Multiple target engagement, and secondaries

[CA_Captain]

Much as I love BBs and CAs, and realize this is an arcade experience and not so realistic:

I'd like to see gunships be able to engage two targets, perhaps by transferring between a forward and aft conning tower.  One of the main historical reasons to have bow and stern batteries and multiple sets of fire control was for just that purpose. 

Secondaries were to keep torpedo boats/destroyers at arm's length, but they don't really work like that.  Range is too short, and fire control is atrocious. 

 

Just wishing, but still having a good time making holes in electrons with other electrons.

[Lert]

Why would you want to split your firepower and thus damage output, instead of focusing down a single target at a time? In over 4k games between alpha, beta and live I never had a situation where I thought 'golly, I sure wish I had less firepower to throw at this one target'.

 

As for secondaries: if they were accurate and had historical ranges, nobody would be able to come close to a battleship. Destroyer runs would be suicidal. It would ruin balance.

[dionkraft]

I agree on that. It is too bad that some turrets cannot be fixed in some desired position until you decide to use them and they are facing in the direction which would save you precious seconds.   I sold off all my BB's as its too frustrating to play in that mode.   I know this is just an arcade game of sorts but if it were a arcade game it would never made it commercially.  

[kerensky914]

I'd like to see gunships be able to engage two targets, perhaps by transferring between a forward and aft conning tower.  One of the main historical reasons to have bow and stern batteries and multiple sets of fire control was for just that purpose.

 

Not really.  The main reason for bow and stern batteries was a development from the early dreads that had turrets in the middle (like Wyoming, Imperator) on en echelon (Kawachi) - dedicating space to turrets and magazines spaced throughout the ship was inefficient, and created problems for machinery spaces that were spaced apart.  Concentrating the main guns into two batteries allowed the machinery spaces to condense, and allowed the designers to provide more armor covering those spaces with less weight. 

 

Of course, the logical conclusion of that development is seen in ships like Nelson and Richelieu, with only one main battery.

 

Back to two batteries - having multiple fire control systems was more for redundancy, not for multiple targets.  Sure, it could be used that way, but that wasn't the primary purpose.  Remember, the whole idea of the battleship essentially goes back to age of sail tactics, with multiple ships engaging in battle lines.  The idea is always to engage a single target and throw the kitchen sink at it until it is out of the fight.

[scruffycavetroll]

Why would you want to split your firepower and thus damage output, instead of focusing down a single target at a time? In over 4k games between alpha, beta and live I never had a situation where I thought 'golly, I sure wish I had less firepower to throw at this one target'.

 

As for secondaries: if they were accurate and had historical ranges, nobody would be able to come close to a battleship. Destroyer runs would be suicidal. It would ruin balance.

 

If you have an enemy on your port & starboard sides, will the secondaries automatically fire at both

[ckupf]

Why would you want to split your firepower and thus damage output, instead of focusing down a single target at a time? In over 4k games between alpha, beta and live I never had a situation where I thought 'golly, I sure wish I had less firepower to throw at this one target'.

 

As for secondaries: if they were accurate and had historical ranges, nobody would be able to come close to a battleship. Destroyer runs would be suicidal. It would ruin balance.

 

I struggle to believe that you never wanted to use a turret that you couldn't train on your primary target at a secondary target. After all you don't have 360 degrees of firing angle on any gun.

[Sinboto]

 

If you have an enemy on your port & starboard sides, will the secondaries automatically fire at both

 

Yes, unless you have manual skill. 

[Sinboto]

Why would you want to split your firepower and thus damage output, instead of focusing down a single target at a time? In over 4k games between alpha, beta and live I never had a situation where I thought 'golly, I sure wish I had less firepower to throw at this one target'.

 

As for secondaries: if they were accurate and had historical ranges, nobody would be able to come close to a battleship. Destroyer runs would be suicidal. It would ruin balance.

 

Yeah let's step away from that line of thought when we have battleships poofing out of existence and destroyers with infinite torpedo reloads.  

[Lert]

If you have an enemy on your port & starboard sides, will the secondaries automatically fire at both

 

Yes.

 

I struggle to believe that you never wanted to use a turret that you couldn't train on your primary target at a secondary target. After all you don't have 360 degrees of firing angle on any gun.

 

Very, very, VERY rarely. If I am in that situation I drove in to that situation myself, and I try to avoid that as much as I can. Even if I could split my fire between those two targets, they'd be focusing their full firepower at me, so I'd still rather have enough firepower to take down one of them instead of doing half as much damage to two ships.

[Macabe]

Wonderful idea if it were a sim but you really don't want to split your dpm across two different ships.

[Junostorm]

To a degree it can already be achieved, two targets, in certain situations i.e. your in BB angled to another BB and there is a CA/DD abeam.   In this situation your front turrets can only fire on the BB whereas your rear ones cannot, however if the another target is abeam you can use your rear turret.

 

 

[CA_Captain]

A quote from Gardiner & Gray, p. 229:
"Postwar Japanese accounts suggest that the system of four triple turrets was superior for defensive combat, while six double turrets were superior for offensive combat, meaning that six double turrets could engage more targets at once than four triple turrets."

