Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
_Kasyu_

secondary gun discrepancies

Do you feel the secondary guns are weaker than they probably should be?  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you feel the secondary guns are weaker than they probably should be?

    • Yes
      17
    • No
      7

12 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
6 posts
671 battles

I've noticed while looking at the statistics of secondary guns that the guns themselves and main guns of similar or identical design differed wildly.

For example, the Grosse Kurfurst has secondary guns which are a mix of 150mm/55 caliber guns and 128mm/61 caliber guns. taking Nurnberg as an example for the 150 mm guns, and Z-52 for an example of the 128 mm guns, I noticed that the range on the Z-52's guns (which are only 45 calibers long, compared to the 61 of the Kurfurst) is 12 km, compared to the 7.7 km range of the Grosse Kurfurst secondaries. For the 150 mm guns it's even worse, since the Nurnberg launched in 1935, 6 years before H-41 (the blueprint ship Grosse Kurfurst is based on) was designed, and has a range of 15 km, which is over double the range of the secondaries on Kurfurst.

I also found that on most american and british ships with secondaries larger than 113 mm have drastically lower firing speeds compared to main guns of similar or identical design. for example, the guns on gearing and all US fast battleships, with the exception of Montana and Ohio, which use 54 caliber secondaries, (of which Ohio fires .5 seconds faster for no reason other than it being premium), and the guns on the Gearing, are only different in the mount. The North Carolina and Iowa have a reload time of six seconds with their Mk. 32 mounts, which is the same rate of fire as somers, which uses the Mk. 22 mount. Gearing, which uses the Mk. 38 mount, somehow shaves off three seconds of reload time.

A Shimakaze at around 2/3 health could probably get to 3 km of a Grosse Kurfurst, torpedo it, and then get out of range without dying if the Kurfurst doesn't fire its main guns at it. in real life, those 150 mm secondaries would probably sink the Shima at around 12-10 km out, so please buff the secondaries.

-Kasyu

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
333 posts
16,299 battles

The way I look at it, range isn't just the gun. It's also rangefinders, directors, etc. It makes some sense that secondary batteries have inferior fire control systems.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
416
[FGNE]
Members
960 posts
4,568 battles

Bacon?

...

Now more seriously into the topic, the answer you are looking for is “balance”.

  • Funny 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,889
[SYN]
Members
15,860 posts
12,803 battles

So, you want your secondaries to...

  • Shoot as far as cruisers or DDs can
  • Fire as fast as they can
  • Have similar accuracy as DDs and cruisers

While your battleship retains

  • More armor, everywhere
  • More HP
  • More secondary guns than DD or cruiser guns
  • Fully automatic targetting of secondaries

ya okay bud

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
985
[A-I-M]
Members
3,009 posts
22,042 battles
52 minutes ago, _Kasyu_ said:

I've noticed while looking at the statistics of secondary guns that the guns themselves and main guns of similar or identical design differed wildly.

For example, the Grosse Kurfurst has secondary guns which are a mix of 150mm/55 caliber guns and 128mm/61 caliber guns. taking Nurnberg as an example for the 150 mm guns, and Z-52 for an example of the 128 mm guns, I noticed that the range on the Z-52's guns (which are only 45 calibers long, compared to the 61 of the Kurfurst) is 12 km, compared to the 7.7 km range of the Grosse Kurfurst secondaries. For the 150 mm guns it's even worse, since the Nurnberg launched in 1935, 6 years before H-41 (the blueprint ship Grosse Kurfurst is based on) was designed, and has a range of 15 km, which is over double the range of the secondaries on Kurfurst.

I also found that on most american and british ships with secondaries larger than 113 mm have drastically lower firing speeds compared to main guns of similar or identical design. for example, the guns on gearing and all US fast battleships, with the exception of Montana and Ohio, which use 54 caliber secondaries, (of which Ohio fires .5 seconds faster for no reason other than it being premium), and the guns on the Gearing, are only different in the mount. The North Carolina and Iowa have a reload time of six seconds with their Mk. 32 mounts, which is the same rate of fire as somers, which uses the Mk. 22 mount. Gearing, which uses the Mk. 38 mount, somehow shaves off three seconds of reload time.

