Remove ads

Let's Play Rule the Waves 3 - An Interactive Let's Play by Shebe Zuu

Reader mode
Steven Kodaly said:
[X] Yes, let's hold a design contest!


To quote Dr. Nefario, do you want to explode?!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So, fun fact about RtW's under the hood mechanics! Britain has the "Hidden Flaws" trait, which makes them more likely to suffer flash fires. However, ships built in Britain for a foreign power do not inherit the trait, and ships built in a foreign yard for Britain do (i.e., it's not saved in the ship's savedata, but instead applied nationally). This means that it's a good idea to occasionally build a few ships in British (and later American) yards, just to copy their homework a bit.

Edit: Anyways, I'd suggest something like this for our battleships.

Key points:
  • It's the maximum size of ship we can build starting 6 months from now. If we delay the design process by two months, then the first design period will finish up right when our docks expand, and we can do a quick redesign to bring it up to 14,500 tons.
  • 20 knots means these can chase down enemy cruisers. It's expensive, but it really helps turn them from just generic battleships into true multi-purpose "good at anything" ships. Reliability engines are important early on as well.
  • Short range because we're gonna need these in Northern Europe. It saves around 800 tons on the overall design, and we can send our cruisers overseas if need be.
  • Armour is meant to provide protection against the naval guns we'll likely face. The 13" Q-2 penetrates around 8" at point blank (and 7" around 2500 m), so 7" is around the lower edge of what I'd want for belt armour. Armour on the extremities is enough to reject 6" (4") through to 8" (5.3") Q-1 guns. Deck armour's useless in this time period. Turret roof armour is 2" since most HE in game pens 1.5"-2" and losing a battleship due to a 3" HE shell sending fragments into the handling spaces and causing a flash fire is really embarassing.
  • I've opted for a 6x11" main battery, but we could go with 4x11". I was trying to emulate the Brandenburgs but with more effective firing arcs.
  • This has the max amount of secondary/tertiary guns. 6" is the largest calibre where a flash fire won't destroy the entire ship, so I've left them completely unarmoured. Alternatively, we could go with 6x8" in armoured turrets, but I think the fire-starting potential of the larger 6" battery is more effective early on.
  • There's a fair bit of weight remianing on this sketch design to allow for further improvements.
 
Last edited:
stop design contests, wait for more dreadnought info
 
Remove ads
The Furst Bismarck with its better than expected speed is already a robust weapon against enemy cruisers. No point in trying to make bootleg battlecruisers by making our new battleship also able to chase down cruisers. Focus on using them to fight other battleships.
 
General_Urist said:
The Furst Bismarck with its better than expected speed is already a robust weapon against enemy cruisers. No point in trying to make bootleg battlecruisers by making our new battleship also able to chase down cruisers. Focus on using them to fight other battleships.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Furst Bismarck's armament is fairly anemic; we'll be going up against ships with 4x10" guns fairly soon with 2x8".

Also, speed is very useful in a battleship as well! If we're fighting against a superior force, we can go to flank and disengage, which isn't possible if we're slow. As well, the late 1890s are a period where the torpedo starts to be very dangerous (nobody has good damage control or torpedo protection, so a single hit can be devastating, and they're actually long-ranged enough to be useful). The most dangerous position to be in is slightly behind and to the side of an enemy ship, since it makes for the easiest torpedo shot; if we're fast enough to avoid sitting in that position for too long, we are more effective at avoiding torpedoes. If a ship is damaged, it'll slow down, and having a comfortable speed advantage at the start of the engagement means you're less likely to have a formation disintegrate because one ship took a waterline hit. RtW also has a gunnery penalty that applies if you're near your top speed, so sitting a few knots below it is generally good. The AI doesn't do this, but if we design our ships for a 2 knot speed advantage over the fastest enemy battleships, we can take advantage of it. On top of that, there's not a lot to improve with these designs. We don't have heavier guns, we can't mount more secondaries, and the armour is good enough against the reference threat.
 
Remove ads
1891 Design Contest
  • Threadmarks
    • DESIGNS SUBMITTED TO THE NAVAL CONTROL BOARD FOR THE 1891 DESIGN CONTEST
    ​

    The first proposal before the board, given the designation Schwaben, represents a continuation of our current line of battleships. Small, short ranged, and not particularly fast, it does still represent an improvement in broad strokes, with the most notable addition being the placement of a main gun turret in the aft position. Its' main virtue is without question its' cost, which is quite low in relative terms to many other ships of this size and class.


    The second proposal, given the designation Mecklenburg, represents the long-standing desire of many in the Navy for a true, ocean-going battlefleet. No coastal defense ship, the Mecklenburg would give Germany overseas power projection it has sorely lacked up until this point. In order to achieve this however, the ship has needed to balloon quite considerably in size (and consequently cost) compared to our current vessels, without adding on much in the way of armor - though the twinned main battery turrets do represent a considerable upgrade in firepower.


