Jump to content

Guardian54

Members
  • Content Сount

    1,194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6233
  • Clan

    [70]

Community Reputation

230 Valued poster

2 Followers

About Guardian54

  • Rank
    Ensign
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,365 profile views
  1. Guardian54

    Tashkent — Soviet Tier IX destroyer.

    See, I cannot possibly so much as imagine myself giving up on the ability to penetrate heavy cruiser plating with IFHE. Once they nerf IFHE though, I expect to be able to redistribute my commander skills for free. In addition, 10km on a destroyer is more than a bit too easy to spot for me, as I'd be outspotted by the likes of Minotaurs and Mogami/Ibuki, but I CAN conceive of trading that off for MUCH more range i.e. the ability to dodge better because I swear my Cleveland dodges better than my Tashkent right now thanks to the range.
  2. Guardian54

    Tashkent — Soviet Tier IX destroyer.

    Right now, and until I get the range upgrade (plus 2 more captain skill points), I'm playing with about 11.5 km range. Ye gods DDs require a lot of skills to be useable. Right now I have CE and IFHE, so one more 4 point skill and I'm going to only get one more 1 pointer, ugh... probably the module damage chance one I think. The max 15km is only against BBs or fatter cruisers though, as even at 11.5 km it struggles to hit other destroyers.
  3. Guardian54

    Tashkent — Soviet Tier IX destroyer.

    Stock configuration is utter trash. I don't expect upgraded to be anything better than meh at best. Not enough range to kite, not enough raw firepower to deal with all the gunboats running around (IJN and French), terrible torpedo range... Since Kleber is not apparently considered OP, it's time to give the Soviet gun destroyers better torpedoes or better stealth, because Kleber is all their best traits put together.
  4. Guardian54

    Update 0.9.0. British Cruisers

    Oh look, the Armor Viewer is now no longer blue through red, but instead 50 Shades of Orange. This is obviously to cover up the ludicrously overdone Light Cruiser IFHE Nerf that's planned.
  5. Guardian54

    Forum Game - Word Association

    Space Hippies (See Jean-Luc Picard and the usual stupidity of the Federation)
  6. Guardian54

    Gorizia and Italian cruisers are the new port queens?

    150mm belt is enough to withstand cruiser fire during a turn-away (which you do at long range). Much better than say a Japanese cruiser's 100mm. It gets lolpenned by battleships through the ends, but that's normal. It's a better Pensacola in my experience.
  7. Guardian54

    Gorizia and Italian cruisers are the new port queens?

    Gorizia is quite good in armor, accuracy and agility. The concealment is lethally visible though so be very careful to not be ahead of the pack.
  8. Guardian54

