Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Naval Gun Combat questions

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> Naval Gun Combat questions Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 1:02:25 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Some questions i have run across

How should we handle ship armor:

1-Belt armor: it only matters for short distance or also matters for long range fire?

2-Deck armor: related to the first question, it only matter for planes bombs? or for plunging fire too?

3-Torpedo protection? handled by belt armor?

4-Ship guns: we usually use data for penetration at 0m a best case that is completely unrealistic for a 20km hit (that would probably hit the deck with less chances to hit the belt.) is that right?




Post #: 1
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 8:46:15 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		1. the game engine calculates belt hits vs Deck armor hit preportions based on range. The longer the range, the more likely a "deck armor" hit will occur over a belt armor hit.

2. deck armor protects against both bomb hits and plunging hits. Bombing runs retain a chance to hit "belt armor"

3. There is no direct torpedo protection (Side protection system or SPS) represented in the game. It is handled indirectly by the DUR value which limits SYS damage. Torpedo hits do attack the belt armor hit location but all torpedoes in the game have penetration values that exceed the belt armor value. If they didn't then there would be "no penetration" and no FLT damage would occur and only the barest minimum of SYS would occur.

4. Gun devices use a max penetration value @ point blank range (or 0mm) which is then adjusted for range.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 2
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 10:21:01 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		And to add...skip bombing attacks belt armour, I think. (Well..not related to Naval GUN Combat, tho..)

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 4/16/2007 10:23:21 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 3
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 10:25:37 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Another bit OT thing.

I hate playing Animations on when it comes to Naval Gun combat. Widely unrealistic things seem to happen...since IIRC, Animations were added after game engine was ready. I wonder if they actually represent what's going on... Things like BBs using only their secondary guns in combat etc. are way too common and I lose the "suspension of disbelief".

Thus, I stick to combat reports only.


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 4
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 2:12:15 PM   
treespider


Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Another bit OT thing.

I hate playing Animations on when it comes to Naval Gun combat. Widely unrealistic things seem to happen...since IIRC, Animations were added after game engine was ready. I wonder if they actually represent what's going on... Things like BBs using only their secondary guns in combat etc. are way too common and I lose the "suspension of disbelief".

Thus, I stick to combat reports only.




And more than likely avoid any sync issues by doing so...

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 5
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 2:38:06 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Another bit OT thing.

I hate playing Animations on when it comes to Naval Gun combat. Widely unrealistic things seem to happen...since IIRC, Animations were added after game engine was ready. I wonder if they actually represent what's going on... Things like BBs using only their secondary guns in combat etc. are way too common and I lose the "suspension of disbelief".

Thus, I stick to combat reports only.



I too love the Naval combat screen concept, but seeing "naval combat begins at 36,000 yards", and every ship present opens up, well, that is annoying and has nothing to do with either the game combat calculation, nor real-life possibility..
Never a "game breaker, just a nuisance..
Can be cured by just leaving off the "range" announcement altogether...

_____________________________




(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 6
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 4:50:38 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		Thanks Nikademus/Sardaukar. Good Witp is much better than i tought. This issue came because Littorio(Italian BB) armor, it has a belt of 350+36+24mm=410mm i was afraid this would make an ubber BB.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 7
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 8:31:39 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		your welcome. Littorio's side armor belt was a sandwich concept designed to encourage decapping of an AP shell. The armor plate grade steel was in two components 70mm on 10mm backing and a main 280mm armor plate on a 50mm wood backing + 15mm steel (for splinter protection). total armor grade steel armor thickness 360mm (14.17inches total at thickest), inclined 8 degrees. Estimated immunity zone against the Italian 15inch 17,498 yards+

Don't expect the WitP engine to be that precise however. BB belt armor systems tend to be fairly immune at most longer range daylight fights, same as with the deck armor.



< Message edited by Nikademus -- 4/16/2007 8:32:44 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 8
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 8:56:01 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Another bit OT thing.

