Page 3 of 3 First First 123

Thread: Why does the BB range SUCK?

Why does the BB range SUCK?

  1. #51
    Originally Posted by barbarossa67
    Well... was thinking about posting a response here, but cpt.sharp's post can't be topped and seems like a fitting way to bring this thread to a close.
    Seems you were mistaken... though I hink the world would be a better place if you were right

  2. #52
    Originally Posted by Crimson_Goblin
    Woah, this is consistent with the game info on the website, but is it really the case that the only three Allied BBs are Prince of Wales, Repulse and Texas? I mean the Texas wasn't even at Pearl Harbour on 7 Dec 1941. In fact no USN BBs were at Coral Sea or Midway, or even in the firing line until after the Guadalcanal campaign had started. Why not have North Carolina, Washington or South Dakota (all effectively identical) which featured significantly at Guadalcanal? And they have a Surigao Straight scenario? With Prince of Wales, Repulse and Texas? Although the Battle of Surigao Straight would be the last WW2 Pacific naval engagement that I would select for a scenario with any challenge to it ...
    The only ships at the Battle of Coral Sea that mattered, in terms of offense, were the carriers, everything else were just AA platforms.

  3. #53
    "They were then sent (KG5, Duke of york, Howe and Anson) to the Pasific and played as much part in the war as the American BBs did. Shore bombardment and CV Escorts."

    thats what i mean. what good are they? none of them engaged a japanese battleship in a gunfight. the only ships to take on japanese battleships in a gunfight was the USS Washington at i beleive guadalcanal, and most of the dreadnoughts that were present at pearl harbor which sank the fuso, yamashiro, and mogami at the battle of surigao strait.

    "Her sister ships KG5 Sunk the Bismark"
    wrong.... bismark was scuttled. the only shells fired the day she sank that were capable of penetrating her armor was the rodney's 16" shells. of the 700 shells fired, only 10 penetrated, all from rodney's 16" guns. the cruiser dorsetshire's torpedo run on the bismarck did nothing, as her anti-torpedo bulge is still completely intact. so much for sinking the bismarck.....

    i truly hate how the seemingly default battleship for the pacific theater in most games these days is the kgv/pow. WHY? they were not the only battleships in the pacific. the PoW herself was sunk in 1941 with the repulse. so why are they in a war, that for the US, STARTED IN 1941??? it makes no sense. neither does the texas being there, she only performed shore bombardment on iwo jima and okinawa. where are north carolinas, the pennsylvania, the nevada, the tennessees, the colorados, the new mexicos, and the south dakotas (hell, why not iowa as well) that served almost the ENTIRE TIME in the pacific theater??? why is the battle of surigao strait even in the game when the allied forces (battleships) that fought are so amazingly historically innacurate??? playing the fighting steel map, i saw a texas called the pennsylvania with the hull number 39. it had me going WTF??? imho, there is a huge problem with the allied battleships that needs to be remedied.
    Where's my Nevada? And my Pennsylvania? I want a USN BB, not a pair of ships that got sunk by japanese airpower shortly after entering the combat theatre.

  4. #54
    Nobody can really tell if the Bismarck was sunk by the torpedos, or if the Bismarck sunk cause the own crew did it. But you can say it was a really huge battleship!

  5. #55
    i truly hate how the seemingly default battleship for the pacific theater in most games these days is the kgv/pow. WHY? they were not the only battleships in the pacific. the PoW herself was sunk in 1941 with the repulse. so why are they in a war, that for the US, STARTED IN 1941??? it makes no sense. neither does the texas being there, she only performed shore bombardment on iwo jima and okinawa. where are north carolinas, the pennsylvania, the nevada, the tennessees, the colorados, the new mexicos, and the south dakotas (hell, why not iowa as well) that served almost the ENTIRE TIME in the pacific theater??? why is the battle of surigao strait even in the game when the allied forces (battleships) that fought are so amazingly historically innacurate??? playing the fighting steel map, i saw a texas called the pennsylvania with the hull number 39. it had me going WTF??? imho, there is a huge problem with the allied battleships that needs to be remedied.
    well you just answerd you own question.

