even has lower caliber guns than outlined in articles 5 and 6. 16inch being the limit

"I have a bit of a weight problem" Same

I'm not sure if you ever saw it , but the wing turrts (rear) ware able to fire when you ware broadside at long range. They ware able to elavete anaugh to fire over the other wings, so at full broadside you had 8 tripple turrets shooting.

Modern BB Secondary Tower II have another 4 spot for secondary guns: 3" triples maximum. Even 12 or 15x18" inch guns are enought, all together with normal or increased amount of ammo. Do not forget the tall superimposed barbette for secondary guns. So, centerline secondary guns(6" to 8"), superfiring over the main guns, like on the Yamato. Some more armor are also needed. With "only" 12 or 15 pieces of main guns, you will got enought weight usable...

We also have the Alpha 5 patch now. New hulls, more modern light cruisers, french BBs, HMS Nelson, etc. Also, transport ships are possible in the mission builder, and finally, RAMMING SPEED!

So that is basically one big explanation video about how the Empire really shouldn't have relied on Star Destroyers alone. Nice.

@Beuwen_The_Dragon

9 ай бұрын

Well they didn’t, really. An Imperial Star Destroyer is just one element of the Imperial Fleet. They were intended for long duration patrols to secure multiple systems. They were supplemented with dozens of Tie Fighters, interceptors and Bombers, and would often have escorts of gunboats and light patrol cruisers. They were incredibly powerful, surprisingly maneuverable, and could outmatch anything the Rebel alliance could field in a one on one match. The only hope the Rebels had against ISDs was to disable lone ships in surprise hit-and-run attacks with torpedoes and ion weapons, or to overwhelm lone ships with superior numbers, both of which were still extremely risky endeavors. ISDs are no slouch as military vessels.

Well, you did get more use out of your super battleship than the IJN got out of theirs!

this ship actually more resembles the HMS Nelson, the G3 version that was never built.

Ship is too big, and focused too much on weaponry. Less cannons, less displacements and more manouvrable. Makes stuff a lot easier, also focus on secondary's with better accuracy instead of the highest caliber, and for the casemate/ radio tower emplacements, also focus on better accuracy. You can better hit with doing slight damage, than not hitting at all

@ShiningDarknes

4 жыл бұрын

really he needed better accuracy. I seem to recall that pagoda tower is actually not good for accuracy. Also needed to just focus all guns on DDs, the other ships can only tickle you, torpedoes simply don,t care about your armor or torpedo protection in this game so the are the most dangerous. The 4 side turrets just confused the game. Better to have massed batteries, that split his 18" into two groups and that really hurt is fire director accuracy because they were getting directed by the secondary fire directors which are in general not accurate.

@phantomwraith1984

4 жыл бұрын

Personally I'd also run a mega 125k ton BB, but back her up with escorts. A lone BB is always a goner, she's the sword of a fleet but you need a shield as well. You need destroyers and cruisers scanning for torps and providing suppressing fire. So I'd had the same BB but with 6 DDs, 2 heavy cruisers and 2 cruisers

You gain little real advantage with the side mounts you could replace the rear ones with a single turret and get the same firepower. The british battleships, are World War One era.

Yep, your big mistake was turning in after that first torp salvo. You should have turned out to both avoid them and keep the distance. That one move cost you the battle.

Main battery turrets on the side of a ship like these would be called wing turrets. I suspect for identification they would be known by two things: fore vs aft and port vs starboard, e.g. "aft starboard wing turret".

Do it again, but with a destroyer screen to keep away enemy destroyers. That or more secondaries. We want more ships with big guns!

12:03 you sneaky bastard i saw that cut where you looked up the location of the build time stat and tried to play it off. I'm watchin u...

reminds me of the ijn izumo super battleship concept

she would have won if you just attacked the DD´s which are the biggest threat by far, they might be hard to hit but you only need to hit them once

"Avenge the Yamato" became a reality

I cant believe that he forgot that hall modifications exist. Like that could help with the fire arcs of turrets thanks to raised platforms.

could you have staggered the side mount 18s the same as the guns on sms kaiser to allow all the guns to fire? or would the rotation still be limited? 22:00 "wing turrets" iirc.

From what i understand they are numbered or lettered from bow to stern and port to starboard. So your two bow main turrets would be A and B turrets. Your port side turret would be C then Starboard D and so on down the length of the ship.

I would love to see you try this again

Have you seen the new update? Besides more missions, it's actually possible to build a Nelson Class (as Britain) now!

"I'm going to take down a lot with me........RIIIIIIIIIIGHT......well thats going to be the end of this one."

it would be interesting to see actual paper super battleships done in this!

should of focused on the DD's first especially when multiple of them come chasing after u.

Nice reenacted the sinking of the Bizmark

What I think you really should have done was to substitute turrets D1 and D2 with some secondaries on barbettes and on the deck. That could have helped with the DDs. Really want to see a redo of this fight

Could use more Barrettes and stagger the turrets down the side so they could fire forward perhaps over the deck turrets.

