Remove ads

Belated Battleships (KanColle) [REHOST]

Reader mode
Whiskey Golf said:
Sure, but the only aircraft that can drop the Daisy Cutter and MOAB are C-130 and C-17 and welllllll those aren't really survivable for penetrating enemy airspace. <.<
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There are no more Daisy Cutters as the last one was detonated back in 2004 I believe. That said, the US has been working on much smaller warheads for things like the Hellfire. So maybe upsizing one for Tomahawks and other bombs might be possible. Considering the size of the explosion, they'd be like the Tallboys and such I would think.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Well that brings up a question about Abyssal ichor/leftovers/etc. Is the clean up after Abyssal occupation hazardous enough that glassing it over is the more environmentally friendly option?

edit: do we even know?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We do. Abyssal remains are, as far as anyone can tell, just normal steel. They dredged up some fragments from Jersey's first kill and analyzed it before Crowning borrowed a bit to make her sword out of.
LudicrousSpeedGo said:
As I've stated, the leveling effect is neither hard and fast nor consistent. There are posters who've claimed (and would like to believe) otherwise, I'm just putting up my proof.

It serves the narrative, but is majorly arbitrary to rule of cool / WoG.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What? no it's not. You're just looking at it from the wrong perspective.

The leveling-effect doesn't work on a tactical level by messing with individual systems, it works on a grand strategy level by enforcing a certain naval paradigm though magic. For an Admiral sitting back in his headquarters, a Seawolf SSN will be functionally interchangeable with a Type-XXI shipgirl because they're both top-tier submarines. You can't expect the modern stuff to do much better than the best historical equivalent. It gets a little hazier when it comes to aircraft though, simply because the number scale has changed. What would be considered an overwhelming air presence today couldn't hold a candle to a WWII formation in sheer numbers, so modern aircraft have some fudge factor to them.

You can't abuse the leveling effect to get what you want because it's not a set of simple mechanical rules that can be worked within. It wants what it wants, and you can't outsmart it.

The best way I can think to phrase it, is imagine someone taking a WWII grand-strategy game (Like HoI) and trying go kludge in a modern-units mod without changing any of the ruleset.
 
As TheJMPer said it some time ago, the leveling effect is consistent in that it gets consistent results, the ones he just described. Not that it works by consistent mechanisms. So expecting the same things to perform the same way under different circumstances just isn't realistic in the new naval paradigm (the ones where most effective warships run on hamburgers, cuddles, and dess).
 
Does the scaling effect work by ship type or by intended purpose? exe Would an Arleigh Burke, as a top tier modern DD (or whatever we decided on) have the same AA as a Ship girl Gearing or somesuch, or would an Arleigh Burke, as a top tier modern AA platform have the AA fire power of an Iowa or some such.
 
Viper5delta said:
Does the scaling effect work by ship type or by intended purpose? exe Would an Arleigh Burke, as a top tier modern DD (or whatever we decided on) have the same AA as a Ship girl Gearing or somesuch, or would an Arleigh Burke, as a top tier modern AA platform have the AA fire power of an Iowa or some such.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Burkes are going to be nearly as good as Atlanta-class CLAAs because of tonnage creep in destroyer sizes.
 
Can we please stop talking about the leveling effect. We do not need 3 more pages of back and forth Clogging the thread. TheJMPer has repeatedly explained it.
 
Distraction time?

Since we've got Aby!Derfflingers running around and I got bored...model time.






The second funnel being red is historical to how Derfflinger and Lutzow were painted at Jutland. Plus there being a blood red stack fits for the Abyssals. Especially Nazi Abyssals.

Modernization is slightly less AA than late-war Tirpitz.

12 of the 10.5-cm Flak 38s (six dual mounts)

12 of the 37-mm Flak guns (again, six duals)

And 36 of the German 20-mm mounts.

(for context, late-war Tirp has around 60 of the 20-mm and two extra mountings each for the 10.5 and 37mm)
 
I'm curious how an A-10 would perform in a gun dogfight vs abyssals. While A-10's are completely outclasses as missile combatants against modern jets, I've read a lot of literature saying that the A-10, with similarly skilled pilots, can demolish any interceptor jet stupid enough to try to get into a gun dogfight with it. You take down an A-10 as a modern interceptor by using missiles, or with slashing high-speed passes, not dogfighting.

A-10's are, of course, the absolute pinnacle of all ground support aircraft, with the possible exception of Puff The Magic Dragon, so in that role they would definitely be useful in the Abyssal war, but they might just have a secondary role as well.
 
Farmerbob1 said:
I'm curious how an A-10 would perform in a gun dogfight vs abyssals. While A-10's are completely outclasses as missile combatants against modern jets, I've read a lot of literature saying that the A-10, with similarly skilled pilots, can demolish any interceptor jet stupid enough to try to get into a gun dogfight with it. You take down an A-10 as a modern interceptor by using missiles, or with slashing high-speed passes, not dogfighting.

A-10's are, of course, the absolute pinnacle of all ground support aircraft, with the possible exception of Puff The Magic Dragon, so in that role they would definitely be useful in the Abyssal war, but they might just have a secondary role as well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They would get their asses handed to them, just like if you threw A-10s against Vipers or Hornets.
 
The only reason I could see that being feasible is that the A-10 can fly slower than most jets stall speeds. Hell, the P-8 Poseidon has a faster top speed than the A-10.

That being said, against Abyssal fighters, the speed advantage would be negligible.
 
Breakaway25 said:
The only reason I could see that being feasible is that the A-10 can fly slower than most jets stall speeds. Hell, the P-8 Poseidon has a faster top speed than the A-10.

That being said, against Abyssal fighters, the speed advantage would be negligible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah, I've seen video footage on YouTube of interceptors getting their asses handed to them by A-10 pilots in gun dogfights.
 
Getting into a turning dogfight with an A-10 means one thing, you're giving all of the advantages to the A-10. He can fly close to his maximum speed and keep his energy up. While the opponent(Say an F/A-18 or an F-16 for convenience sake) is forced to fly at low speeds on the very edge of its performance envelope.

A slow fighter is a sluggish fighter. A slow fighter can't burn energy to maneuver and is restricted to low speed, low G maneuvers. Any mistake, the fighter stalls and is dead regardless.
 
Breakaway25 said:
The only reason I could see that being feasible is that the A-10 can fly slower than most jets stall speeds. Hell, the P-8 Poseidon has a faster top speed than the A-10.

That being said, against Abyssal fighters, the speed advantage would be negligible.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Stukas can fly slower than most good WWII fighters' stall speeds too. That does not mean it is a good idea to try to dogfight a Spitfire or a Mustang while flying a Stuka.

The levelling effect is simple and has been covered in massive detail; I think we all know how it works by now.
 
Which is why I said you throw away your advantage if you slow to the A-10's speed. A Spitfire would face the exact same thing if it slowed to the Stuka's speed.

You never fight an opponent in the air by giving them the advantage, you fight with your own advantage.
 
Or, in other words, the things that make a good ground attack plan make a terrible fighter, and vice versa.

The only thing the A-10 has going for it in air-to-air is just how durable of a plane it is, and, frankly, that's nothing like enough.
 
For the A-10 debate, look up the Warthog Stomp. Flight safety rules had to be changed for Red Flag to keep the fast movers from being utterly curbstomped by the warthogs.
 
PAGDTenno said:
Or, in other words, the things that make a good ground attack plan make a terrible fighter, and vice versa.

The only thing the A-10 has going for it in air-to-air is just how durable of a plane it is, and, frankly, that's nothing like enough.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah... one only has to look up the Night Witches. They were slow because they were ground attack planes and would never get in a dogfight because they would get curbstomped.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top