    "They were then sent (KG5, Duke of york, Howe and Anson) to the Pasific and played as much part in the war as the American BBs did. Shore bombardment and CV Escorts."

    thats what i mean. what good are they? none of them engaged a japanese battleship in a gunfight. the only ships to take on japanese battleships in a gunfight was the USS Washington at i beleive guadalcanal, and most of the dreadnoughts that were present at pearl harbor which sank the fuso, yamashiro, and mogami at the battle of surigao strait.

    because the ships you list, what good are they? all they did in the pasific is shore bombardment and CV Escorts. (as you say only 1 US battleship to take on a japanese battleship in a gunfight was the USS Washington)

    and already said countless times......
    they will be in the download content (so get your credit card ready)

  6. #56
    Shivers.... humm .. id have to see what the features are before I decide to pay for them.. But there are a few things id spend money on

  7. #57
    "(as you say only 1 US battleship to take on a japanese battleship in a gunfight was the USS Washington) "

    apparently you missed where i mentioned the other one sharp. battle of surigao straight. fuso, yamashiro, and mogami were shot at and sunk by the pre-WW2 dreadnought battleships Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Maryland, West Virginia, Tennessee, and California, ALL veterans of the attack on Pearl Harbor. they contributed more than any battleship of any other nation to the war in the pacific. there is nothing that the british battleships in the pacific did that USN battleships did not do.
    Where's my Nevada? And my Pennsylvania? I want a USN BB, not a pair of ships that got sunk by japanese airpower shortly after entering the combat theatre.

  8. #58

    Thumbs Up Forget not the USS South Dakota

    Originally Posted by Cpt.sharp
    (as you say only 1 US battleship to take on a japanese battleship in a gunfight was the USS Washington)
    Hey Capt Sharp, as another WW2 naval history nut, I like your input!

    By the way, people interested in this thread may like to know that the battleship South Dakota was also at the so-called Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal (night of 14.11.42) along with the Washington. After all 4 USN DDs were rendered crippled, sunk or sinking in return for 1 IJN DD sinking, in the second phase of the battle South Dakota (which was leading Washington) received 27 hits in about 4 minutes. Although her seaworthiness was not threatened (hit by a 14" shell from the lone IJN BB, Kirishima, that hit did not cause any notable damage) South Dakota was rendered "deaf, dumb, blind and impotent" (according to Admiral Lee, TF commander) and out of the battle. Left as the lone effective warship on the USN side, Washington then took on Kirishima (which is usually classified as a fast battlecruiser rather than a battleship) with her radar assisted gunnery and hits by about nine 16" and forty plus 5" shells left Kirishima disabled and sinking. Shortly thereafter Washington retired to avoid risk of torpedo attack from the 3 IJN CAs and CL and 8 DDs which were still engaged.

    It has to be observed that WW2 naval engagements do bear a certain similarity to "shoot 'em up" arcade games!

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2
    Rather outdated?

    lets look at her career.

    She was built in 1913.
    the QE class was the first Fast battleships ever made. First to have Bulge armour and first to have 15" guns.

    She was at the battle of Jutland. At a crucial moment in the battle, as the two enormous fleets approached one another, the Warspite's steering gear broke down completely, and she turned circles under heavy fire from no fewer than seven German battleships. Onlookers called it 'Windy Corner', for they were certain that she was about to be sunk, but the gallant Warspite emerged with all guns firing, and full of fight. She took 13 hits. when they repaired her rudder damage she joined up with the rest of the fleet and continued fighting until she was order to withdraw due to her damage (13 hits is quite allot).

    During WW2 she took part in the second battle of narvik. she was the flagship in the Mediterranean. She stayed afloat though countless bombing attacks. She took on two Italian modern battleships on her own (the two other battleships she was with were slower then she was and could not catch up with her during this battle)

    At Cape Mattapan she in affect put the end to the Italian navy presences in the med.

    She is credited with the longest ranged shot on a moving target at sea.

    She served in the Indian ocean to track down and sink the jap fleet that attacked pearl harbour (the japs left the Indian ocean before the RN found them)

    She took heavy damage by a glider bomb and almost sunk.

