Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Had the Germans invested in aircraft carriers rather than battleships early in WWII, their navy may have been more effective against the Royal Navy. As it was, they never really completed any proper aircraft carriers. Conversely, the Royal Navy and the USA had dozens each. Then again, the Germans never really cared much for ships, as they only had nineteen capital ships.
If Germany had, instead of producing its four battleships before WWII, had gone with eight aircraft carriers (which would have been around the same cost), they would have likely been much more effective as a naval power. At that point, they could have fielded 640 aircraft on the high seas, which could have caused the Royal Navy some concern. If they were each escorted by a capital ship, four destroyers, and a dozen submarines, they could have packed quite a punch. When it comes to spacecraft, however, long range beam weapons, backed by VRF beam weapon turrets for point defense, seem to be a superior solution. If you can damage your opponent from 100,000 miles away, it will likely take their fighters/missiles hours to reach you (assuming that they can maneuver enough to reach you). Smaller spacecraft can provide additional screening against fighters and/or missiles, but the point defense of the large capital ships should be sufficient to engage thirty to sixty groups of targets per turn. |
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
Bear in mind that the big fast carriers that the US, Japan, and the UK had were accidents of history, and only existed because those navies wanted to not have wasted all the money they'd spent on half-built battlecruiser hulls, so their conversion to carriers was written into the treaty. Quote:
Quote:
Given what was known at the time, battleships were a necessary investment for the major powers until at least 1940. The continued construction of new battleships after then (especially HMS Vanguard), and the complete refurbishment of those sunk at Pearl Harbour was questionable, but earlier construction made sense at the time. |
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
While the cruisers would have normally not been considered capital ships, they were pretty much used as such by the Germans, so I included them in the number (though major ships may have been a better word choice). After all, the Germans were too terrified of losing their battleships to use them as anything but commerce raiding, which could have been done by smaller ships, so they had to depend on the cruisers. The heavy cruisers, cruisers, and light cruisers had to pick up the slack for the Germans.
Of course, it is difficult to generalize the utility of warships to the utility of military spacecraft. In space, everyone can see everyone else, so no one is hiding beyond the horizon. Firing distance and accuracy matters, and the ship that can land the most penetrating hits from the furthest distance is usually the ship that survives. Thus, beam weapons usually end up being the replacement for fighters/missles, as they can engage at extremely long ranges. Heck, beam weapon exchanges can potentially decide a battle hours before any missiles or fighters would become a factor. |
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
|
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So that leaves the following:
|
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
|
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
Well, if we look at the stats for a 13.5" gun at http://navweaps.com, the muzzle velocity for a new gun firing a 1,400 lb shell was about 2,500 ft/s. Assuming the shell worked as intended (and they often didn't, due to design and manufacturing flaws that were corrected by the War's end), that would be sufficient to penetrate 17.3" of armour hit square on. At 10,000 yards, velocity would be 1850 ft/s and penetration 12.5" if hit square. At 15,000 yards it's lost another couple of hundred feet per second, and is landing at a definite angle. The thing is, plates were very seldom hit square on. The shell would be coming in at an angle due to range, the target would be rolling, and the target would almost never be exactly broadside on (though turret faces would often be very nearly square), and often the armour was sloped as well. Sometimes these factors cancelled out, but more often they did not. Thus even if the gun and shell worked perfectly and the gun wasn't worn, operating at a lower temperature, etc., the chances of penetration being as good in a real battle as on the range were slim. That said, once ranges get down to a mile or two and gunnery becomes 'point and shoot' (in GURPS terms using Gunnery rather than Artillery) those big battleship guns had far more penetration than they needed to penetrate belts, assuming they hit roughly square. |
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
Likewise, the existence of the Italian battleships in the Mediterranean somewhat limited the RN's freedom of action. |
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
Quote:
|
Re: using spaceships for battletech-style tactical mecha combat
A square hit would probably be best represented by maximum damage while a glancing hit would probably be best represented by minimum damage, with any damage in between representing an increasingly angled hit.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.