Yes try this design again, but instead of the side by side mains, use a standard middle placement and definately add more secondary guns.

Suggest that the side by side main guns would be "C" port and starboard "D"port and starboard?

I really liked this episode, but to win, id tink the destroyers would be much more dangerous than the battleships

the infamous Kaiju-Class.

Start at maximum distance. Build for speed so you can angle as you move away, letting more guns fire. Move away from the enemy fleet (possibly build a ship with most guns in the aft part). Try to kill the destroyers before the bigger ships are even in range of you. In a world with torpedoes, no big ship is invulnerable or anywhere near it.

Can you try to make some silly designes, perhaps using the unlock button? I'm thinking Thunderchild, 12-inch guns on a destroyer, a barge with guns, an ironclad build on Modern battleship hulls, stuff like that.

cool design , could you have put a raised turret on the rear as well to give yourself (2) 320 degree turrets ? and how about (4) funnels would that improve engine power as well as add a few Knots ? as the design was were you able to shoot all but the (2) forward turrets when you were steaming away from the enemy fleet ?

12:19, that tip absolutely makes no sense. If the ship is broadside, there's no notable angling. If its bow or stern on, the belt is equally as angled if not more. Ships aren't as armored there in real life because they are not important to the survival and operation of the ship.

@ghostarmy1106

4 жыл бұрын

If you build a battleship with all forward facing guns like france did in WW2 you could bow tank depending on your amor size everyrhink

@neurofiedyamato8763

4 жыл бұрын

Not really, not at all. It does allow the battleship to close in to its ideal range without worrying about needing to bring all its guns to the fight. However once at that range, it would need to turn broadside OR risk getting TOO close. Every ship, especially battleships are designed to fight at a certain range, where their armor is most effective, referred to as a ship's immunity zone. Same applies to their fire control and armament layout. Continually pointing towards or away the enemy will constantly change that range and put your ship at risk. Bismarck have a protection scheme specialized at close range thanks to its turtle back. While US and Japanese battleships were intended for long range gunnery. For the US who have good fire control and good deck armor, closing in is basically giving up all its advantage. For example, the South Dakota's armor scheme was supposed to be able to stop 16" shells between 19 to 24km. That means if it maintains this range, Bismarck would not do any significant damage. If South Dakota goes bow on, it will keep closing the distance until it is below 19km and become more at risk. The armored bulkheads at the bow and stern of the ship is only 11", thinner than the belt so enemy rounds can go in through the unprotected bow and strike the armored bulkhead in to the citadel. Also ships can't just stop dead in the ocean to bow on while maintaining range. It takes US battleships 8 minutes to accelerate up to full speed. During those 8 minutes, you are a sitting duck from basically everything. That is why every real historical naval battles were fought in line battles and always underway.

"The more you know"~

I believe when the turrets are side-mounted it is SA, SB so on

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

The USN labeled them clockwise. The Iowa's DP 5'' turrets go from A to J, starting with the most forward starboard turret.

@dariuswatson9302

4 жыл бұрын

@@Tepid24 k, thanks. my father served, just going off recelection

Perhaps, perhaps, you should include torpedos as well as secondaries. Then as soon as the DDs start heading towards you for an attack run launch a spread of torps. Either they will abort their attack or they will get hit. In the confusion the secondaries have a better hit chance...maybe?

when you have tuurets like this its called A B double Cs double Ds hahahhaha

@Stealth17Gaming

4 жыл бұрын

Does Double D really cover it for an 18 inch turret though? XD

Leave off one 18" turret and mount a bunch of torpedo launchers. Take off another 18" turret and mount secondaries that can fire quickly and hit DD's as they approach their torpedo range. Leave main guns on center line as some are not usable at certain angles.

Damnit Jim, you are getting a promotion!

apx 23:00 you also have to realize that if we went off of the amount of displacement the allies had we probably would have lost the war

If I was in a destroyer with one gun and you made the chitose with 20 inch guns and 100 inches of armor on everything I would like get the hell out of their

Would it be worth employing larger secondary guns to keep the destroyers further away?

22:00 the same thought came into my head . What do you call the turrets when they are side by side. I was gonna post a comment asking you.

@hboss5627

4 жыл бұрын

I thought it was going to be like turret a, turret b, turret c.1, turret c.2, turret d.1, turret d.2, turret y, and turret z, but IDK I might just be an idiot.

Is diesel 2 or max steam turbines better for weight?

You should have put the second row of sideways facing 18" on barbettes

18" secondaries

When in doubt, *MOAR DAKKA*

I would have focused all guns on the ships that can torp me... one at a time.

Wing turrets they're called

This. THIS is the spiritual sequel of the legendary PS2 game Warship Gunner!! Now give us DUAL-HULL OPTION!! :D :D :D

from the get go I was sure this would be uninteresting because of how overpowered you were and I'll say that it must feel cruddy to lose in these episodes, it made for a far more interesting ep

You should make an indestructible brick armed with only 3 inch guns