I hate playing Animations on when it comes to Naval Gun combat. Widely unrealistic things seem to happen...since IIRC, Animations were added after game engine was ready. I wonder if they actually represent what's going on... Things like BBs using only their secondary guns in combat etc. are way too common and I lose the "suspension of disbelief".

Thus, I stick to combat reports only.



I used to think the damage "Descriptions" listed whenever a penetration occured were just eye candy but according to Mike Wood, who wrote the actual routines, they represent real information about the nature of damage. He came online about a year ago to mention this. Thus, I don't think the other msgs are without meaning.

_____________________________


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 9
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 9:45:50 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline 		I have a drawing that after that belt(it states 350mm not 360mm) there is a 36mm plate and then a 24mm side plate covering the machinery. Lets see if i can upload. One of those things that can only be confirmed by official plans probably.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 10
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 9:50:18 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Yes, the diagram you posted is in Garzke. There's an inconsistency though, in that the other side of the diagram breaks down the armor sandwich as 70 + 10 + 280 (360mm) and the descriptive paragraph on the belt armor also adds up to 360 as does the belt armor summary on page 432 for a total thickness of armor grade plate of 14.17 inches. It might be that the 10mm backing plate is not armor grade which could explain it. Either way, 10mm won't make a difference in this game engine. Its simply not that precise.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 11
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 10:33:20 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I too love the Naval combat screen concept, but seeing "naval combat begins at 36,000 yards", and every ship present opens up, well, that is annoying and has nothing to do with either the game combat calculation, nor real-life possibility..



IIRC nobody ever scored a ship-to-ship gun hit at more than 26,000 yards.


_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 12
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/16/2007 10:41:21 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

I too love the Naval combat screen concept, but seeing "naval combat begins at 36,000 yards", and every ship present opens up, well, that is annoying and has nothing to do with either the game combat calculation, nor real-life possibility..



IIRC nobody ever scored a ship-to-ship gun hit at more than 26,000 yards.




The point I am making is that DD's were making hits at CA/BB ranges.........


_____________________________




(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 13
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/17/2007 7:48:20 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		DDs should not be able to shoot beyond the range of their guns. I have noted very few long range engagements in testing. Many times ranges are very believable - especially at night. Ships cannot normally see each other much above 30,000 yards - although radar can reach out to greater distances. Range is tricky - because you can see the top of a big ship a lot farther away than you can see a submarine or patrol boat. But it appears to me the engine has this approximately figured out. 5 inch gun ranges are typically 18,000 yards - so if you see an engagement at 26,000 yards - it is because something with bigger guns is present (or should be).

< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/17/2007 7:49:58 AM >

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 14
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/17/2007 8:59:12 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

I used to think the damage "Descriptions" listed whenever a penetration occured were just eye candy but according to Mike Wood, who wrote the actual routines, they represent real information about the nature of damage. He came online about a year ago to mention this. Thus, I don't think the other msgs are without meaning.


Yes, did read that too. It's very nice..but it rises the question of "is everything else seen in combat anomations true too?". If that's the case, it's scary since too weird things seem to happen. I'm mainly concerned about large ships using their main weaponry very reluctantly (at least it shows that way in animations). Same happens in War Plan Orange where it's even more alarming, since that game is all about surface combat.


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 15
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/17/2007 9:00:29 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		I think the engagement ranges shown in animations are quite realistic...it's what actually happens after that is what worries me...

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 16
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/17/2007 8:54:51 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar



Yes, did read that too. It's very nice..but it rises the question of "is everything else seen in combat anomations true too?". If that's the case, it's scary since too weird things seem to happen. I'm mainly concerned about large ships using their main weaponry very reluctantly (at least it shows that way in animations). Same happens in War Plan Orange where it's even more alarming, since that game is all about surface combat.



