Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
The_first_harbinger

A detailed analysis of how SMS Seydlitz survived the Battle of Jutland

4 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,105
[SPTR]
Members
3,476 posts
5,734 battles

Because the British shot HE only.

Seriously, I believe making a HE dedicated battleship line is a blatant insult to naval history and the steel giants of that era.

It is a case of too little too late, I hope WG won't make the same mistake twice.

Edited by The_first_harbinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,208
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,619 posts
9,014 battles

The performance of the British shells during WWI was abysmal so even with larger guns their hits weren't penetrating very well. Personally I would like to see the HE napalm fire spam meta go the way of the dodo with all shell types having a fire chance but at a much lower chance with HE being the ammo to use when AP is not working knowing that you will do less but steady damage.

Edit: With the drastically lowered fire chance I would also give fires a chance to spread with that chance increasing with each additional fire burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,199
[PVE]
Members
9,676 posts
7,466 battles
On 10/2/2017 at 2:30 PM, BrushWolf said:

The performance of the British shells during WWI was abysmal so even with larger guns their hits weren't penetrating very well. Personally I would like to see the HE napalm fire spam meta go the way of the dodo with all shell types having a fire chance but at a much lower chance with HE being the ammo to use when AP is not working knowing that you will do less but steady damage.

Edit: With the drastically lowered fire chance I would also give fires a chance to spread with that chance increasing with each additional fire burning.

 

That sounds like it would be workable, depending on the percentages used to start fires. Also having the fire spread if you do not use damage control could work depending on the percentage of chance that the fire spreads. Would take a lot of testing and tweaking I think tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,208
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,619 posts
9,014 battles
4 hours ago, Kizarvexis said:

 

That sounds like it would be workable, depending on the percentages used to start fires. Also having the fire spread if you do not use damage control could work depending on the percentage of chance that the fire spreads. Would take a lot of testing and tweaking I think tho.

Part of that idea is that fire fighting is always going on and there is a very small, 1 or maybe 2% chance on each damage tic for the oldest fire to go out.

This is the fire table from a set of miniatures rules called Naval Thunder, what I would like to see is something on the order of this for damage control for both fire and flooding.

Fire Damage Control Table
1d10
1 – 3 Fire Extinguished
      Take 1 damage. If this is an end phase damage
      control check, remove the ongoing fire marker.
4 – 7 Fire Continues to Burn
      Take 2 damage.
8 – 9 Ready Ammunition Explodes
      Take 5 damage and apply a Secondary Battery
      Turret critical result.
10    Fire Spreads
      Take 2 damage and roll 2d10 on the gunfire critical
      table. On a Fire, Flooding, or Rudder result, take 2
      damage and roll again.

The chance to put the fire out is high but so are the penalties for failing. The flooding table is harsher but works in the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×