    Guardian54's Boat Feasibility Checks

    Turns out I don't get notifications from this thread despite me having watched it. Strange. Very sorry I took this damned long to respond! Only because SpringSharp wouldn't let me build it earlier. I see. This seems reasonable. Geared Turbines it will have to be then! (Which will give a 1911 build date due to SS restrictions) I should note that in this TL, transmission technology development is ahead of OTL by a few years. I could plausibly claim that the faction issuing these design specs has a serious focus in transportation technology so Geared Turbines (with herringbone gearing) can show up early. The development chain is something like: 1) leather conveyor belt invented in the late 1770s to move grain. 2) velocipede-type push/pull hybrid hand-cart (you push it, but the handling characteristics are like a pulled vehicle) bicycle and tricycle invented 1780s (forget precisely when I wrote it to be) 3) chain-driven bicycle invented sometime around the 1840s. This is followed in time by investment into railroads--including trying to figure out how to make it require less infrastructure in terms of water towers--and automobile technology. Canada still ended up the Tricycle Kingdom though because a tricycle can do just about anything. (Memetic tricycle from Beijing LOL) This eventually extends to electrification and turbines, but yeah, turbo-electric isn't going to be THAT far ahead of OTL, so Geared Turbines it will be. Had to google and found it was the second Yodo-class protected cruiser, this one right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_cruiser_Mogami_(1908) That "armor" thickness is a reinforced deck to hopefully keep splinters out of the engine spaces and magazines. It's a matter of "Well we'll need a structural deck here anyhow... Hmm, if we bend the edges downward a bit and thicken it a little, it would be a splinter deck, which could certainly be useful in duels of high-explosive shells..." Because real life doesn't have the Last Stand captain skill. However, I can do away with the deck easily enough, even if that requires some serious compartmentation for machinery which is a serious problem without the ease that turbo-electric represents.. I'm basically mentally using 1912-1915 or so for turbine tech baselines. 6000 nautical miles is absolutely essential due to the demands of duties with the Empire, as underway replenishment is not yet well codified and the one-way-trip distances are as noted. Higher endurance (i.e. 8000) would be ideal to avoid requiring refuelling in Britain after a convoy run but was deemed unrealistic To meet the demand of 6000 nautical miles endurance at cruising speed, I will build it to 1200 tons STANDARD (I JUST noticed the 1200 tons I specified is NORMAL, not STANDARD...) because I was kind of looking at the Clemsons for "this is the sort of tech that will eclipse it" and the stats seemed reasonable at the time in comparison (it has WAY less torpedo armament even if it eventually gets upgraded to triples or even quads). VERY MUCH SO! I whipped up a revised version where it actually has 1200 tons STANDARD. I had to give it -300 tons misc weight below water (and 50 tons above deck for fittings like fire control directors) to bring it up to even an anemic 40 HP/ton instead of the 50-60 HP/ton destroyer machinery was known for by the Great War. It says "laid down 1911" but due to altered technological progression this should actually have been built sometime in the year 1910 at latest. If strictly required I can subtract 50 or even 100 tons more off the weight below waterline for that 50 HP/ton figure I've seen cited on navweaps forums complaining about SpringSharp's DD machinery. SI Spec 1908, Canada Destroyer laid down 1911 Displacement: 1,152 t light; 1,200 t standard; 1,444 t normal; 1,639 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep) (266.86 ft / 262.47 ft) x 36.09 ft x (11.48 / 12.57 ft) (81.34 m / 80.00 m) x 11.00 m x (3.50 / 3.83 m) Armament: 4 - 3.94" / 100 mm 45.0 cal guns - 30.77lbs / 13.96kg shells, 250 per gun Quick firing guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1911 Model 4 x Single mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread 2 raised mounts - superfiring 2 - 1.57" / 40.0 mm 45.0 cal guns - 1.97lbs / 0.89kg shells, 1,000 per gun Anti-air guns in deck mount, 1911 Model 1 x Twin mount on centreline, aft deck forward Weight of broadside 127 lbs / 58 kg Main Torpedoes 4 - 18.0" / 457 mm, 17.62 ft / 5.37 m torpedoes - 0.845 t each, 3.382 t total In 2 sets of deck mounted centre rotating tubes Armour: - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max) Main: 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm 0.39" / 10 mm 2nd: 0.20" / 5 mm - - Machinery: Oil fired boilers, steam turbines, Geared drive, 2 shafts, 19,952 shp / 14,885 Kw = 28.00 kts Range 6,000nm at 12.00 kts Bunker at max displacement = 438 tons Complement: 116 - 152 Cost: £0.163 million / $0.651 million Distribution of weights at normal displacement: Armament: 44 tons, 3.1 % - Guns: 37 tons, 2.6 % - Weapons: 7 tons, 0.5 % Armour: 16 tons, 1.1 % - Armament: 16 tons, 1.1 % Machinery: 788 tons, 54.6 % Hull, fittings & equipment: 555 tons, 38.4 % Fuel, ammunition & stores: 292 tons, 20.2 % Miscellaneous weights: -250 tons, -17.3 % Overall survivability and seakeeping ability: Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 785 lbs / 356 Kg = 25.7 x 3.9 " / 100 mm shells or 0.6 torpedoes Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.23 Metacentric height 1.6 ft / 0.5 m Roll period: 12.1 seconds Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 51 % - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.25 Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.03 Hull form characteristics: Hull has a flush deck, a normal bow and small transom stern Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.465 / 0.482 Length to Beam Ratio: 7.27 : 1 'Natural speed' for length: 17.70 kts Power going to wave formation at top speed: 71 % Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50 Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 15.00 degrees Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length): Fore end, Aft end - Forecastle: 15.00 %, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m - Forward deck: 25.00 %, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m - Aft deck: 45.00 %, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m - Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m, 16.40 ft / 5.00 m - Average freeboard: 16.40 ft / 5.00 m Ship tends to be wet forward Ship space, strength and comments: Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 162.4 % - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 136.9 % Waterplane Area: 6,260 Square feet or 582 Square metres Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 96 % Structure weight / hull surface area: 47 lbs/sq ft or 230 Kg/sq metre Hull strength (Relative): - Cross-sectional: 0.70 - Longitudinal: 5.16 - Overall: 0.85 Cramped machinery, storage, compartmentation space Excellent accommodation and workspace room For some reason it doesn't have the "good seaboat" label anymore. It still tends to be wet forward, but given the flush deck chosen for strength, this is to be expected (there are those splash barrier board things installed, but they are just about worthless in a North Atlantic winter where the foremost fighting position that could possibly be manned is B turret in front of the combat bridge, and even that is a "you best leave through one of the rear-facing hatches in the barbette") The disgusting space below water is due to the borked SS HP/ton for machinery. I tried making a modernization kit (for 1935) with 3x2 100mm guns, 2x2 40mm autocannons, some 20mm Oerlikons, and 1x4 21-inch torpedoes, but the seakeeping was problematic. I wonder if adding a one-deck forecastle and increasing the draft would resolve that problem...
  9. Guardian54