    If the Schwaben represents a continuation of our current design trends, the third proposal, the Hessen, is an evolution of them. Retaining the low speed and range of our current ships, the Hessen adds on a bit more tonnage in order to move to a main battery of 4x11 inch guns compared to our current battleships 2x10 inchers. It also switches up the secondary battery for a larger number of smaller caliber guns as opposed to a few large caliber weapons. Despite the size increase, it is also still relatively affordable.


    The fourth and final proposal, the Preussen, goes in a radically different direction to all other ships considered. Conceived as an attempt to create a ship that could outfight any others currently afloat, it makes maximum use of our current dockyards to place an unheard of amount of main battery firepower on the vessel, while also increasing the engine's speed and reliability considerably. Naturally these upgrades have not come cheap, in terms of either money or space. The Preussen's armor scheme in certain ways actually represents a downgrade from our current ships, while also carrying a surprisingly light secondary battery for a ship of its's size - though advocates for the ship say this can quickly be addressed in a cheap redesign once our new dockyards are completed and we have 1,000 tons more room to add additional guns.

    Which Design should the Naval Control Board approve for further development? [DESIGN]
    [][DESIGN] Proposal 1, the Schwaben-Class
    [][DESIGN] Proposal 2, the Mecklenburg-Class
    [][DESIGN] Proposal 3, the Hessen-Class
    [][DESIGN] Proposal 4, the Preussen-Class

    Voting will be open for approximately 24 hours after this post!

    (Also apologies for taking so long, I've been kidnapped by the Rogue Trader beta)
     
  • Threadmarks
    • I'm gonna be honest, this is the only one I like:

    [X] [DESIGN] Proposal 1, the Schwaben-Class
     
    [X][DESIGN] Proposal 4, the Preussen-Class

    It's very different to what I'd normally be designing for this era, so I'm honestly curious to see how it would work.

    Design 2 is proboably the most 'sensible'.
     
    [X][DESIGN] Proposal 4, the Preussen-Class

    Design 1 has a 8" secbat protected by only 4" of armour. Unlike 6" guns, which cannot catstrophically flashfire in RtW, guns of 7" and larger can. 4" of armour, within a few years, will be penetrated by 8-10" AP; this is an absolutely critical design flaw. These ships would be floating bombs.

    Design 2, likewise, has a 7" secbat with 4" of armour. I cannot stress how bad of an idea it is to have exposed ammunition capable of blowing up the ship in compartments that enemy guns can penetrate. This is how you look like the British battlecruisers at Jutland.

    Design 3 is probably the best of the "conventional" designs. However, there's a few reasons why design 4 is better:
    • First, let's look at the gun per price. Design 3 has 4 main battery guns and costs 36k; we're paying $9k per gun. Design 4 has 6 guns and costs $50k; we're paying $8.3k per gun. Because ships don't scale linearly, we get more guns per dollar with Design 4!
    • Secondly, the armour layout of design 4 is better. Not much can penetrate a 7" belt outside of "the ships are literally touching" range; even less when you consider that most shots will be striking at some greater obliquity. Meanwhile, design 4 has a thicker belt extended, which will preserve waterline integrity.
    • Third, RtW's gunnery calculations have a "small salvo size" penalty. If you're firing a lot of guns at a target, you get an accuracy bonus. If we're chasing an enemy ship, and can only bring the front guns to bear, design 4 can fire up to 4 guns (no penalty, hopefully), whereas design 3 can only fire 2 guns at most (inevitably having the small salvo size accuracy penalty).
    • Lastly design 4 has reliability engines, whereas design 3 has normal engines. Design 3 is much more likely to suffer engine breakdowns in battle.
    We could do a conventional layout like Design 3, but with some of the improvements of Design 4 (reliable engines, more sensible armour layout), but I still think it's less effective than Design 4. As it stands, Design 3 is a significant downgrade.

    Edit: Oh, @ etran, I just noticed SoNII in your signature, is it up and running again?
     
    Last edited:
    I'm convinced by C_Z's argument. Germany is a young, virile empire with two completely normal arms and it deserves a great fleet, so if Proposal 4 is best, then we go with that.

    Also, yes, SoN2 is up and running, for my sins. There's about an hour left in the 1893 election.
     
    [X][DESIGN] Proposal 4, the Preussen-Class

    You don't have to sell me that hard on buying the absurd overpriced super prototype.
     
    [X][DESIGN] Proposal 2, the Mecklenburg-Class

    Flash fire risk or not, this is a fast and ocean-going ship that does not look cursed. Even though Preussen's 20kts are tempting, I like medium range better. Besides, reliable engines do not matter much unless you always run your ships at full speed, and speed is what Preussen has to spare.

    I could be persuaded to pick option 4 if it would have regular engines and used the freed weight for armour or medium range.
     
    Vote closed
  • Voting
  • Voting
    • Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top