Jump to content
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

168 Valued poster

About BBsquid

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Birthday 07/22/1969
  • Profile on the website BBsquid

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Honolulu, HI
  • Interests
    Surfing, Hiking (all good in Hawaii), and as much beach time as I can fit in a busy schedule. Avid gamer and historian. Firm believer that Star Trek is far superior to Star Wars, and all cats are better than most dogs. Whatevas.

Recent Profile Visitors

445 profile views
  1. What?? I love my New York. Im not ever going to be purple, but I do ok in her and regardless always have a blast in her. My advice would be forget NY has that 5th turret and work her like you do NM (only squishier). Every now and then you get that opportunity to bring the 5th turret into action. Shes a good ship imo.
  2. You do realize that thats a movie, right? I hope you also realize that HE is a blast/fragmentation weapon, not an incendiary round that makes big, poofy, fiery explosions. Not gonna argue, a 28cm HE round will kill lots of people and tear up light structures. What you see in the clip? horses*it.
  3. Not sure if you are aware of this but there is a SIGNIFICANT structural difference between an airplane and a ship. Even with extensive fires aboard Lexington at Coral Sea, and the Forrestal and Enterprise fires, there were no reports of structural fatigue. I can attest first hand that fuel fires burn extremely hot, and JP5/JP10 even hotter. The steel you are thinking of is not the same kind of steel used in the production process of armor plate. Im not saying that armor steel is impervious to fatigue but I maintain it is unlikely. On something like a ship you would likely have massive AvGas explosions and/or magazine detonations well before structural failure of the armor. You will recall the Arizona? When the forward mags went off and destroyed the forward part of the ship, the superstructure and foremast collapsed forward about 45 degrees. Arizona burned for three days, and the fire was centered right about the superstructure and foremast. Neither melted or deformed beyond the damage caused by the initial explosion. There are still large pieces of the Arizona's superstructure out on the Waipio peninsula. Having surveyed it, I saw no indications of metal fatigue or failure. To be clear though, Im not a metallurgist nor could i do any tests on it. It is rusting badly though. Superstructure? possible in certain circumstances. As a general rule, ship superstructures were not armored and would likely fail if the heat was intense enough. Armor plate? Not likely. To your reference of the in game fires...fires on that scale would be what we referred to as a mass conflag. Either your crews would be incapacitated by the intense heat and prolific nature of the flames, or the Captain ordered abandon ship. Either way, metal fatigue is a moot issue as the ship is no longer combat capable. To that point though, the last time I know of a ship burning the way they do in game was during the age of sail.
  4. Can you provide a real world example of a ship that suffered an armor failure due to fires? Do you know the processes involved in producing armor plate? Armor isn't the steel girders in buildings. In all my days in the navy, I cant actually think of a single source that would create a fire hot enough to warp or buckle armor. Not saying it can't happen but it seems pretty low on the probability scale.
  5. Without a doubt, fire was our biggest concern. Not being the greatest swimmer, I will admit excessive amounts of fish water in the people tank (that would the ship flooding for you land-lubbing scubs) was also a big concern. That said, CVs..like oilers, are essentially floating bombs waiting for a chance to self immolate. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of fuel oil and AvGas, lubricants for a/c etc etc. Surface ships, ships in general burn...but unless there is a catastrophic failure with the damage control equipment and/or damage control teams, or the ship was absolutely devastated in short order, the fire damage was not as excessive as depicted in game. Went through three main space (engineering) fires during my time in the navy, and never were we in danger of losing the ship. Granted, peacetime conflags are much different than combat action with bullets flying.
  6. Some may, but not all. Killing DDs removes they eyes of the reds. Prioritizing cruisers makes sense in that, lacking a heal for the most part), they are the easiest to remove from the board. The team with the ship deficit normally has a hard time pulling the win. Overall, I see your point though.
  7. This right here. Too many times Im moving up with the DDs to cover them. As soon as they get spotted or take fire-accurate or not-they pop smoke and hide inside...leaving me with no targets to engage but invariably spotted and taking fire myself.
  8. Why would there be an armor debuff? Ive never heard of an account where a fire caused the armor to fail. And rudder shift debuff? What about after control and aft steering? Not seeing the logic with these two.
  9. Im not sure what navy you served in but, while we did constantly train to fight fires, the fires in this game are nowhere realistic. Might want to re-think that statement. Fires can be devastating (think: Forrestal, Enterprise, the Northern Force cruisers at Savo, Farenholt at Duncan at Esperance, etc), however the damage control efforts in most cases is sufficient. Warships are not topped with gasoline and most ships in a combat zone jettison flammable material. Only when power and fire mains, leaving damage control teams unable to fight fires are lost is fire a deadly concer. Remember Holland on Hood? He ordered the crew to let an ammunition fire burn unchecked.
  10. Pretty sure thats a single triple mount, not a quad. If it was a quad they would all be in line. Thus mount clearly shows the (third, center) tube above the lower starboard tube.
  11. Dont lose hope. 99.99999% of the forumites here will lend an ear and offer insight and advice. For the most part its a very solid community. While you already know the answer to the torp question, the UI is the game interface. I don't have the PA DDs, but from the notes and other players, when you are in torp mode there is a warning about ineligible target or some such when locked on to DDs in the display.
  12. That..that could actually be the other solution. And when he went back to AZ there wouldnt be a penalty as shes a premium. Hes still specilaized as an AZ guy though, although he may have reverted back. Again without being noticed.
  13. That's the weird part; my AZ captain had 12 pts and skills trained, but then I put him in NM it was a seamless transition with no retraining required. From what you guys are saying though it sounds like I benefited from a 1 time bug or a lucky twist of fate. Thanks for the input though...what you guys are saying seems to have knocked the dust off a bit.
  14. Okay...apologies if this has been covered. Right in the middle of finals so just wanted to bang this out. Bear with me... Back in the day I bought Arizona. Sailed her early and often. Got the captain to 12 pts or so. Missed playing my NM, and seeing as premium ships are trainers, I dropped my NM skipper in AZ and off i went. No problems. In order to run NM for the xp bonus, I dropped my AZ skipper (12pt) in her and...boom, no problems, no retraining penalty. Worked like a dream. Now, yesterday, many patches later, I tried to drop my AZ skipper in Iowa and Monty for a quick spin. Both tell me I need to retrain the skipper 125k and 200k respectively. The question is: wass my earlier experience with AZ/NM switching a fluke or a bug, or is there something bugged now? (for clarity, once i had 12 or so points on my NM skipper from driving AZ, I returned him to the NM without issue) Any advice or input, or a swift kick to the 'nads would be appreciated.
  15. You didn't notice the warning in the UI that tells you DDs are invalid targets when you popped them off at other DDs? And not a crack on you, but why do so many not bother to read the patch notes? I generally read them while downloading the patch if I haven't seen them earlier. I like to keep abreast of whats changing and all that hoopla.