Sea Power - Heavier Surface Warfare Playthrough by Former OHP FFG Sailor

[@CharliMorganMusic]

Regarding fuel efficiency, the cruise altitude is always the 2nd highest option-you put it at cruise speed, reduce turns as much as possible, and put it at cruise altitude for the longest range.

[@th3narrat0r5]

Didn’t expect to see you here :D

[@ryu1940]

thanks for the tip!

[@misarthim6538]

This is such a fun scenario! In my first playthrough, I got blasted, obviously. In second, the Shipwreck salvos sunk Yorktown but she sucked up all of them so, worth it. My counter fire with TASMs was completely defeated because NJ decided to fire first the TASMs and then TLAMs. Then my Harpoon salvo sunk Sovremenny, I guess picket works both ways. But that was actually good, because with all missiles out of the way, I got to sail NJ right into Kirov's face and blast him with 16". Glorious.

[@ryu1940]

hahah that is awesome!

[@davidsyes5970]

~1h 02m... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't" If I'd heard that pace of contact reporting when assigned as the CIC on-Watch/Battle stations Radioman, I'd probably have laughed hysterically to the point of being sent back to Radio. The normal pace, and the ability to read various JANAP/ACP/NWP/NATO pubs kept me interested. I was never bored sitting in CIC. At one point, I even fantasized cross-rating to OS. But, I figured their level of math and trig had to be on par with that of the QMs, and in Radio (in the 80s) I had it easier. Today's ITs, tho, having all the MS certs and security/snooping duties (I gathered from a KZbin vid that ITs have to eavesdrop on any and all comms of any kind entering snd leaving the ship, thus causing some to be demoralized having to know yet not know TMI about fellow shipmates; I thought that keyword algorithms would obviat the need and de-risknthe stress that comes with being an unwilling spy) means I'm glad I served in the 80s, and not the post 2010s. I ended up in IT anyway, after a few years in data entry, but nothing I did exposed me to stressful levels of keeping secrets. ... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't... "Con 't

[@Yakovlev_Norris]

I personally don't mind the longer form videos. I can always watch it in multiple sittings if it gets really long. It might be a good idea to edit out long periods of 'skipping time' or where nothing of note happens, like in this video where you are waiting for the T-LAM's to run out of range. I do like your refreshing take (to me) on this game, a large number of videos I have seen are made by people who don't seem to have knowledge of any of the weapons.

[@ryu1940]

@@Yakovlev_Norris thank you! This is excellent feedback and I’ll try to cut out long periods of in between. I have a problem where I am filming and recording my voice as I play and because I don’t know how long some down time might between the action. I’ll try to be better at this.

[@msytdc1577]

​@@ryu1940If you are recording your mic in a separate track from the game audio it would make for easier editing, you can cut and splice the video game image/audio to match the action, and let your talking voiceover do it's own thing instead of being locked to the moment on screen, meaning if you were mid sentence you could jump the game forward and let your VO complete the thought without having two sets of game sounds overlap. Kind of a hybrid between real-time commentary and an after the fact voiceover. When you start and when you end your recording you can also record yourself making a few transition audio sound bites like "jumping forward here" "back to the action" etc., to insert in the final video as jump cut transitions (or you could always go with the SpongeBob SquarePants "Twelllve miiinuttteess laaater" intermissions), then you will have a library to use that sounds natural in the video; you'd be shocked how much different people sound from day to day, hour to hour, is gravely in the AM, gets hoarse from talking a long time, etc. You could also run it through any standard or more advanced/new AI/ML audio filters (high-pass filter/vocal base boost, remove plosives, remove "umm"s, cut out background noise) that can give you a podcaster/KZbinr quality mic sound without having to invest in the physical gear (just fix it in post!). Or you can run it through a speech to text output before editing so you can read your commentary as a written script, and more quickly see which bits you want to keep and what is yapping, which need to be time locked to the action on the screen, and what is your Ted Talk exposition that can be cut down or moved around if needed. Or just record it straight, push the upload button and call it a day, both extremes are perfectly valid, do what you enjoy, cheers mate 🍻

[@CharliMorganMusic]

You can lock the circles on ships by clicking the tool on the ship in question. It will dissappear if you lose the contact, though.

