quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I don't know that they're "undervalued", but I do think they're "under-represented".

1.  They rarely engage targets with their main guns.
2.  They rerely engage anyting at long range anyway.
3.  Even as bombardment platforms they play 12th fiddle to cruisers because BBs only have 9 salvos of main ammo (and only 6 available to shoot).

Increase their ammo and help them to actually shoot their main guns, and you'd see a more historical relevance.

-F-

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I don't know that they're "undervalued", but I do think they're "under-represented".

1. They rarely engage targets with their main guns.
2. They rerely engage anyting at long range anyway.
3. Even as bombardment platforms they play 12th fiddle to cruisers because BBs only have 9 salvos of main ammo (and only 6 available to shoot).

Increase their ammo and help them to actually shoot their main guns, and you'd see a more historical relevance.

-F-

OK this is about what I was trying to say as well
M

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Had PoW and Repulse met the two Kongo's in 1941, the Japanese ships would have suffered badly IRL.  Repulse was their age but had better guns, while PoW was better in every category but speed.  It's fortunate for the Japanese that airpower dealt with them rather than a BB vs BB engagement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I don't know that they're "undervalued", but I do think they're "under-represented".

1. They rarely engage targets with their main guns.
2. They rerely engage anyting at long range anyway.
3. Even as bombardment platforms they play 12th fiddle to cruisers because BBs only have 9 salvos of main ammo (and only 6 available to shoot).

Increase their ammo and help them to actually shoot their main guns, and you'd see a more historical relevance.

-F-

OK this is about what I was trying to say as well
M

Well, I would agree that their capability, in particular against light ships such as DD and PTs are under represented. Not only do main guns fire less frequently, but I would argue so do their secondary guns.

Still, that said, my witp experience is that it is better to take any 2 BBs over any 6 CA/CLs. The Uber armor on the BBs makes them untouchable by anything other than other BB main guns and torps.


Edit: Where is Ron S when you need him. At this point I'm pretty sure he would way in to point out that the WitP surface combat engine has a great many flaws.

quote:

Accuracy, in WitP terms of naval guns, is an abstraction of rate of fire in rounds per minute, multiplied by 10.
If you look at the accuracy rating of a US 5"38 it will say 200, that's 20 rpm (x 10). A Japanese 8"50 is 40 (I think) which is 4 rpm (x 10).
Then look at a US 14"50 (as the Tennessee or New Mexico carries) it is only 15 (1.5 rpm).

quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
The funniest thing is when at night from 1000 yard nearly intact BBs pepper each other with their smallest AA guns... [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
The funniest thing is when at night from 1000 yard nearly intact BBs pepper each other with their smallest AA guns... [:D]

Actually, that's what I would call the stupidist thing..., more or less glaring proof of the flaws in the original design. It certainly wasn't 25mms the Kirashima knocked out SoDak's Fire control with off Guadalcanal---not was it 40mm fire with which the Washington shreaded the Kirashima in return. 2by3 let some real "howlers" slip into the Game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
The funniest thing is when at night from 1000 yard nearly intact BBs pepper each other with their smallest AA guns... [:D]

Actually, that's what I would call the stupidist thing..., more or less glaring proof of the flaws in the original design. It certainly wasn't 25mms the Kirashima knocked out SoDak's Fire control with off Guadalcanal---not was it 40mm fire with which the Washington shreaded the Kirashima in return. 2by3 let some real "howlers" slip into the Game.

One has to question why BBs would close to 1000m in the first place. Actually, why would they close to the range of their secondaries by choice? The secondary batteries are for dealing with smaller vessels like DDs and CLs that are trying to close up as I understand it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: csatahajos
The funniest thing is when at night from 1000 yard nearly intact BBs pepper each other with their smallest AA guns... [:D]

Actually, that's what I would call the stupidist thing..., more or less glaring proof of the flaws in the original design. It certainly wasn't 25mms the Kirashima knocked out SoDak's Fire control with off Guadalcanal---not was it 40mm fire with which the Washington shreaded the Kirashima in return. 2by3 let some real "howlers" slip into the Game.

One has to question why BBs would close to 1000m in the first place. Actually, why would they close to the range of their secondaries by choice? The secondary batteries are for dealing with smaller vessels like DDs and CLs that are trying to close up as I understand it.

While true the secondaries are going to fire on a BB if they don't have another target.

I agree no BB commander is going to close to 1000m.

I suspect that this is supposed to be an abstraction and its the escorts that are actually closing to that distance, but I'm not sure it's a well implemented...or maybe they really do mean the BBs are that close. [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
I agree no BB commander is going to close to 1000m.

quote:

Original:  csatahajos
Which is very strange 'cos IRL for a given range a larger caliber and longer caliberlength gun is almost always more accurate due to the flatter trajectory and higher shell weight (it carries the momentum further).

quote:

Be careful not to confuse precision with accuracy.

quote:

other than other BB main guns and torps.

quote:

True but still that does not change my point: a 14" or 16" gun for example at 10kyards is no worse in hitting the target than a 5" gun, given the same circumstances otherwise.

quote:

It ticks me off no end to see a naval engagement result in only a small number of large caliber shell hits from the BB's, but historically that's what happened. IIRC Washington hit Kirishima with only 9 16" shells, but there were also 40 or more 5" hits from her secondary guns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

The secondary armament on prewar battleships was a direct descendant of the "quick firing" guns on WWI dreadnoughts and predreadnoughts, and intended to stop torpedo boats and light craft before they could get in torpedo range.  Those WWI dreadnoughts positively bristled with smaller guns, mostly aimed and fired individually like wooden ships of the line.

As destroyers got bigger and torpedoes developed longer ranges, though, the secondary armaments really became less useful.  One or two 5" shell hits are not going to be enough to stop a determined DD captain from making a torpedo attack unless they hit something critical.  That's why some nations went with 6" (or with the Germans, 5.9") secondary guns on their BB's; better stopping power and longer range than the 5".

Then airpower demonstrated its effectiveness and suddenly secondary weaponry was not only useful again, it was downright critical for a BB to put as many smaller guns as possible on the ship.  It's why the old US prewar BB's had their superstructures ripped off and rebuilt, along with their secondary armaments, to look like the SoDak's.  Better fire control systems, plus radar, plus rapid fire loading and well trained crews, meant that a BB's secondary guns could pump out a LOT of shells in a given amount of time.  Maybe they wouldn't punch through a cruiser's armor, but they will seriously mess up anything not protected and were death to destroyers and smaller craft.

It ticks me off no end to see a naval engagement result in only a small number of large caliber shell hits from the BB's, but historically that's what happened.  IIRC Washington hit Kirishima with only 9 16" shells, but there were also 40 or more 5" hits from her secondary guns. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

Yes, and Washington had the advantage of closing to pointblank range undisturbed by such things as shellfire and torpedoes, while Kirishima fired at South Dakota (missing most of the time too).  In my copy of US Battleships, I believe there was only one 14" shell hit on SoDak; the rest were 8" and smaller shells.