Everything from birthday presents to hate mail goes here. ;D
Ahoj!
Relations with me can be "1". We deal through the Riddermark.
Borys
France isn't much better on that respect I'm afraid. A 2 is the best you'll get from France.
Hmm I was pretty sure we did have diplomatic relations per the Treaty of Rome. But a 1 works for me, easier to trow mud your way. ;D
Make your airship engines 200HP.
Will do, they are a carry over that I forgot to change.
Why'd your relations with the Dutch tank in '06? I can see post-March '07 being poor, but wasn't aware of anything before that.
Woops date problem. They were deteriorating before due to the Kra Canal, but nowhere that much. Mistake on my part due to March problems.
Something I wonder about, just were are the "Fantasy" New Swiss cities situated? I know the New Amsterdam = Darwin, but were is Phoenix and Olympia and is any of the real cities moved?
Phoenix and Olympia are located in the Swiss Home Islands, a large island archipelago midway between the Marshalls and Hawaii, near Johnston Atoll. Geneva is located mid Australia on the Great Lakes, roughly analogous to Chicago - Lake Michigan.
None of the real cities have been moved,
Quote from: Tanthalas on September 05, 2008, 10:33:49 AM
Naval Propulsion
1895 Baseline(0): Complex Reciprocating Engines, Engine Year 1900
1902 Advanced (+1): Engine year 1905, Max. Turbine power 5000HP/Shaft,
Direct-drive Turbines
1905 Cutting Edge (+3) Engine year 1909, Max. Turbine power 12000HP/Shaft
1909: Engine year 1912, Max. Turbine power 20000HP/Shaft
1913: Engine year 1916, Max. Turbine power
1917: Engine year 1920, unlimited power/shaft
1922: Engine year 1925
1927: Engine year 1930
I see you have added the 1909 (1912 engine year) engine tech, but I cannot find any report you posted that is have ever been researched.
Could you point out werein case one have missed it?
Quote from: Korpen on September 05, 2008, 12:08:23 PM
Quote from: Tanthalas on September 05, 2008, 10:33:49 AM
Naval Propulsion
1895 Baseline(0): Complex Reciprocating Engines, Engine Year 1900
1902 Advanced (+1): Engine year 1905, Max. Turbine power 5000HP/Shaft,
Direct-drive Turbines
1905 Cutting Edge (+3) Engine year 1909, Max. Turbine power 12000HP/Shaft
1909: Engine year 1912, Max. Turbine power 20000HP/Shaft
1913: Engine year 1916, Max. Turbine power
1917: Engine year 1920, unlimited power/shaft
1922: Engine year 1925
1927: Engine year 1930
I see you have added the 1909 (1912 engine year) engine tech, but I cannot find any report you posted that is have ever been researched.
Could you point out werein case one have missed it?
one of the corections (which I havnt finished yet) that I discoverd I had to make after I got the as of 1908 tech list. I researched a couple things that I already had (what I get for going off a 1906 report I supose), alot of the stuff I researched was just place holders (how I saw it anyway) untill I could figure out what I already had ^.^
When I was updating NS, Rocky said I could have all ships laid down 1911 and after, have 1909 engines.
Just wondering, should NS have 1915 Night Fighting Tech? That was something NS spent a lot of time on. Or should we modify that part of the Tech Tree to the following?
Night fighting
1890: Carrots and more carrots, basic tactics.
1908: Improved tactics, searchlight, star shells.
1912: night scopes + greatly improved tactics
1918: Illuminating shells with parachute, improved night scopes
Because I saw NS as having quite some training (even pre-1st Pacific War) and star shells, which this does not allow untill 1912.
There won't be an 1890 tech.
NS starts 1910 with the 1908 tech. Where it goes from there is up to Tan.
As to the speed issue - you would mean that I said ships built in 1911 and later would have 1912 engine year. This assumed that NS promptly began researching the relevant engine tech as soon as it was possible - now that Tan is going through each report, that assumption is no longer valid.
they did though (I just had to fix the compleation thing)
If they did the engine research, then they're peachy.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on September 05, 2008, 07:25:09 PM
If they did the engine research, then they're peachy.
as if I wouldnt LOL. Even though I plan to reform the NS a bit on protection issues, I'm still a Closet Speed freak
The strange thing is that the new batch of Battlecruisers around have even LESS armor than most of my NS designs! :o
I still think the Night Fighting Tech should be at least reworded. Starshells, I think should come before nightscopes, and a starting level tech introduced as the 1908 looks somewhat advanced.
Quote from: Desertfox on September 06, 2008, 08:37:54 PM
The strange thing is that the new batch of Battlecruisers around have even LESS armor than most of my NS designs! :o
I still think the Night Fighting Tech should be at least reworded. Starshells, I think should come before nightscopes, and a starting level tech introduced as the 1908 looks somewhat advanced.
my decks are lighter I will agree but they are heavier than historical, and my belts, upper, and ends are heavier. In this era Plunging Fire isnt an issue (realy wasnt even in WW1 well unless you were British) I intend to build my Makensens (they realy were the first Fast BBs ) as the strong arm of the fleet (I realy should start laying them down LOL)
Oh I wasn't talking about your designs (which have even more armor than my BBs!) but about the current rash of battlecruisers and especially heavy cruisers with <7" belts. Some of the designs floating around make Interceptor (4" belt) look balanced, and Constellation (7" belt) look like a battleship!