[@ryu1940]

Yeah that really messed me up one time when I first discovered that with the air defense bubble I drew around one of the hostile ships dropping off when the track faded. My P-3 crew did not appreciate that.

[@Rhino_Aus]

@@ryu1940 They really should change it so that if the attached contact fades, the circle/line/etc remains in the last known position and becomes dotted or something like that

[@maciekszyszka9654]

The best Sea Power video I have ever seen.

[@ryu1940]

Wow thank you very much for that!

[@AndreTheEntree]

Extra little thing, you can place new commands in the middle of a series, by selecting a command point previous to where you want to add the new point and if you shift click it will add the new command in-between ( chronologically).

[@ryu1940]

That’s a great tip, thanks for sharing!

[@TAnders877]

26:57 I have seen other cruisers do similar things. I think when they are launching helos they will get stuck on their last navigation action until the helo launch sequence is completed. I changed formations while launching a helo and a Tico just sailed in a random direction until it finished launching.

[@CharliMorganMusic]

I see a lot of "Iowa Class Battleship vs X" and ppl surprised when the battleship loses, which is weird, because it was refit to be a glass cannon, and can't defend itself vs modern weapons for shit.

[@ryu1940]

oh yeah absolutely, you really cant rely on ciws to defend against missile spam, you have to have a picket intercept that stuff at range.

[@yournamehere9928]

I think a large part of that comes down to people both severely underestimating how powerful anti-ship missiles can be, and thinking that the Iowa's armor would be able to shrug off any and all antiship missiles.

[@joeblowe3180]

It was never meant to be a lone wolf

[@thegenericguy8309]

@@ryu1940 you especially can't rely on it against the 70s+ generations of Soviet missiles, as AS-4, AS-6, SS-N-12, and SS-N-19 are all semi-armored both externally and with internal bulkheads to improve survivability against fragmentation, meaning proxy fuze damage should be less reliable and the internal spall generated by the M163's 20mm APDS isn't nearly as free to travel throughout the missile's internals - it needs to directly impact a vital component with the penetrator itself in order to reliably kill, which is easier said than done in a missile the size of a MiG-21 that's already within 20mm range

[@gluesniffingdude]

​@@yournamehere9928Which is really strange because we have estimates for how many Exocet sized missile equivalents are required to sink large displacement ships and it's like not much more than you need for a much smaller ship. And that's for an Exocet equivalent - supersonic seaskimmers with thousand pound HE warheads are considerably more powerful

[@suntzuthesecond]

In my playthrough of this scenario, I kept my ship in EMCON and didn't get shot at, until the Tu-95 got just within range of my SM-1 and I launched two at it. Presumably, the Bear's crew went: "Yep, that's an FCS radar, we can classify these as 'hostile' now." The SM-1 took out the Tu-95, but the missiles were already on the way. I changed course and ordered flank speed in hopes of getting out of the way, but it didn't work and I lost the Ticonderoga. I pushed ahead with the Iowa still in EMCON and got most of the way to the Soviet flotilla unmolested. Its TASM salvo took out the Kirov, but my ship got detected and ID'ed by a helicopter when trying to get within Harpoon range of the Sovremenny. It was game over for me from that point onwards.

[@Bombless]

I went into this scenario blind (and before I started watching your vids, might I add). I started banging on all radars from the start and was quickly attacked. New Jersey and Yorktown were very close to each other and they actually stopped all SSNs but it was super close, CIWS saved my bacon. I was pretty spooked, because I hadn't realised the P3s were still flying low and hadn't picked up the two sea contacts. In the end it took forever to finish the mission because I had missed the spy boat and NJ had to turn around and hunt it down. I did use the 16' to finish Sovremenny though, had run out of missiles (and also got the stuck in the water bug for it). Loving your tutorial videos btw! I understand so much more now thanks to you.