    So who is going have to buy the Payto Rico?

    Did 2 doubloon boosters and after finishing Directive 4 had enough to get the PR in time. Still trying to finish Directive 5 though cause I still have some prem time.
  10. Guardian54

    which line has the best cruisers?

    God help you. I have that ship. It's by far the worst of the Russian cruisers that I've played so far. My own conclusions? 1. God help you if you have to chase enemy, the bow gets overmatched except two small strips by anything 15 inch and over AKA loled through by the AP of all BBs you meet except the occasional Lyon. 2. Your torpedoes are a "don't try to bumrush me" weapon at best, despite their improved range. 3. If you don't have Concealment Expert and IFHE on your captain, you will suffer BADLY. CE is more important. Annoyingly the Moskva doesn't require IFHE so you'll have to respec once you get there (if you can be bothered). 4. Keep enemy BBs within 2km inside your max gun range circle if at all possible. Otherwise you will get citted, a lot. 5. Shake das booty. 6. In my experience this ship does NOT have the capacity to full-reverse and turn because it does not pick up speed quickly enough. Your best bet if more than a single BB is firing on you is to be shaking das booty while kiting away. For reference, my T10 list is in my signature, and my first Tier 9 was either Seattle or Buffalo. I am prone to open water kiting in every cruiser and battleship and have no idea how to hump island or bow tank while reversing. Unless I am backing away from getting grounded or slowing for a tighter turn, I only know Ahead Full.
  11. Ditch it so we can have a good laugh, you have a higher chance of being on enemy team than my team, 12:11, so you should ditch it and see what happens. My Kitakaze, Fletcher, Jutland, Chung Mu, Z-23 and even Vauquelin could use the target practice.
  12. Guardian54

    Forum Game - Word Association

    Jackhammer (as opposed to your Jane Hammer)
  13. Guardian54

    Dmitri Donskoi — Soviet Tier IX cruiser.

    Still a giant pile of trash that can't play aggressively in any way, shape or form. Ugh. ...Hold on, actually it's very useful during the Puerto Rico grind. I can queue up a battle, go relieve myself, come back, and THEN start the ship moving forward, and that delay should make it actually usable instead of flaming garbage.
  14. Guardian54

    Forum Game - Word Association

    Persimmons
  15. Hey there landcollector (if you're the one I know from SB/SV). The biggest camo is Spring Sky, +777% Free XP, same for flags, so with a +300% from Papa Papa, +250% from Hydra, +200% from Leviathan, +25% from clan building, and from the division event (+300%), it's plausible to get +2629% Free XP with clan. Warships Free XP gain is different from WoT 5%, as I got 150 base FXP for 1180 XP, or about 12.7% somehow (some digits omitted here but retained in calculator). multiplied by 27.29, that's about 3.466x (Base XP + Premium) She just told us she gets 2500 Base XP per game. Alright then. 1.65x2500 x 3.466 = 14296.55 FXP. So a certain spoiled orincess needs to "photos or GTFO" along with the details page to show how the numbers add up. 20,000 XP gain per match I can believe, but even 20,000 Free XP requires you get well over 3500 base XP. The laughable 40,000 she claims, without photographic proof? She's also basically saying "let them eat cake". A society's resilience and vitality is NOT measured by the well-being of its top 0.01%, nor the bottom 5%, but by the center of the bell curve. PR is an event for elites unless you want to pay (which, by the way, is pretty easy) so should never have been marketed as anything else. Same goes for a game community.
×