| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Sean-Khan
Commander
2700 Posts
    
 | |
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/10/2007 6:17 AM |
| I coded a spreadsheet to calculate odds for WaS.
And the combat is very random.
It's obvous that torpedoes are random. Roll a 6 with a long lance & an enemy cruiser sinks. roll a 1-5 and nothing happens. It doesn't get much more random with D6.
What the spreadsheet shows is that gunnary combat is also very random.
e.g. Iowa V's Bismark, casual guess with 15-18 dice being rolled is that average results should dominate. Which turns out to be false. In that battle the most likly result is that one of the 2 ships will blow up to a "Vital-hit". Several turns before enough damage can accumulate to destroy either by normal hits. | |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2700 Posts
| | 02/11/2007 11:22 AM |
| Interesting. I'm wondering how does it sum up. I guess that many Japs have Long Lances; So, there's several attempts for torpedoes. Depending on situation, Japanese might want to close in as fast as possible to launch a deadly volley of torpedoes; Initiative will probably be very important in this game.
Rules at least sound interesting. There's so much rolling so maybe it evens out in the end and makes the game go in swings...
Btw, if there's torpedoes & other ships around, that makes battleships go down faster. Battleship vs. Battleship with no support would be boring fight anyway  Btw, at long range, Iowa should get 8 6's out of 15 to make a vital hit. Not very likely I think.
I really hope gameplay will be good! | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/12/2007 3:21 AM |
| Iowa V's Bismark
range;0,1 Hit=71% Vital=21% (note odds of a hit drop at short range, because a high roll will be a vital hit instead.)
range;2 Hit=74% Vital=15%
range;3-5 Hit=74% Vital=6%
So even at range-5 the accumulative odds that Iowa will score a vital hit
before it scores the 5 normal hits it needs to sink Biskmark is over
40%. At short range the accumulative odds of a Vital hit by Iowa increase to 85%.
Bismark V's Iowa
range;0,1 Hit=63% Vital=6%
range;2 Hit=57% Vital=4%
range;3,4 Hit=40% Vital=1%
The Bismarks own odds at range 3-5 are so poor that it will need to close range. If the movement rules allow Iowa to maintain long range against Bismark, then Bismarks only hope of winning is the wildly random odds (less than 1%) of a vital hit on Iowa. Note; That is historically accurate, Iowa had radar directed guns & Bismark didn't. But it is very random.
While it's true that all of the Japanese cruisers & Destroyers should have long-lance. We havn't yet seen their points costs & defensive values. IJNS-Tone's points value is clearly high because of it's scouting ability. And hopefully the other japanese cruisers will be cheaper. As you say, initiative is likly to be decisive.
I'm guessing the main counter to an all-battleship fleet in this game will be Aircraft, Subs or possibly a swarm of destroyers/MTB's. | |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2700 Posts
| | 02/12/2007 5:14 AM |
| So, fleet construction will again matter really much. In Iowa vs. Bismark match, you'd probably want lots of destroyers (AA, Anti-sub) to support your Iowa. Bismark would have stronger support, and German way would probably be to eliminate US support first, allowing destroyers to shoot their torpedoes and subs and bombers act freely. Bismark really looks bad agains Iowa... Of course, Condor or some other unit might have some kind of effect that improves Bismark's performance. US has Catalina in turn...
Tone looks really good (well, little to compare to), but it's cost surely is high. | |
Vindicated AtG Called shot: 2nd Huge Red Dragon
My collected trade reference links
Star Wars tactical combat -project
My modelling/terrain pages
Suomen miniatyyrikeräilijät / Miniature collectors of Finland | |
|
Rhydur
Sneak
62 Posts
| | 02/12/2007 12:21 PM |
| Posted By XAos on 02/10/2007 6:17 AM
In that battle the most likly result is that one of the 2 ships will blow up to a "Vital-hit". Several turns before enough damage can accumulate to destroy either by normal hits. Isn't that fairly historically accurate? True, there are very few real WW2 BB vs BB duels, and only a handful more from WW1. But when they went long enough to have a "conclusion", many did end this way. Much fewer if you don't count British BCs, though.
