Treaty Fudge - "Historical" Build with

[@dougjb7848]

10:50 To place AA armament: 1) Brush entire superstructure and main deck with Elmers Glue. 2) Open packet marked “40mm quad mount.” 3) Pour contents of packet over ship. 4) Wait two minutes. 5) Brush ship lightly with feather duster. 6) Allow 24 hours to cure. 7) DAKA!

[@BrotherMunro]

I like da way you fink!

[@imapopo2924]

@@BrotherMunro WE NEED MOR DAKKA! GET DA MEK BOIZ IN 'ERE 'N GET THOSE GITZ TA WORK!

[@codywilliams8005]

After the battleship league it would be interesting to see a light cruiser and heavy cruiser league at some point. Would be awesome to see ships like Baltimore, Eugen, Graf Spee, Atago, etc. face off

[@Taz_XE076]

I'd put money on a Zara if that league rolled around

[@codywilliams8005]

@@Taz_XE076 Interesting, I figure Baltimore (or if Des Moines is included) would be pretty tough to beat. Especially Des Moines with RF 8 in guns and rather advanced radar. But I do feel Zara would be a pretty nice contender.

[@dougjb7848]

You’d really have to separate CAs into “treaty-bound” and “screw the paperwork, the gloves are off.” There is no way an eg County, Portland or Takao can compete with a ship protected by 5” main belt, sailing at 33kts and throwing nine 8” shells every 7 seconds with Gen4 radar.

[@codywilliams8005]

@@dougjb7848 Agreed, it would definitely have to be treaty bound divisions and post treaty divisions. Maybe even a “treaty compliant” division for the ships that skirted the limits such as Deutschland, Zara, and some of the Japanese cruisers.

[@dougjb7848]

@@codywilliams8005 As “comprise committee” as the Scheer class was, I don’t think any treaty CA could beat her 1-1.

[@douglastarbox7640]

loved the line "anything short of solitary confinement was luxurious compared to Japanese crew quarters."

[@anumeon]

Pretty much the Drach:ism of this videoseries so far. :)

[@antonhengst8667]

"Triple 15s" oooh, a rare drach slipup

[@dougjb7848]

13:50 NoCar most definitely had a triple bottom hull.

[@zerefsunlimitedshipworks]

Bump

[@benjaminspencer6507]

Yup, she took a torpedo from a Japanese sub. Went for a patch and got back to work!!

[@johnynuke3310]

A ww1 battleship league would be very interesting

[@SpootKnight]

@8:30 Once upon a time this superstructure could be made seamless. Those were lovely times.

[@glauberglousger6643]

6:25 that tower I is meant to be the South Dakota tower, similar to the only other non Japanese or North Carolina secondary one (the secondary is technically Not) Although the secondary lacks gun mounts, (The modern one is supposed to be the North Carolina/South Dakota, or so it says in that update)

[@gargravarr2]

I think Drachinifel fudged up the belt calculation there. The combination of the 16deg shell trajectory and the 15deg inclined belt means that the shell will have to go through about 14 inches of armor, true. But even with a vertical belt, the shell coming at the 16 degree angle would need to go through 12.5 inches of armor, not just the 12in thickness of the belt. So the in-game belt thickness should be the real thickness multiplied by the ratio of these effective thicknesses. In math terms, Drachinifel calculated 12/cos31 = 14, while the correct value would be 12*cos16/cos31 = 13.45 . The error is about 4%. For the South Dakota, the belt should have been set at 14.3 inches.

[@zerefsunlimitedshipworks]

Bump

[@dougjb7848]

You get outta here and take your calculate with you! 🤣🤣

[@zerefsunlimitedshipworks]

@@dougjb7848 virgin

[@level98bearhuntingarmor]

I'd like to see more hull showcase videos again due to the new hulls in the latest update

[@antonhengst8667]

Ah yes, USS NS Carokota

[@deanoliv2880]

Good video

[@glauberglousger6643]

This ship seems to have the best of both ship classes, speed, increased armor, shells, and such, which seems a bit unfair (to Bismarck and Vanguard) But I assume it shouldn’t make too much of a difference (both ships ending up at single digit health %’s at once) Also the non changed gun reload

[@briantorgerson7241]

Look, it's the USS Carokota!

[@grandconqueror2446]

Granted not quite any specific ship, but you could make the argument this would be a ship you could get through Congress, stay within the treaty, and have realistically built (minus any liberties you had to take)

[@j.thehappywyvern6397]

Wait we’re going with treaty fudge and not North Dakota?

[@dougjb7848]

Now I’m hungry.

[@robertserafini560]

us battleship HE shells were high capacity

[@matthewburkett602]

The question I have is where Drachinifel found reference to US battleships using coincidence range finders? Everything I have ever come across said that Great Britain used them but the US used stereoscopic range finders like the Germans did. I am not trolling, I am just curious. I will see if I can dig up any sources. Really great build though 🙂

[@roguecarrick816]

so shes basically just using the bad weather outline from foreign power ID cards? might be a north carolina sir, might be a south dakota, wouldn't be the first time a bunch of US classes looked similar.

[@HGShurtugal]

North Carolina is the only warship I have ever been on.

[@silverhost9782]

I guess mixing them makes sense. Both NC and SD feel like division 2 or maybe division 1.5 ships rather than division 1 outright. Doing it this way might them a better fighting chance and drops the NC shaped dead weight from the league

[@markswang8987]

can you guys make a guide for the colorado class? I been trying to find the right hull and bridge for sometimes already.

[@NotTheRookie]

North Dakota, or South Carolina

[@FaithFalkner]

Mmm... fudge.

[@ethanharison-gray3851]

Maybe do one final class with planned battleships such as lthe lions and Montanas? Not sure how many you could put in I just wanna see the lion!

[@robertserafini560]

us battleships used stereoscopic rangefinder

[@ecophreak1]

What % of sugar is allowed in treaty fudge?

[@robertserafini560]

giving the us .5 inch instead of 1.5 for inner decks like the rest got

[@Antiquitycar]

A fudge please, stirred, not shaken.

[@nathanshoaf5452]

Can you do a historical American campaign?

[@BrotherMunro]

I do need to play the US still so maybe!

[@cathyharrop3348]

You know we would forgive you using another nation's hull if the components works.

[@uncletello]

Call it the North Dakota or the South Carolina...:)

[@BrotherMunro]

Can’t use South Carolina as that was an actual class of US Battleships in the 1910’s but North Dakota would work

[@dougjb7848]

Nouth Carota.

[@dougjb7848]

Apparently nobody is actually getting any actual fudge, treaty or otherwise. -1.3good.

[@jamesmchenry4708]

maybe it's a South Carolina. Or a North Dakota. or a South North. Or a Carolina Dakota.

[@robertserafini560]

so brits crippling american navy what else is new

[@pilfit]

So not only does the NC end up in the wrong division, you guys decided to build a combo of the NC and the SD but build it on the least suitable hull for either and drop its draft and beam down to nothing to get the weight right... ignoring that by doing so you will be nerffing its gunnery and resistance into the ground so it wont be able to hit anything or handle much damage. When you decided to combine them you should have switched to the SD hull so you didnt have to do that! I cant wait to see what you decide to do to the Iowa seeing all you have to do to make that an Iowa is fixed the draft/beam problem you gave this ship and make its guns a little longer. Ontop of all this you have given every other nation railguns to fix the problem of the inaccurate pen values but because the US ships use super heavy shells they dont get this, ignoring that those super long guns on the other ships mean they all have crazy accuracy and super flat trajectories.