    She bombarded, Crete, Scilly, Italy, Normandy.

    She was Sent to scrap in 1947 but run aground so was unable to be sent to the scrap yard and had to be taken apart over the next 3 years institute.

    See earned 25 battle honours. (enterprise only earned 20)

    She was the best Ship the Royal navy ever had. it was a shame she was scraped.


    When she was created she was the most powerful ship in the world.
    When she was scraped she was considered to be among them still.

    So no, she was not out dated. She was in her prime.

    well i cant find anything to substanciate your claim of the longest hit by a bb. but even if its true we all know its all luck at ranges over 10000 yards with the long TOT's (time on target) the warsprite was lucky in some aspects and its expert crew it what saved the ship during wwii. everyone knows that the italian navy couldnt fight its way out of a wet paper bag. hell the canadian navy could sink an italian battleship and its crew. but lets be realistic the warsprite was an outdated BB in wwii, the only thing that was postive was her crew. but ship to ship the warsprite was no comparison to the Iowa class BB's or the Yamato class or the Bismark class or even your own King George class. The warsprite was underpowered, underarmored and outdated. Its prime was in wwi. The warsprite was lucky she never had to fight a real class BB during wwii, and were all lucky Hitler was too stupid to realize that if he knew how to manage a navy that the british navy would have been at the bottom of the ocean during wwii and NYC and Washington DC would have been nothing but rubble.

    But I give credit where credit is due. The warsprite had one of the best crews ever to staff a BB. They were able to keep her afloat when she was listing over more than 30 degrees and more than Half her compartments were full of water.

    But you cant compare a wwi BB with the classes of BB's that were developed at and around wwii. you also forgot to state that she spent more time in for repair than she did patrolling the seas. With only 2" armor decking a 5" shell hit would put her in for repairs. WWII BB's has 6" to 14" armor decking, and would take a 14" shell to penetrate their decks. The Yamato Class, Missouri Class and Bismark Class BB could engage the Warsprite well before they could even get into range. These wwii BB's had radar guiding firing systems and could engage a target at up to 45000 yards or over 25 miles. The warsprites range was only 28000 yards or only 16 miles.

    But for argument sake...the aircraft carrier put an end to this class of ship. so all this fact stating and story telling is pretty much pointless.....

  10. #60
    "South Dakota was rendered "deaf, dumb, blind and impotent" (according to Admiral Lee, TF commander) and out of the battle."

    to my knowledge, south dakota never fired and hit kirishima, due to a freak electrical accident that rendered her utterly useless. washington then proceeded to sink the kirishima, which was unable to penetrate south dakota or washington's armor belt.

    and @ rnewfy, there was no missouri class battleship. you are think of the iowa class, of which missouri is BB-63.
    Where's my Nevada? And my Pennsylvania? I want a USN BB, not a pair of ships that got sunk by japanese airpower shortly after entering the combat theatre.

  11. #61
    Originally Posted by menace2
    to my knowledge, south dakota never fired and hit kirishima, due to a freak electrical accident that rendered her utterly useless. washington then proceeded to sink the kirishima, which was unable to penetrate south dakota or washington's armor belt.
    Menace, you are right about no hits, but I never said South Dakota did hit Kirishima. You are also right that she had a series of technical problems, but they did not render her utterly useless - it was IJN gunnery that did that - nor did they prevent her from being in the battle. Both she and Washington opened fire on Hashimoto's CL and DD division at the start of the action. When South Dakota and Washington engaged the Kirishima group, South Dakota lost use of her SG radar for a few minutes before the battleship main batteries opened up, but this only disadvantaged her to the extent that USN lookouts were nowhere near as good at spotting enemy units as were their IJN opposite numbers. The SG radar was back on before either Kirishima or the USN BBs opened fire. South Dakota got off four or five 16" salvoes at the Kirishima group, no hits, whereas Kirishima scored at least one 14" hit (but on heavy armour, hence no meaningful damage) on South Dakota. It was the other 26 or so hits that finally took out South Dakota's radios, radar plot, all but one radar set, disabled gun directors etc. She was then out of the battle.