If your not seeing hits, that doesn't mean the weapons arn't firing, just not hitting. On the DD thing, what ranges were they firing that were considered "CA/BB" range?

on an end note, there's never been any doubt in my mind that the surface engine is optimized for night engagements. Day engagements are not very precise so don't expect NWS's "Fighting Steel" rework. In defense of the orig developers, WWII pacific surface combat was mostly at night. Tankerace's War plan orange tweaked things a bit making it better.


_____________________________


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 17
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/18/2007 1:11:11 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar



Yes, did read that too. It's very nice..but it rises the question of "is everything else seen in combat anomations true too?". If that's the case, it's scary since too weird things seem to happen. I'm mainly concerned about large ships using their main weaponry very reluctantly (at least it shows that way in animations). Same happens in War Plan Orange where it's even more alarming, since that game is all about surface combat.



If your not seeing hits, that doesn't mean the weapons arn't firing, just not hitting. On the DD thing, what ranges were they firing that were considered "CA/BB" range?

on an end note, there's never been any doubt in my mind that the surface engine is optimized for night engagements. Day engagements are not very precise so don't expect NWS's "Fighting Steel" rework. In defense of the orig developers, WWII pacific surface combat was mostly at night. Tankerace's War plan orange tweaked things a bit making it better.



The DD firing on the surface battle screen shows the DD's making hits at what are really CA/BB ranges. These "hits" however are not necessarily being mirrored on the combat summary. I suspect the entire "surface battle screen" was meant as chrome entertainment and NOT a representation of "miniatures-type" combat.
Certainly, the torpedo attacks are also reporting hits further than maximum range on occasion..
Not a so-called "game breaker because I do not expect that surface screen to be showing me the true battle ranges/events, but rather a rough approximation..
Example:If you stick around you will actually see ships sink, but if you exit from the screen, FOW might tell you a single ship sunk, (but later you will get the true sinking info.)

_____________________________




(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 18
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/18/2007 11:42:20 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Sometimes torpedoes hit at very great ranges. Normally you expect effective torpedo range to be much less than theoretical maximum torpedo range. But the greatest torpedo salvo in history took decades to understand - partially because not all the ships hit were even in the same task group. The same salvo sank a carrier (Wasp?), blew a destroyer in two, and damaged a modern US battleship. For many years we assumed two submarines were involved. The most distant hit was almost certainly not visible to the attacking submarine.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 19
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 7:59:12 AM   
akdreemer


Posts: 1028
Joined: 10/3/2004
From: Anchorage, Alaska
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Sometimes torpedoes hit at very great ranges. Normally you expect effective torpedo range to be much less than theoretical maximum torpedo range. But the greatest torpedo salvo in history took decades to understand - partially because not all the ships hit were even in the same task group. The same salvo sank a carrier (Wasp?), blew a destroyer in two, and damaged a modern US battleship. For many years we assumed two submarines were involved. The most distant hit was almost certainly not visible to the attacking submarine.

True, but in this case the Japanese torpedo could actually go that long of a distance, this is the exception and not the rule, and really is a statistical fluke. Indeed the major focus of Japanese surface warfare, of which the subs were a part, was their ability to fire torpedoes to very long ranges, but depended on the firing of mass amounts of torpdeoes.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 20
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 8:05:15 AM   
akdreemer


Posts: 1028
Joined: 10/3/2004
From: Anchorage, Alaska
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Thanks Nikademus/Sardaukar. Good Witp is much better than i tought. This issue came because Littorio(Italian BB) armor, it has a belt of 350+36+24mm=410mm i was afraid this would make an ubber BB.


Multiple armor plates are less resistant than a single homogenous plate. In this case the two smaller plates serve as fragment barriers and add no apreciable resistence to shell penetrations.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 21
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 7:13:51 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		This is correct. Unfortunately, WITP seems to be built on the simple assumption that we want the maximum armor thickness, period. The code discounts this by various "die rolls". Nor is it easy to correct this. There are theories about what counts to what extent. Indeed, structural steel has some armor value, and modern warships might be called "semi-armored" because their hulls do stop some (particularly modern, small) shells. But the practice of considering HY80 (and similar) as having protection value dates back into this period of history. There are also theories about the value of "sloping" of the armor and/or structural steel. Which is pretty abstract because a real shell does not enter at a normal angle - but some specific function of a nearly parabolic trajectory. Two shells almost never enter at the assumed angle anyway - so the WITP code idea of die rolls is actually pretty good.

What we need - and it would be a bear to implement - is to define a uniform theory of armor value for all types of armor and structural steels -

then to gather that data for all ships (only maximum for deck and side - conning tower is chrome apparently unused)

and then enter it in the data set on a consistent and comprehensive basis. Probably a man year type project.

(in reply to akdreemer)
Post #: 22
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 8:06:23 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Multiple armor plates are less resistant than a single homogenous plate. In this case the two smaller plates serve as fragment barriers and add no apreciable resistence to shell penetrations.


That smaller plates are for splinter which in case of a BB heavy round can be a big chunk (the last plate being more distant makes also some protection exploding bombs etc.)

My issue is that we sum all armor for some ships but not for others? is a 30mm plate armor in a cruiser counted but in BB not counted?  why? Keep in mind that a couple of light cruisers - British ones - dont even have belt armor from magazine to magazine.

CL Garibaldi have a 30mm belt +100mm belt shouldnt we count the 30mm one?

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 23
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 8:10:05 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

conning tower is chrome apparently unused


Since the conning tower is such a small target i hope that is true since the chance of hitting it are much less. Also doesnt have the same damage consequences.

< Message edited by Dili -- 4/19/2007 10:09:23 PM >

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 24
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 8:17:47 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		"Tower armor" hit location represents the conning tower of a ship.

_____________________________


(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 25
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 9:54:28 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		Funnily, as I said, when I watch combat animations, sea battle seems horribly unrealistic...but when seeing only combat report same battle looks completely plausible...

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 26
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/19/2007 11:30:44 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		how so?

_____________________________


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 27
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/20/2007 12:50:05 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

Multiple armor plates are less resistant than a single homogenous plate. In this case the two smaller plates serve as fragment barriers and add no apreciable resistence to shell penetrations.


That smaller plates are for splinter which in case of a BB heavy round can be a big chunk (the last plate being more distant makes also some protection exploding bombs etc.)

My issue is that we sum all armor for some ships but not for others? is a 30mm plate armor in a cruiser counted but in BB not counted?  why? Keep in mind that a couple of light cruisers - British ones - dont even have belt armor from magazine to magazine.

CL Garibaldi have a 30mm belt +100mm belt shouldnt we count the 30mm one?


In WITP we should count it as 130mm. IF we had a discount system we might count it as 115mm - something like that.

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 28
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/20/2007 12:54:49 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AlaskanWarrior

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Sometimes torpedoes hit at very great ranges. Normally you expect effective torpedo range to be much less than theoretical maximum torpedo range. But the greatest torpedo salvo in history took decades to understand - partially because not all the ships hit were even in the same task group. The same salvo sank a carrier (Wasp?), blew a destroyer in two, and damaged a modern US battleship. For many years we assumed two submarines were involved. The most distant hit was almost certainly not visible to the attacking submarine.

True, but in this case the Japanese torpedo could actually go that long of a distance, this is the exception and not the rule, and really is a statistical fluke. Indeed the major focus of Japanese surface warfare, of which the subs were a part, was their ability to fire torpedoes to very long ranges, but depended on the firing of mass amounts of torpdeoes.


Their torpedo cruisers being the extreme expression of that doctrine... 20-tube Long Lance broadside!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to akdreemer)
Post #: 29
RE: Naval Gun Combat questions - 4/20/2007 1:17:20 AM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

In WITP we should count it as 130mm. IF we had a discount system we might count it as 115mm - something like that.


Italians considered it equivalent to 150mm side of CA Zaras.
Also then we'll had to change all deck armor since in many ships it's made by several layers.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> Naval Gun Combat questions Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.297