[@ryu1940]

Thank you that is awesome to hear!

[@themigmadmarine]

I was surprised the other day to discover that ctrl+clicking the map to order a sonobouy drop places a pre-designed search pattern of sonobuys.

[@ryu1940]

Oh yeah and I think ALT click will do another sonobuoy pattern. I can't remember off the top of my head but one is a spread out pattern and the other is a tighter pattern.

[@SparklesMcFartyPants]

@@ryu1940 Correct - ALT-Right Click will put out a wider pattern.

[@BenjaminGerfelder]

Apparently there are three patterns in total, all different sizes. CTRL + RightClick ALT + RightClick CTRL + ALT + RightClick Don't ask me what the sizes are, I can never remember :D

[@hamakazeKC]

I also had a weird experience with this one. First I tried to shoot down the recon aircraft but it had perfect countermeasures and all 8-10 SM2's I fired at it were decoyed. Then I got hit by 3 waves of P-700's at about their max range which sank New Jersey leaving me with just Yorktown but Kirov was out of anti ship missiles. I had Yorktown close in and volley off all her harpoons but none got through. So I closed in, crossed the Kirov's T and engaged her with the 5 inch guns. After a long gun battle Yorktown won but was very beat up. I never even knew the other destroyer existed as it played zero part in the combat and wasn't picked up by Yorktown or the one P3 which didn't eat a naval S300. I guess you just never know what's going to happen :)

[@yankeelongshoreman9113]

You can actually use TLAMs as anti shipping weapons. It's a pain in the ass because it essentially functions as an extremely long range and quick torpedo, but it can be done if you're willing to do the math.

[@ryu1940]

lol that is pretty awesome

[@schiefer1103]

34:49 the game actually interrupted the T-LAM salvo to fire off the T-ASM salvo, just fyi

[@ryu1940]

@@schiefer1103 Yeah I didn’t realize that til later and it’s a good thing I’ll keep in mind in the future.

[@BenjaminGerfelder]

There was something in the patch notes of the beta branch about laying the groundwork for being able to switch from kilometer to nautical miles or the other way around, so I guess there is some better consistency coming.

[@ryu1940]

Oh man that is great to hear!!!

[@jackmcfann]

Those sunburn missiles are scary, man. Sea-skimming supersonic missiles with 135 nm range and flying LO-LO means that unlike other Soviet missile, there isn’t a high-flying cruise phase that long-range SAM systems like SM-2ER can take advantage of. The only upside to facing them is that their “short” range compared to their Soviet supersonic AShM systems means their platforms are closing for longer, and thus can be picked off by aircraft and longer ranged TASM missiles.

[@nomar5spaulding]

Man, I'm at 20:57 when you start ordering that P-3 to fly like 4 rings around the Soviets and all I can think of is my brother and also the KZbinr Formerly Known as Jive Turkey talking about how MPAs are annoying to submarines. My brother once told me that he isn't that worried about aircraft detecting his boat, because they really aren't that good at it. He's worried about something else detecting the boat and telling an airplane, because they might not be that great at finding you, but when they already know where you are, they just never leave.

[@ryu1940]

Haha that is super cool I love his channel. Yeah my dad was a submariner and had similar sentiments about ASW planes and helicopters.

[@ErisGriffon]

FYI using 100x speed causes the game to get really wonky. It can cause those unit freezes, aircraft unable to land, etc. Highly suggest not using it. Thx for the videos, great content. -former CTM.

[@ryu1940]

Thank you! Yeah I wonder if that’s what did that Sovremenny in. It sucks because it isn’t very fun sailing around at 10x or 30x when we have hundreds of miles to close lol

[@slateslavens]

28:54 Could you use a MK46 helo-dropped torpedo on the spy trawler? If so, it might keep your warships from being located... also, don't the P3s have Harpoons or torpedoes as well?

[@ryu1940]

good question, no the asw torp would not track a surface boat like that. Firing the harpoon at the trawler also did not give away my position because the ship that fired at it was not using any radars to track it. Basically I was giving the weapon the target location from what the aircraft had on their radars. You can definitely fire at ships without giving away your position just by having aircraft spot targets for you or other platforms (like a submarine as well).

[@slateslavens]

@@ryu1940 thanks! good to know on all points.

[@ryu1940]

@@slateslavens oh I forgot to mention in that specific scenario the P-3s don’t have harpoons so you can’t use them otherwise you’ve got the right idea using them to kill that boat!

[@slateslavens]

@@ryu1940 love that you ended it on guns tho.

[@ryu1940]

me too, I really didn't think that was going to end up like that lol

[@smithersusn98]

I've noticed when a salvo of ASMs that I've fired are very close together, they seem to all get shot down together. So for launching form aircraft, I spread the formation out as wide as I can, and go line abreast. That seems to help with that problem, but even still, sometimes putting 1-2 seconds between a half-salvo vs. launching a full salvo also helps.

[@ryu1940]

Oh yeah spreading the launching aircraft definitely helps and it also helps if you can split the aircraft section up so they can fire from separate axis' to the enemy.

[@MikeKrasnenkov]

It might be because without radar emissions enemy AI can't classify you as hostile. And without that it won't fire the shipwrecks.

[@eypandabear7483]

“I wonder what this suspiciously battleship-shaped radar return could be…”

[@yester8039]

Great video as allways.

[@ryu1940]

Glad you enjoyed it, thank you!

[@Pow3llMorgan]

You can actually sink both enemy ships with the TASMs in this if you use your TLAMs as decoys. I tried it once firing two TLAMs for every TASM and since they have the same top speed they'll arrive at the target simultaneously.

[@ryu1940]

Yeah I actually did better when the Sovremenny was not bugged and stayed with the Kirov... the TASM and TLAM decoys were really effective The aspect with the TASM approach on this was not great against the Kirov going bow on.

[@mdb831]

The "elephant walk" formation looks cool, but it's a quick way to a watery grave. Spread tf out.

[@Corsair37]

I'm going to have to check out that F10 tip next time I play. Totally agree on the inconsistency of units of measure. I prefer nautical miles (and yards) myself, for the reasons you give. Hopefully the dev team will address that in a future release. I would say 1 Tico for 1 Kirov is slightly better than 1:1, as the Kirov class were are quire formidable ships in their own right. Plus we have/had more Ticos than the Soviets had Kirovs :)

[@ryu1940]

Yeah totally true lol I think they only had 4 Kirovs. I am really hoping for some unit of measurement consistency. I hate having to convert KM to NM constantly.

[@Corsair37]

@@ryu1940 yep, much easier to use the 2,000 yards = 1 nm conversion. At the very least, maybe the devs could include an option in setup to allow players to choose metric or US.

[@Corsair37]

@@ryu1940 You're right, they had 4 Kirovs (I thought it was only 3). 5 planned, 1 cancelled. 1 still in service, 1 in overhaul, the other 2 retired. Then again, we had 27 Ticos, down to 9 now with 18 retired. And no cruiser replacement in site or planned (though destroyers are almost as large as cruisers now).

[@ryu1940]

They should start thinking about making a stretch Arleigh Burke styled ship and call it a next gen cruiser

[@lmaoroflcopter]

Were the shells on the New Jersey radar guided at this time? Could that have been an option for engaging? Edit: ah.. :)

[@jackzhang8677]

Kirov doesn't actually take that much to sink. In the Guam scenario, a 16 Harpoon salvo is enough to sink the Kirov while it's being escorted by a Kresta II and a Grisha. The thing is that Kirov's bow, just like a modern Aegis ship, has a huge magazine of missiles with a ludicrously large amount of liquid propellant and high explosives. The top down down attack of the Harpoon seems to easily damage these magazines, and the game seems to model secondary explosions.

[@Rock_Dodger]

that radar ops call out on the helo's driving to distraction!! also. why do you program the P3 tracks like that instead of just having them loiter in a safe spot?

[@ryu1940]

You're certainly on the right track there putting the P-3s away in a safe spot, I just do it for convenience because it is a game. If you have them loiter further away you get longer windows of the tracks dropping off and when that happens my markers go away which I find annoying. I really do with the radar callouts were toggled on or off. It is maddening lol.

[@Rock_Dodger]

Oh yeh. I see what you mean. I was however shouting "your p3! Your p3! Your p3!" As it was heading straight for the sovremenny! 😂😂 can't handle stress like that!

[@themoo12345]

Seems like the AI just totally bugged out at the end there, shame. Pretty sure the AI didn't fire at long range because you never radiated and the Tu-95 didn't VID you. The AI won't fire at unidentified contacts. They can't do the kind of logic that you can to fire on non identified contacts when they fit the profile of a known hostile force. Really wish the devs would make multiplayer a priority for this game, playing against an actual human would be so much more interesting.

[@marco8414]

Was there any particular reason you didn't fire upon the Tu-95 when it crossed right in front of Yorktown the first time? That would've been my first instinct but your videos are teaching me a lot of things I never would have thought.

[@ryu1940]

I didn't shoot at it mainly out of curiosity lol if the AI was smarter then I would have been forced to light it up but I have learned now that the TU-95 was not able to ID me because I was out of visual range and it could only follow way-points so it would never attempt to investigate me to get a positive ID if I was at EMCON.

[@Bobcatflyfish]

One thing i’d be curious about is whether you can use the TLAM’s against a stationary ship like Sovremeny

[@ryu1940]

I definitely want to try that now just to see how the game reacts to that lol

[@jamesp8164]

I am curious as to why the Navy gave the refit Iowas all kinds of offensive weapons but very little defensive weapons. I understand that it was not intended to operate indepedently, it just seems like a combatant ship that's that valuable and irreplaceable would be more strongly defended. Maybe it was limitations on what they could do with the existing hull?

[@ryu1940]

There were plans to remove one turret and add VLS cells all over as well as a hangar iirc. Typical bolt on RIM-7 launchers were thought about but it was determined early on that the launchers and the missiles in them would not survive the over pressure generated with a 16in broadside lol

[@mikeck4609]

Using TLAM as decoy is awfully gamey…those are really expensive and there’s only a limited amount available to that fleet. You’re a pro…you know there’s no way that’s happening unless sinking that ship is a war winner!

[@ryu1940]

Oh yeah I totally agree with you there but I felt like using this because I wouldn't be cruising around with the New Jersey without more TASMs over TLAMs if I was expecting a surface battle. Also, I really wanted to see how this plays out in the game because I'm always curious to see how the enemy AI would react to situations.

[@pnzrldr]

@@ryu1940 Yeah, sure, TLAMs are expensive. But we shoot them at individual terrorists, given the right political imperative. In what universe is the NJ and YT cruising around with only two unarmed P3s in support? Where is the CVBG alpha strike, land based air, etc... that should make this an exercise in observation rather than a fight? BTW, I live in Yorktown, and object to you losing our town's namesake!

[@RaDK012]

What i did for the mission is to keep the 2 ship really really close so the anti-air gun can defend each other ship, and kill the TU-95 early since even in emecom sometimes it can detect the 2 ship and i would got the anti-ship missile barage. Like that i could survive 2 waves undamaged and then get closer to launch my missiles. I managed to keep my 2 ships undamaged with this strategy

[@testi2025]

They could draw weapon range circles after the unit is recognised, just like Command has.

[@ryu1940]

that would be nice to have some of that automated and a user could filter out what they want to see

[@bradenatkinson4784]

hey have you ever played command modern operations (cmo) if not the tldr is it trades the 3d graphics (out side of using in tacview) for the ability to represent a much much larger array of platforms and weapons. also it allows for grater control of your units than is currently possible in sea power.

[@ryu1940]

I have not played it. I have had it in my steam wishlist forever through. To be honest I don't like micromanaging a bunch of things with the platforms and I do enjoy the approach that Sea Power takes. I know it isn't for everyone but ships should know the basic employment of their sensors and I'm glad I don't have to do much of it for them. That said I am hoping to see more and more platforms come to Sea Power over time.

[@bradenatkinson4784]

@ yeah I can’t argue with that as I do feel sea power is way more intuitive and feels more like a game than a piece of software.

[@basedana]

Well, I saw you had some trouble distinguishing between yards and kilometers, and since 1 yard is around 1 meter, 1000 yards should equal 1 kilometer. Hope this helped

[@ryu1940]

@@basedana Thank you, I do understand on a yard to meter level it’s close but as the numbers get larger to work in terms of nautical miles the difference naturally becomes more apparent. 2025 yards is equal to 1 nautical mile but it’s 1.85 km. You can see when we work in terms of longer range sensors and weapons that this 1 meter to 1 yard can produce significant differences. Which can potentially put you in range of an enemy weapon system when you thought you were out of range of it etc.

[@techstepman]

once again the soviet crew was more interested in their vodka ahahahaha

[@ryu1940]

lol

[@drexia8973]

Really cool content! Keep it up ^^ Just subbed

[@ryu1940]

Thank you!

[@Tercio16]

Is the F10 selection button a MOD or in game?

[@ryu1940]

@@Tercio16 it is a debug menu that comes with the game.

[@mikevargas809]

brilliant

[@ryu1940]

@@mikevargas809 Thank you!

[@yeetrpg]

-What kind of music are you in? - Contact core. ConConCon ContacCon... *build up* Contact drop

[@ryu1940]

lol

[@yeetrpg]

@@ryu1940 shootout with sovremenny (translates from russian as "modern") was insanely cool

[@ryu1940]

@yeetrpg thanks man! I didn’t expect that ending by a long shot when the scenario started but it was the coolest outcome.

[@yeetrpg]

@@ryu1940 been playing uboat, and while evading destroyer on shallow water managed to squeeze my type VII-c in between a bridge and a mast of c-3 on the bottom :) sound of my keel scratching the deck was astonishing. Maritime simulators sometimes do indeed generate mind blowing storys of Insane luck and skill

[@justiceforjeller]

I assume that the bear sees you but cant id you as hostile due to emcon, a little disapointing for the ai but its kindve a difficult balance to strike

[@ryu1940]

Yeah, if anything the AI should be improved to approach closer if it really needs VID to force the player to make a decision to shoot down the aircraft.

[@JefferyTheriault]

You should see if the P3 can mount AIM-9's as part of a self defense load out. Pop goes the Helo.

[@Circle-247]

What I miss is more when you were discussing the tactics of such a thing. People ask to see larger surface combat because they want to know how to manage a large number of heavy ships.

[@ryu1940]

I think for larger number of ships I can do that in the future but I'd like to wait for a save feature because scenarios like that can play out over hours and I wouldn't want to play the game that long in one setting. I've also yet to find a good ship fleet vs ship fleet scenario.

[@Circle-247]

@@ryu1940 You should make your own. Particularly because you know the ins and outs of modern fleet composition - how a U.S. Carrier group would be formed, or an OPFOR alternative - this is the real substance of your videos. Case in point is your highlighting of moving the ships out to 20 miles ahead as a missile sponge. It would likely never have occurred to anyone but a Navy buff to have done that. You could literally make entire videos dedicated to Naval tactics and your channel would explode in popularity. Thank you for you hard work.

[@jeremygair4007]

Instead of time compression it may be advantageous to use video cuts.

[@ryu1940]

yeah i’ve got figure out how to do this efficiently thank you for the feedback

[@jeremygair4007]

@ryu1940 hands down you are the most qualified for this game

[@ryu1940]

@ wow thank you very much!

[@jeremygair4007]

@ryu1940 I just get tired 9f watching other players literally fly planes right into the teeth of enemy air defense, or ships thrown straight at the enemy. Or subs running around flank speed constantly...

[@ryu1940]

@ it was pretty rough sometimes before the game was released watching some of the early access footage from other folks lol

[@jamesscott2894]

Poor Sovremeny, suffers an engineering/propulsion casualty and her buddy just leaves her bobbing in the waves at 2 knots all by her lonesome to face a hail of 16in out of the fog...

[@ryu1940]

I was bummed to see her bugged out but more than happy to use those 16inch guns...I didn't think we'd be using that at all when the scenario started lol

[@smithersusn98]

I can't wait to be able to mute the incessant "contact faded" that you get from circling aircraft with directional radar (like P3s)

[@ryu1940]

Yeah it sucks it is like an all or nothing thing. Now I play with the voice call outs turned off and it definitely hurts my SA if I'm focused on something else with the map. I need some voice to trigger stuff in my brain to say hey man you better check on that really quick.

[@Ptolemusa]

I'd be interested to hear your take on the actual effectiveness of modern missiles vs that much armor. Those BB's were built to shrug off an equivalent amount of explosives but fired from a gun instead of a launch rail. Looking at the sinking of the Musashi and Yamato. The amount of ordnance required to actually sink one of these ships seems to me to be way in excess of what the Kirov and/or Sov carries. Specifically armor piercing and below water line type damage. Maybe a mission kill by rendering the fire control radars and optics useless... idk. In my mind it seems that the only real option those soviet ships would have is to launch everything and hope New Jersey doesn't chose to hunt them down. Tell me why i am wrong.

[@ryu1940]

Yeah they certainly had armor but even with Yamato, I think the first bombs hit at 12:40 in the afternoon and within an hour or so the super structure was completely decimated and she was already fatally wounded having taken on thousands of tons of water and needing to counter flood an engine room to try and stay upright. Certainly accounts of it sinking taking hours is true but it doesn't take long before a ship is fatally wounded. Having walked around on the Iowa and the Missouri I can definitely imagine pretty catastrophic damage with fire if the super structure went up from a few missile hits and that spreading in a bad way.

[@Ptolemusa]

Thanks for the reply :D And now i'm sad, you're probably right, if everything topside is smashed or aflame... And if she isn't in guns range it really is just death of a thousand cuts. CV did replace BB after all. Just imagine the fury of Iowa ablaze and within guns range.. Hehe

[@ryu1940]

@@Ptolemusa yeah absolutely and i’m the book Fleet Tactics the author talks about the different uses the Japanese and Americans had for their battleships in the Pacific. For the US they saw the writing on the wall and tended to keep their BBs with the carriers for added AA protection to give to the carriers while the Japanese still even later into the war were trying to sail their battleships alone without carriers hoping to catch the American CVs at night in close when the planes couldn’t fly. This was extremely poor decision making that stayed with the Japanese Navy to the end.

[@nerd1000ify]

The P-500 has a 1000 kg SAP-HE warhead and flies at Mach 2 at sea level. We can compare that to the navweaps website's gun tables (by the late Nathan Okun) as a reference, where conveniently the Iowa class's own shells have a similar mass. The Iowa's guns fire shells at more than mach 2 at sea level, but they begin slowing down right away and are going about Mach 2 at a range of 6000 yards. Navweaps has nice set of tables describing armour penetration vs range for many WW2 naval guns, and from those we can see that at 6000 yards a shell from an Iowa can penetrate about 25 inches of cemented armour with a perpendicular impact. The Iowa's belt is 12.1 inches thick slanted at 20 degrees from vertical (equivalent to about 13" vertical armour), which is clearly nowhere close to enough to stop that. Now I have no idea what the design of the P-500's payload is, so I can't say whether it has equivalent ballistic performance to a 16" AP shell. As it is described as a 'Semi-AP' warhead, it presumably sacrifices some armour penetration for extra explosive filling. But so long as its a bit more than 50% as good at penetrating as the Iowa's own 16" shell is, a main belt penetration is possible assuming the missile hits broadside to the ship. A single main belt penetration by a 1000 kg payload would be crippling, multiple would almost certainly sink the ship. And of course, let's not forget the alternative payload: a 350 kT nuclear warhead, which could wipe out the whole battlegroup, let alone one ship. Conclusion: the P-500 is most certainly a major threat to an Iowa class.

[@Ptolemusa]

@@nerd1000ify Thank you, this was the kind of wet towel and spear to the heart conclusion i was dreading. In the best case the warhead splatters and does a lot of damage, in the worst case it is hard enough to dig in and do some serious damage. Just looking at the missile, it really is just a jet fighter without the wings and cockpit. And the nuke option... Having just watched 1940's latest video about the missile sponge. it really puts it into perspective how important it would be to soak up these huge and expensive beasts and to take out the ships that carries them. I have some thinking and reading to do.

[@adamtruong1759]

I'm curious if you can make the TLAMs inadvertently hit a ship by dumb launching them essentially like a WW2 torpedo spread. Wait, imagine the effectiveness of such an attack on a large formation of ships. Of course it depends on what altitude they fly at. Also, I'm mildly disappointed with AEGIS and somewhat questioning the effectiveness of Soviet CIWS.

[@ryu1940]

Aegis is pretty good, I think the limiting factor here is the SM-2 range. I'm sure they are modelling some early block but I think the navy officially has on their website the SM-2MR block III as 90nm versus the one we have in game which is 40nm. If we had greater range you could start shooting down more of the SS-N-19 popups earlier and wither them down a bit before they got to your fleet.

[@ElGordodeAlemana]

Cheers 🫡

[@ryu1940]

Thank you!

[@MikeKrasnenkov]

I think if you shot down the helos you might have not been fired at. The AI is not smart enough to consider your contacts hostile based on that.

[@ryu1940]

That is interesting to hear because I've definitely have done a similar thing in a play through where I stayed at EMCON but fired at the TU-95 to see what would happen and immediately the Kirov launched her shipwreck missiles so I would be curious to know if shooting down helicopters received the same response.

[@albertpietrosanu2667]

I wish to have display and freqvency of Dangerous waters, that is missiong so hard, even in Cold Watters...

[@ryu1940]

That would be really cool but this game is more oriented to a higher level of stuff. I do wish they made a Dangerous Waters 2 though!

[@albertpietrosanu2667]

@@ryu1940 Right a Dangerous Watter 2 will be great, at least we have a real US Sub simulator work on progres.

[@ryu1940]

I am a surface guy so sadly I'm not too interested in that new virgina sim that will be coming out. I really like being on a ship trying to find subs, it is a lot of fun for me.

[@emdermonkay]

The last thing you want to see coming over the horizon is an Iowa class.

[@ryu1940]

and then see some flashes coming from its silhouette

[@lmaoroflcopter]

Man that contact faded nonsense sounded more and more aussie as time went on 😅

[@ryu1940]

lmao

[@eypandabear7483]

… wherein the gang get in a WW2 battleship to hunt down helicopters!

[@MaxB.20]

contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact contact basically my biggest pet peeve with the game atm

[@ElGordodeAlemana]

You forgot 'track track' 😂

[@ryu1940]

I hopeeeeeee they find a meaningful way to stop that nonsense. It is maddening lol

[@MaxB.20]

@@ryu1940 it very much is :D

[@neoisolationist8790]

SM2-MR is more accurate than this game models for them.

[@ryu1940]

I think you even get better range. The Navy itself at this link states the SM-2MR has a range of 90NM www.navy.mil/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Print.aspx?PortalId=1&ModuleId=724&Article=2169011

[@NLAWScametovisit]

contact

[@wolfcraft484]

i think you should check out the NTU mod, though that mod does kinda throw balancing out the window but thats i think sorta just what happened irl in the late 80s

[@lodickasvlajeckou]

First of all, why would he do that, what is enjoyable about playing with US ships that have technology from 1995, I know not every ships has tech from 1995 but some do and how could it be enjoyable to dominate soviet early 1980s ships which did not receive any upgrades in late 1980s due to economic situation in the USSR

[@ryu1940]

I would be more interested in the mods once they can change models in the future. I'll probably end up checking it out in the future but I like to play the base game.