    Just because South Dakota scored no hits does not mean she was not engaged with an IJN BB, anymore than the fact that Kirishma scored no hits on Washington would mean Kirishima was not engaged with Washington.

  12. #62
    but lets be realistic the warsprite was an outdated BB in wwii, the only thing that was postive was her crew. but ship to ship the warsprite was no comparison to the Iowa class BB's or the Yamato class or the Bismark class or even your own King George class.

    My point is… not that it was a great warship design that could take on anything. its the fact of what the ship did that counts. (old saying its not what you say its what you do)

    what did the Iowa ever do? What did the Yamato ever do? The Bismarck sunk on its first outing, so that didn’t count for much. Where warspite went the distance surviving attacks from air (unlike yamato) and survived attacks from the sea (unlike Bismarck).


    The warsprite was underpowered, underarmored and outdated. Its prime was in wwi. The warsprite was lucky she never had to fight a real class BB during wwii,
    read up about the italian modern battleships. i would defently say there were real BBs. it was there crews that let them down.


    and were all lucky Hitler was too stupid to realize that if he knew how to manage a navy that the british navy would have been at the bottom of the ocean during wwii and NYC and Washington DC would have been nothing but rubble.
    Lets look at what happened to the German navy when they came face to face with the Royal Navy.

    Graff Spree… Sunk (tricked into thinking it was up against a battle cruiser and a Carrier. Cpt scuttled her)

    Blücher... sunk

    Königsberg... Sunk

    Karlsruhe... Sunk

    Köln... Sunk

    Scharnhorst…. Sunk

    Gneisenau… scuttled in port after airraids.

    Bismarck…. Sunk (she was a great ship… that is until she came face to face with a ship that was as you put it a real class BB (POW was not fit for the fight but she still forced Bismarck to return to port). In her last fight she managed to get 0 hits on the KG5 or Rodney. Her guns were knocked out early on and her superstructure flattened.)

    Tirpitz… sunk by aircraft.

    Lets face it. Hitler was smart to leave his ships to commerce raiding. The size of his fleet was no match for the royal navy. The two battleships/battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were the best ships the German navy had. They sunk lots of ships including a CV. But again once the came up against battleships they refused to fight(under orders). And when they did finally face them they got hurt and needed repairs(renown). Or they got sunk (Duke of york).


    But I give credit where credit is due. The warsprite had one of the best crews ever to staff a BB. They were able to keep her afloat when she was listing over more than 30 degrees and more than Half her compartments were full of water.
    a little known fact saved warspite that day. When word got out that warspite had been hit bad and was flooding the German air force sent stukas to finish the job. They arrived at warspite at night when she was being towed. They expected to come up against a badly damaged warship that could not defend it self. They approached the ship and came under considerable AA fire.

    What happened was, when the radar picked up the incoming bombers the captain of HMS Valiant (Warspites sister) steered into Warspites wake and turned on all her lights and became the target for the bombers. This act saved Warspite for sure.

    But you cant compare a wwi BB with the classes of BB's that were developed at and around wwii. you also forgot to state that she spent more time in for repair than she did patrolling the seas.
    TBH i cant remember compairing the ship to anything.

    The fact she went in for repair was a good sign, better to go in for repair then sit at the bottom of the sea. Any ship that was used as much as warspite would be a main target for any navy/airforce.

    and she spent far more time at sea then in repairs. bult in 1913 and ended her life in 1947. i think she would have had to be in 3 pieces in order to be in repairs for her to spend more time in dock then at sea.


    She went though two re-modernisations before the war. Increasing her armour, adding more AA. Improving her 15in guns. Adding radar. she looked compleatly diffrent when she came out of the docks. She was ready for WW2 as any modern ship at that time.


    With only 2" armor decking a 5" shell hit would put her in for repairs. WWII BB's has 6" to 14" armor decking, and would take a 14" shell to penetrate their decks.
    2” armour deck?? What have you been reading?

    13 inch belt, 5 inch deck 10 inch barbettes, 13 inch turrets was her WW2 armour set up. (after re mod during 1937).



    The Yamato Class, Missouri Class and Bismark Class BB could engage the Warsprite well before they could even get into range. These wwii BB's had radar guiding firing systems and could engage a target at up to 45000 yards or over 25 miles. The warsprites range was only 28000 yards or only 16 miles.
    simple reply

    well i cant find anything to substanciate your claim of the longest hit by a bb. but even if its true we all know its all luck at ranges over 10000 yards with the long TOT's (time on target)
    But for argument sake...the aircraft carrier put an end to this class of ship. so all this fact stating and story telling is pretty much pointless.....
    yeah but they dont look good like gun warships do.

  13. #63
    Nope , Gunships, Battleships were the coolest Ships ever to grace the Ocean.. well ... A nucular sub comes close

  14. #64

    Omfg

    i just dont get it? he says battleships should fire farer are you joking? the size of the map is like 10 miles and the yamato fires at 1.8 miles wots wrong with that?? any farer and a carrier would be pointless ffs jesus think before you speak please..... and your on about the yamato jesus battleships are over powered if your on about stuff like that then a carrier should be faster have faster aircraft launch and more CAP so the game would be like better. my god i cant believe someone can make a post about that jesus! and get real battleships rule the waves ever heard of a carrier? ever heard of how the yamato was sunk? al tell ya carriers! lmao you get some real good people on this forum i tell ya that know all!

  15. #65
    Few little tatics might help

    1.Zoom in on the ship you want to hit
    2.FIRE
    3.WIN!

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444
    1. Hit the 2 key
    2. Zoom in on target
    3. Press the left mouse button
    4. ????
    5. PROFIT!!

  17. #67
    4.Rush in and get shot at by CA-DD

  18. #68
    Originally Posted by ramp4ge
    Ookay. A question for someone who can (or someone who can't) give me an answer..

    Why does the BB range suck? Why, in a Yamato, do I need to close to within 1.8 kilometers of a target to hit it? That makes absolutely no sense to me--none. I should be able to hit another BB well, WELL inside my visual range and beyond..I shouldn't have to be humping it to hit it with a high-angle salvo. o_o!

    That is the only dissappointing thing I've run into about this game..I want to be able to nail another BB the moment I see it on the horizon..Not when I can see people walking around on it's deck..
    You can actualy shoot with the Yamato at 1.9 if you shoot at a ship coming towards you and tilting sideways towards you. You will see what I mean all veteran battlestions midway players do it. Its easy when to learn it then its a case of catching the opponent off guard.

  19. #69
    USS Iowa achieve straddles on a Jap destroyer at 35000 yards.

  20. #70
    All of the units need more range in the game, but certainly not realistic ranges.

    I would love to see the BB range increased from 3 to 6 km at least as well as aircraft flying hight increased to 4 km.

    At least torpedo ranges are realistic at 2500 m, as well as F4U Corsair's "Holly Moses" rocket ranges and TBM Avenger's "Tiny Tim" missile ranges are actually increased in Battlestations Pacific.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,450
    Originally Posted by Artas1984
    All of the units need more range in the game, but certainly not realistic ranges.

    I would love to see the BB range increased from 3 to 6 km at least as well as aircraft flying hight increased to 4 km.

    At least torpedo ranges are realistic at 2500 m, as well as F4U Corsair's "Holly Moses" rocket ranges and TBM Avenger's "Tiny Tim" missile ranges are actually increased in Battlestations Pacific.
    These forums are for Battlestations: Midway, not Pacific. There are no Tiny Tim Missles in this game. BB range is 1.6 for standard, 1.8 for Iowa/Yamato
    "In three words I can sum up everything I've learned about life: It goes on." ---Robert Frost.
    -=)CSF(=-XGamerms999
    http://www.watchfarscape.com/forums/...ilies/Thud.gif

Page 3 of 3 First First 123

Similar Threads

  1. How far along am I?
    By wvmayor in forum Thief: Deadly Shadows
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 3rd Jun 2004, 19:14
  2. News On Tr7+8
    By lara_n_kurtis in forum Tomb Raider 1 - 6 - Gaming Help Center
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10th May 2004, 13:34
  3. I'M Going In # 1
    By msgmills in forum Members Lounge (formerly Eidos Community Chat)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28th Jul 2003, 14:35