That's why.

 

If I have 12 guns, I'd rather have 6 chances to hit two targets each than 12 chances to hit one and leave the other unmolested and not having to worry about counterfire.  But maybe that's just me.

[Lert]

This isn't IRL though. This is a game. A game that is about killing ships. And 12 guns on a single target have a far better chance of killing it than 6 guns over 2 targets. Yeah I'm sure you could come up with a convoluted situation where splitting fire would be the better option, but that doesn't mean that the devs should devote all attention to offering split fire. Especially considering that in 99% of engagements in this game, it would be useless.

[BGrey]

The simple and common example is when it is not safe to unmask your rear gun but you have something else it could engage.

[Skpstr]

The simple and common example is when it is not safe to unmask your rear gun but you have something else it could engage.

 

Or (admittedly uncommon) you only need 1-2 turrets to finish your target, and there's a fresh enemy giving you his broadside on a different bearing.

[CA_Captain]

Like many here, I frequently watch the turret direction of my opponent.  If one is facing away from me, they all are.  It would take more circumspection and observation to determine whether you were #2 on the list if more than one target could be engaged.  

There have been more than a few times, especially when my team is less than optimal, when I wished I could give the DD behind me a few rounds in addition to the CA of BB in front of me, if only to throw off their concentration...

[vak_]

As for secondaries: if they were accurate and had historical ranges, nobody would be able to come close to a battleship. Destroyer runs would be suicidal. It would ruin balance.

 

Exactly. Destroyer runs are already fairly hazardous against certain battleships: all IJN BBs T7+, Tirpitz, and Warspite. Especially if the T7+ BBs have a manual secondary skill.

 

I struggle to believe that you never wanted to use a turret that you couldn't train on your primary target at a secondary target. After all you don't have 360 degrees of firing angle on any gun.

 

This is very-very situation. And besides, it can be done as is anyway. When I tank with my bow in NC, I often manage to fire sideways with my aft turret at some cruiser/DD.

[Dabba]

Very old suggestion. As Lert said, most of the time you don't want to split your firepower anyway. However, most BBs have slow enough traverse rates on their turrets that you can effectively engage two targets while one battery is repositioning. Say you just turned and your aft turrets are now turning toward your port bow. You can easily get a salvo off on a target off your starboard or port quarter while they turn to meet your fore guns.

[CA_Captain]

You can easily get a salvo off on a target off your starboard or port quarter while they turn to meet your fore guns.

Not easily.  Easily would be the ability to lock onto two targets and have the turrets follow them like IRL.  But this is not RL.  I would love to split my firepower, since I often only get 1 hit out of a salvo especially early on.  I'd rather get two AP hits on two different antagonizing targets than one on one.

 

Arcade.

 

I get it.  Adapt.  Don't use history as your guide.  But I still want it.

[scruffycavetroll]

 

Yes, unless you have manual skill. 

 

can you choose more than one target with that? Would it let you pick the one on the port & the one on the starboard and have the appropriate guns shooting at them?

[Dabba]

Most people, and the devs don't really see the need enough to dedicate resources to develop it. Easy is a relative term I guess. It really depends on how situationally aware you are and how fast you can switch locks and targets, as well as quickly lead the target, then switch back fast enough to not mess up your fore battery. With a 30 second reload its manageable though, and practice makes perfect.

[CA_Captain]

Most people, and the devs don't really see the need enough to dedicate resources to develop it. Easy is a relative term I guess. It really depends on how situationally aware you are and how fast you can switch locks and targets, as well as quickly lead the target, then switch back fast enough to not mess up your fore battery. With a 30 second reload its manageable though, and practice makes perfect.

 

So it would seem.  Time to work on a new skill, and pray my unused turrets don't have to do a 180 to engage target #2.

[Sinboto]

 

can you choose more than one target with that? Would it let you pick the one on the port & the one on the starboard and have the appropriate guns shooting at them?

 

nope

[Dabba]

 

So it would seem.  Time to work on a new skill, and pray my unused turrets don't have to do a 180 to engage target #2.

 

I really hate switching sides when engaging someone while sailing a BB, be it for the map border or just the course of the game. If possible, I do it in a lull of the fighting, such as when my target moves behind an island, but yeah swinging those guns around with no one else to engage is annoying.

[dionkraft]

In the end - it really does not matter if its real or not. Its just a function whether it will be implemented or not. Just like the carrier you have manual and auto mode. Same can be had for ANY SHIP.  Auto (as it is) or manual as you choose.    Using the BB there are times you do not have enough time to waste revolving the turrets as one enemy is 90 degrees or more coming up within strike range. AND in the meanwhile another is coming around 180 degrees from that. Well THEY KNOW that your rotation will take many MANY seconds to bear down on them so now they have a 'safety cushion' to attack.  

I would rather have guns pointed in strategic angles and protect myself than to have them pointed ALL in one direction.  I think this is where REAL LIFE is a lot better in play gaming.  But this is NOT real life by any means. Its just a game and its a matter of how many functions can bring more fun in the process. 

With slow fire rate of a BB it could be fun going from gun station to gun station planning your shots as the appear within your area of threat.