Quote from: Desertfox on September 07, 2008, 12:56:04 AM
Oh I wasn't talking about your designs (which have even more armor than my BBs!) but about the current rash of battlecruisers and especially heavy cruisers with <7" belts. Some of the designs floating around make Interceptor (4" belt) look balanced, and Constellation (7" belt) look like a battleship!
well maybee if I can get enough of them built to be usefull (say like 6) they will come as a surprise to someone (looks at Maoria you want some yah thats what I thought)
Hm, USNSS Independance seems AWFULLY familliar... :-*
Quote from: Korpen on September 09, 2008, 01:36:31 PM
Hm, USNSS Independance seems AWFULLY familliar... :-*
... that it should I copied it from you after all (I was having a hell of a time making 25 knots work on 48k shp) would you like a developer credit on her? ^.^ im actualy still playing with that hull I just posted it so there would be somthing legit instead of the 27 knot ones I built (but couldnt build due to tech restrictions)
Quote from: Tanthalas on September 09, 2008, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Korpen on September 09, 2008, 01:36:31 PM
Hm, USNSS Independance seems AWFULLY familliar... :-*
... that it should I copied it from you after all (I was having a hell of a time making 25 knots work on 48k shp) would you like a developer credit on her? ^.^ im actualy still playing with that hull I just posted it so there would be somthing legit instead of the 27 knot ones I built (but couldnt build due to tech restrictions)
No need for credit as such, but if building what amounts to clones, some in-character comment about why would be fun. :)
Quote
PC 1 Marlin 3005
PC 1 Hake 3005
Marlin was sunk by the french in the indian ocena incedent, and Hake was destroyed at Buru
Quote from: Korpen on September 09, 2008, 04:40:29 PM
Quote from: Tanthalas on September 09, 2008, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Korpen on September 09, 2008, 01:36:31 PM
Hm, USNSS Independance seems AWFULLY familliar... :-*
... that it should I copied it from you after all (I was having a hell of a time making 25 knots work on 48k shp) would you like a developer credit on her? ^.^ im actualy still playing with that hull I just posted it so there would be somthing legit instead of the 27 knot ones I built (but couldnt build due to tech restrictions)
No need for creadit as such, but if building what amounts to clones, some in-character comment about why would be fun. :)
Quote
PC 1 Marlin 3005
PC 1 Hake 3005
Marline was sunk by the french in the indian ocena incedent, and Hake was destroyed at Buru
kk ill make the changes acordingly (im still finding ships I have that wernt sunk and purging ones that were sunk)
Orientation: This ship Encyclopaedia is a reference document to show what the fleet have or is building.
Strong suggestion: Keep it that way, and do not put design studies and future plans here among the in-service ships. It is confusing and makes it hard to keep track as what is actually in existence, and what is just plans and ideas.
We have after all ship discussion forums for showing of or debating designs. Until you have decided on a design and laid it down, keep it out of the encyclopaedia.
On your 5900t cruiser:
"Main Belt covers 97 % of normal length
Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces"
;)
For all of you who where inquiring about technologies, the updated Swiss Tech Trees are up and running.
The Navy section has been cleaned up and updated. Should be accurate for all ships DD size and up.
How many planes are on the Tuna-carrier?
10 max
With all the recent scrappings, sinkings, and sales - are there any ships left in the NSN that do not comply with the sim's established hull strength requirements?
The 3 oldest light cruisers, and the entire Weasel class.
I'd like to see them fixed or removed from service soon.
Lend them to Romania. We will rebuild them to be legal. :D :D
Quote from: Desertfox on October 27, 2009, 05:28:18 PM
The 3 oldest light cruisers, and the entire Weasel class.
Too bad the Weasels are only 10yrs old. Maybe if you ditch the 6" guns in exchange for more 4".. ???
If you are going to stick with an Ise layout as on the picture, I seriously doubt that 390 feet of main belt is long enough to protect everything from A to Y turret, even if SS says only 79.5% is needed (a result of not using a TBH).
Using this picture...
(http://www.warshipsww2.eu/japan/bb/img/rys-hyuga.gif)
Length (wl) = 777 pixels = 154% = 205.8m/675ft
100% coverage = 504 pixels = 100% = 133.63m/438ft
A to Y coverage minimum = 520 pixels = 103% = 137.65m/452ft
On the drawing of your 700t Dayan class DD,
you could remove 2nd or 3rd stack.
Jef
It's a Swiss ship so the third stack is no doubt for ventilation, to clear all the smoke from the cigarette smokers aboard the ship. :D
The Swiss encylcopedia is now fully up to date.
I'll see what I can do about Ise.
The third funnel could be used for other non-engine related uses.
If I'd known the Colombians were as popular with the Swiss as the Swiss themselves, I'd have run some candidates in the most recent election.