A Shimakaze at around 2/3 health could probably get to 3 km of a Grosse Kurfurst, torpedo it, and then get out of range without dying if the Kurfurst doesn't fire its main guns at it. in real life, those 150 mm secondaries would probably sink the Shima at around 12-10 km out, so please buff the secondaries.

-Kasyu

We would all like to have a Nurny strapped to each side of our KM battleship, but balance. 

For what DDs could do fighting at close range to heavy surface units, familiarize yourself with the destroyers and destroyer escorts of Taffy 3. bosamar.com is a nice place to start. 

A little rationalization of the US Mk 32's might be in order, but folks love their Massachusetts and would hate a nerf by adjustment of a universal mechanic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,192
[SYN]
Members
5,877 posts
13,296 battles
23 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

So, you want your secondaries to...

  • Shoot as far as cruisers or DDs can
  • Fire as fast as they can
  • Have similar accuracy as DDs and cruisers

While your battleship retains

  • More armor, everywhere
  • More HP
  • More secondary guns than DD or cruiser guns
  • Fully automatic targetting of secondaries

ya okay bud

Seems he failed to consider these key points, lol.  :Smile_teethhappy:

Expecting a "yeah, but..." reply soon.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
466 posts
4,399 battles

secondary guns need a buff thats for sure but giving them the same stats as other ships main guns is to much, best thing they can do is make secondary related skills/modules stronger, Right now picking manual sec and AFT over fire prevention and concealment feels more like a handicap than an actual choice  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[PVE]
Members
6,150 posts
22,432 battles
20 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

Seems he failed to consider these key points, lol.  :Smile_teethhappy:

Expecting a "yeah, but..." reply soon.

 

17 minutes ago, _Kasyu_ said:

yeah ok i might have forgotten about balance...

"Yeah, but..."/"yeah ok..."...

& The judges say..."close enough"...

+1 Kuckoo for "close enough" accuracy :-)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6 posts
671 battles
1 hour ago, Telastyn said:

The way I look at it, range isn't just the gun. It's also rangefinders, directors, etc. It makes some sense that secondary batteries have inferior fire control systems.

i looked at the model of the grosser kurfurst, and I noticed that it actually has 7 fire control towers. 1 main, one fore backup, one aft backup, and 4 side towers, likely for the secondaries and AA.

and a quote from the wikipedia page on the iowa class:

Quote

In addition to these search and navigational radars, the Iowa class were also outfitted with a variety of fire control systems for their gun systems, and later for their missile systems. Beginning with their commissioning, the battleships made use of a trio of Mk 38 gun fire control systems to direct the 16-inch guns and a quartet of Mk 37 gun fire control systems to direct the 5-inch gun batteries. These systems were upgraded over time, but remained the cornerstones of the combat radar systems on the Iowa class during their careers.[72] The range estimation of these gunfire control systems provided a significant accuracy advantage over earlier ships with optical rangefinders;

almost all battleships have some dedicated fire control tower for the secondary guns, and in the case of the Iowa, those fire control towers are the mk 37, which was actually the exact same as the ones on the gearing, but with 4 times as many. i noticed that the same applies to the north carolina, however it lacks a third mk 38 for the main guns.

I tried looking for something similar on the bismark, but wikipedia doesnt even mention the fire control towers, so I could only go off of the models, but it seems that its a similar situation there.

in summary, no. the battleships did NOT have inferior fire control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6 posts
671 battles

kuckoo wins this time i guess in terms of gameplay, but as i just mentioned a bit ago, the limited range is not accurate to their designs.

 

 

 

Spoiler

PS you also win for the yeah but thing for real now

 

Edited by _Kasyu_
i forgot to put some stuff in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×