("There seems be something wrong with our bloody ships today")
In truth, there just weren't enough such battles fought to have any real idea of what is "accurate". Plenty of data on Shermans vs. Tigers, for example, but very little on captial ship combat. And most of those were inconclusive, or pretty one-sided, like Massachusetts vs. Jean Bart, or Washington vs. Kirishima, Bismark vs. Hood. (unfinished BB vs. complete, WW2BB vs rebuilt WW1 BC, etc). But certainly, given the firepower of the Iowas, Yamatos, Bismarks, etc., such endings could have been fairly common. Which, of course, is why nations didn't let their expensive BBs duke it out very often.
| |
Dragons are long, but not tall!
Champion of Krenshar | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/13/2007 4:46 AM |
| Posted By Rhydur on 02/12/2007 12:21 PM
Much fewer if you don't count British BCs, though.
If you don't include the british BC's. Then my guess is the total number of battleships lost to catastrophic explosions might be as high as...
None.
Most battleships required multiple hits to sink. That specifically included Bismark. Which when finally caught by the british home fleet, nearly had to be left as a floating wreck. Most of the british ships had to break off the action because they low on fuel and the Bismark still wouldn't sink. Basically the british fleet pounded it with every shell & torpedo they could before it finally sank.
| |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/13/2007 5:02 AM |
| Preview-3 is up;
Wildcat & Zeke Fighters.
Wildcat costs 7 points to Zeke's 6.
But seems noticably more effective. Note that "normal hits against aircraft just abort the target, you have to get a "Vital hit" to destroy it.
Zeke V's Wildcat only 3% kill
Wildcat V's Zeke 8% kill. So it will take a while, but eventually the wildcats will win.
If the Wildcat is defending a carrier than the odds increase to 15%
And with the additional bonus from Enterprise to 25%
Possibly the Japanese carriers will give comparable bonuses to the Zeke. But if not, the Japanese airforce is in for a bad time. | |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
Sean-Khan
Commander
2700 Posts
| |
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/13/2007 6:12 AM |
| Zeke (with surprise) V's Wildcat kill=7% (still a bit weaker than the Wildcat)
Possibly the Wildcats should be kept on CAP over the carriers for turn-1.
The real comparisson will be which is better at killing enemy bombers. They both have AA=7 so it depends on the armour of the bombers.
Historically the Val was a lot worse than the Dauntless. Because of fixed undercarraige on the Val.
And the Judy was a bit better than the Devastator. Because the torpedoes could be dropped at higher speed.
| |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2376 Posts
London
| | 02/21/2007 2:27 AM |
| Preview-4 is up;
Carrier Shokaku. While a 5 points cheaper than Enterprise. It is also perceptably weaker in several stats;
1) AA=7 (Enterprise AA=8 )
2) Does not have "Survivor"
3) Nominally the AirCapacity=3 is the same as Enterprise. But since those are indevidually less effective aircraft it's net worth less.
4) Flag=1 (Enterprise Flag=2)
Any one of those differences could justify a 1-5 point decrease in Shokaku's cost compared to Enterprise. All 4 combined should be more than the 5 point difference that actually exits.
On the plus side, I got a Promo-Sydney rescently & the mini is better quality than I expected. And in correct scale.
Turrets don't rotate, so I expect only the Rares to have that feature.
| |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
NatashDee
Skirmisher
1 Posts
| | 03/23/2007 8:33 PM |
| | To blow a BB up you really need a deck hit and that does not happen at close range. The Brits were too close to the Bismark and most of the shooting was off. Few BB ever exploded ala Arizona (deck hit) and the IJN BB Kirishima was really a BC and was built as a BC did not blow up when pounded by US 16 inch. The German BC was also pounded and did not blow up. Iowa vs Bismark, the only change the Bismark would have is a chance encounter at close range during poor weather in the North Sea. Then her guns fire 50% faster so she is landing a whole lot more main shells and at close range this is enough to kill any BB even without a full penetration of the plate, a "mission kill". As a 1700 lbs shell is going to damage a turret even with no penetration of plate. | | | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |