Jump to content

Distant Guns and Jutland naval simulation videos


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

... and a hearty welcome to the forums for you, sir. Looking forward to more videos.

Starting to have those "senior moments" already, huh? Michael

Who's arguing? You this whole time about nothing. The best part of it is that nominally I don't even disagree with you, I'm just trying to add a bit of context here to the claim that Dreadnought

  • 3 months later...

Those of you who are naval history buffs will perhaps be excited to see Norman Freidman’s 

 

Fighting the Great War at Sea 

and

The British Battleship 1906-1946 

are available in Kindle electronic editions for less than a dollar right now. They usually go for $50-80+.

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00SGC4WYY/ref=oh_aui_d_asin_title_o01_?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019EJVJT8/ref=oh_aui_d_asin_title_o00_?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Edited by Bud Backer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
On 11/13/2018 at 2:58 PM, Bud Backer said:

Is anyone still making - and keeping current - WW1-era naval elevate games?

It looks like Storm Eagle Studios is up and running again. At least their website says „2019“ and they have a Forum with recent entries. And, of course, they offer „Jutland“, “Distant Guns” and various expansions and packs again.

I tried once more to get my Jutland running, but without success so far. Any there is „A new Hope“ 😎

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 to Rule the Waves. Super crude game, but definitely the best available "Navy Manager" game right now. I was personally loving the tendency for Pre-Dreadnought battles to degenerate into silly train wrecks of under armed Battleships and Armored Cruisers endlessly trying to ram each other because their weak 10in guns run out of ammo quickly and can't hit anything. Damn the torpedoes Gridley, full speed ahead! All 9 of our pathetic knots! 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2020 at 12:22 PM, SimpleSimon said:

+1 to Rule the Waves. Super crude game, but definitely the best available "Navy Manager" game right now. I was personally loving the tendency for Pre-Dreadnought battles to degenerate into silly train wrecks of under armed Battleships and Armored Cruisers endlessly trying to ram each other because their weak 10in guns run out of ammo quickly and can't hit anything. Damn the torpedoes Gridley, full speed ahead! All 9 of our pathetic knots!

Were you playing as Spain of some other such underdeveloped nation?

I had great success in attempting to model a historical US Navy, making a few sacrifices in order to preserve gameplay.
https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1272/creating-historical-navy

It even generated a couple of AAR's:

https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1100/turning-point-aar

https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1609/aar-fleet-battle-sicily

 

On 4/17/2020 at 5:59 AM, BletchleyGeek said:

Ultimate Admiral Dreadnought is quite fun (early access though). It's somewhere halfway between Distant Guns and the ships game by the War Thunder Dev company.

I await the full release of that game with bated breath.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, General Jack Ripper said:

Were you playing as Spain of some other such underdeveloped nation?

No I just noticed that opening right up with a war in the early Pre-Dreadnought era frequently led to these laughable exchanges of meekly armed bucket ships that were more likely to sink each other with upholstery fires and accidental collisions ramming attacks than any kind of sophisticated direction or marksmanship. This is entirely what I would've expected out an era when many warships were still more like big Ironclads than proper Battleships-of-the-line. I only rather disliked the ship designer a bit, not because it's excessive micro or anything but because the designer is apparently hidebound by stereotypical ideas of what constitutes a "class" of warship and sticks all these silly penalties and rules on design of a ship. How many navies ever ended up able to universally agree on what a "Destroyer" even was or a "Cruiser" for instance? 

Typical of warship games there's a tendency to place the cart-before-the-horse and retroactively apply modern definitions and thinking for warships back onto 19th and early 20th century designs. It doesn't break the game, but it's just a bit unfortunate to me that even a well researched game like Rule the Waves makes, for instance, the typical mistake of considering Pre Dreadnought battleships as "inferior battleships" and not "the logical evolution of the Ironclad" if you get what i'm saying. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2020 at 12:08 PM, SimpleSimon said:

No I just noticed that opening right up with a war in the early Pre-Dreadnought era frequently led to these laughable exchanges of meekly armed bucket ships that were more likely to sink each other with upholstery fires and accidental collisions ramming attacks than any kind of sophisticated direction or marksmanship.

I have had quite a few engagement simply end when I ran out of ammo, but that's usually held to the early 1900's. Once you have central firing, and a few national upgrades like better rangefinders, you'll score many more hits, and sink many more ships. It seems to me to be more about positioning, and maintaining a nice steady shooting platform early on.

I think what happens in the game is that at the very start, you can fit enough armor to make you immune to your own guns, and it's only after a few shell upgrades that you can really punch holes in things.

 

On 4/19/2020 at 12:08 PM, SimpleSimon said:

Typical of warship games there's a tendency to place the cart-before-the-horse and retroactively apply modern definitions and thinking for warships back onto 19th and early 20th century designs. It doesn't break the game, but it's just a bit unfortunate to me that even a well researched game like Rule the Waves makes, for instance, the typical mistake of considering Pre Dreadnought battleships as "inferior battleships" and not "the logical evolution of the Ironclad" if you get what i'm saying. 

It depends. The game is intended to simulate the Dreadnought race, not the Ironclad race. Your pre-dreadnoughts really only exist to tide you over until you build more modern BB's and BC's. By 1905 in a typical game, your pre-dreadnoughts are basically obsolete.

I, for one, would have loved the game just a little bit more if it started in 1875. But I'm weird.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, General Jack Ripper said:

I have had quite a few engagement simply end when I ran out of ammo, but that's usually held to the early 1900's. Once you have central firing, and a few national upgrades like better rangefinders, you'll score many more hits, and sink many more ships. It seems to me to be more about positioning, and maintaining a nice steady shooting platform early on.

Crucially Rule the Waves has an enormous meta-game sitting over its tactical battles too that enables you to seek alternatives to impasses created by the tactical mode. I know it adds heaps of development logistics to a game and quickly widens the scope for potential game-mechanics problems, but I have just never found any kind of command-strategy game interesting for very long without some kind of tactical-strategic duality in its scope.

29 minutes ago, General Jack Ripper said:

It depends. The game is intended to simulate the Dreadnought race, not the Ironclad race. Your pre-dreadnoughts really only exist to tide you over until you build more modern BB's and BC's. By 1905 in a typical game, your pre-dreadnoughts are basically obsolete.

I, for one, would have loved the game just a little bit more if it started in 1875. But I'm weird.

Ah ha but were the Ironclad and Dreadnought race not one in the same? It's difficult to define exactly where one class ended and the other began. That's why I find the decision to cut the game off at Pre-Dreadnoughts more than a little arbitrary. I know they had to stop widening the game's scope at some point, but you're far from weird in preferring the game had started in 1875. I would've preferred Rule the Waves started in 1861 actually, when the first hint was dropped that naval warfare was in for some big changes. Sure you would've had to feature sails, gunpowder, boarding, etc but at least from my own perspective I can't see how the game couldn't have made those things work. In the end I just figure they didn't think about it, picking an arbitrary start date of 1900 to sort of "begin" the game around Tsushima's time...but the Russo-Japanese War was far, far from the beginning of the Dreadnought age....more like dead in the middle of it all. 

Nitpicking overall Rule the Waves is a fine game and i'm sure i'll grab the new game soon enough. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2020 at 8:25 PM, SimpleSimon said:

Ah ha but were the Ironclad and Dreadnought race not one in the same? It's difficult to define exactly where one class ended and the other began.

The Ironclad Race ended with the development of Harvey Steel, no longer requiring iron plates to be used in armor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_armor

The Dreadnought Race began with the launching of HMS Dreadnought, and set a new standard with a homogenous main gun armament.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Dreadnought

So there's a brief period between the two from about 1892 to 1906 in which your Pre-Dreadnought Battleship reigned supreme, then rapidly became obsolete with B's sitting in reserve fleets or relegated to backwaters as much as 15 years after their construction.

Rule the Waves starts it's campaign at the very height of the Pre-Dreadnought era, but you only have a few short years before the march of technology leaves you behind.

 

On 4/22/2020 at 8:25 PM, SimpleSimon said:

Nitpicking overall Rule the Waves is a fine game and i'm sure i'll grab the new game soon enough. 

I've purchased it, but had little time to play it. Maybe someday soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, General Jack Ripper said:

The Ironclad Race ended with the development of Harvey Steel, no longer requiring iron plates to be used in armor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_armor

But Ironclads didn't disappear the next day crucially. Or even over the next year. They remained a factor in naval warfare for years to come. Obsolescence doesn't, if ever really make things just stop existing or go away the next day. It relegates them yes. It demotes them...but they stick around. Frequently so called "obsolescent" equipment ends up seeing more use and action than the newer hardware does too. This is why the "Fleet in Being" narrative of the Great War annoys me a bit. The British and French played fast and hard with lots of Dreadnoughts during the war. Not the Dreadnoughts of the Grand Fleet no, but they were practically throwing them away in the Mediterranean to thwart Ottoman minefields. Not to mention Jackie Fisher's Battlecruisers and their escapades... 

English histories always do that "Only one Battleship lost during World War 1" Wikipedia quote you know? Ps the British lost way more than one *Capital* ship during World War 1 but we all know that. 

1 hour ago, General Jack Ripper said:

The Dreadnought Race began with the launching of HMS Dreadnought, and set a new standard with a homogenous main gun armament.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Dreadnought

That's the British narrative of naval history lol. Using their own rationale we might as well start Rule the Waves in 1914 when HMS Queen Elizabeth the first super dreadnought was launched because...everything before her is obsolete now right? Thankfully we don't because all of us can agree that'd just be a super arbitrary point to cut a tech tree off at, or the scope of a game, or the narrative of a book on battleships. Really we'd be leaving out heaps of other ships and other context then, and our game would suffer for such a lack of meta. 

1 hour ago, General Jack Ripper said:

So there's a brief period between the two from about 1892 to 1906 in which your Pre-Dreadnought Battleship reigned supreme, then rapidly became obsolete with B's sitting in reserve fleets or relegated to backwaters as much as 15 years after their construction.

Rule the Waves starts it's campaign at the very height of the Pre-Dreadnought era, but you only have a few short years before the march of technology leaves you behind.

My point is that the history and mythology that Rule the Waves and many naval games anchor (lol) themselves upon is way more subjective than they believe. Yes it is nominally true HMS Dreadnought was the first "true Dreadnought" but if you sent it to battle against, say, HMS Agamemnon...a side by side comparison of each ship does not reveal a staggering mismatch even though our poor HMS Agamemnon is now a "pre dreadnought", literally just because it was a predecessor class of ship to Dreadnought. Is it inferior to Dreadnought? Yup, but by how much? My own litmus test is if you sent these ships to battle against eachother in a World of Warships style team-deathmatch, would the Captain of HMS Dreadnought be totally sure of his victory? Would he even feel it necessary to take precautions? 

If I was him about the only ship i'd feel that way against would be...USS Monitor. I may have the "better ship" but I will certainly not be underestimating an opponent with similar protection and literally the exact same guns as my ship because he's a few knots slower, definitely not because he's a "Pre Dreadnought". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2020 at 2:25 AM, SimpleSimon said:

Ah ha but were the Ironclad and Dreadnought race not one in the same?

The short answer would be „no“, unless you consider all technical development as one continuous process.

Otherwise, Peter Padfield‘s „Battleship“ is an excellent read about the topic, offering a huge amount of detail. Well, sometimes too much information for me.

You can get it as Kindle book for little money or even for free on Amazon. And to my surprise, it is very readable even on a smart phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2020 at 11:59 AM, BletchleyGeek said:

Ultimate Admiral Dreadnought is quite fun (early access though). It's somewhere halfway between Distant Guns and the ships game by the War Thunder Dev company.

Thanks for mentioning that one. Looks pretty good, indeed. Though it’s predecessor seems to have some issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't tried the Age of Sail one... It does look quite good.

 

People seem to complain about the ground battles... and I didn't love the American Civil War ones. Fun at times but accuracy and realism is sacrificed a bit too much in exchange for fast gameplay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:

But Ironclads didn't disappear the next day crucially. Or even over the next year. They remained a factor in naval warfare for years to come.

Yeah, but they were long gone by the time Rule the Waves starts. The invention of the quick-firing gun put an end to that.

 

On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:

The British and French played fast and hard with lots of Dreadnoughts during the war. Not the Dreadnoughts of the Grand Fleet no, but they were practically throwing them away in the Mediterranean to thwart Ottoman minefields. Not to mention Jackie Fisher's Battlecruisers and their escapades... 

The fleet that went up the Dardanelles consisted mostly of old Pre-Dreadnoughts, which is why they were relegated to the Mediterranean theatre in the first place. They had no place in the main battle line of the channel fleet any longer. Rule the Waves lets you do something similar, by basing your obsolete units in other areas. Just because the Dreadnought race begins doesn't mean you just go and scrap your entire legacy fleet. My ships serve an entire 20 year term in game unless destroyed or scrapped.

 

On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:

Yes it is nominally true HMS Dreadnought was the first "true Dreadnought" but if you sent it to battle against, say, HMS Agamemnon...a side by side comparison of each ship does not reveal a staggering mismatch even though our poor HMS Agamemnon is now a "pre dreadnought", literally just because it was a predecessor class of ship to Dreadnought. Is it inferior to Dreadnought? Yup, but by how much? My own litmus test is if you sent these ships to battle against each other in a World of Warships style team-deathmatch, would the Captain of HMS Dreadnought be totally sure of his victory? Would he even feel it necessary to take precautions?

In weight of broadside HMS Dreadnought outguns HMS Agamemnon by a factor of two. She literally throws twice the weight in broadside artillery. Dreadnought is faster, which means she can set the range of engagement, stand off outside of 9-inch range, and flail Agamemnon to death with her 12-inchers and Agamemnon is literally powerless to do anything to change that outcome. Not to mention Dreadnought has an electronic central range-finding system, a complete generational advantage over Agamemnon. Dreadnought will fire first, do more damage, score more hits, and cannot be chased down and brought within secondary battery range. That's also not mentioning her turret arrangement which allows for multiple turrets to fire both fore and aft. Whether she's steaming towards you, away from you, or alongside you, she outguns you comfortably.

In a WoWS type engagement, it's the same as sending a Tier 1 against a Tier 3. I would take those odds all day, and twice on Sunday.

 

On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:

If I was him about the only ship I'd feel that way against would be...USS Monitor. I may have the "better ship" but I will certainly not be underestimating an opponent with similar protection and literally the exact same guns as my ship because he's a few knots slower, definitely not because he's a "Pre Dreadnought". 

The arbitrary name of the category of ship is merely arbitrary. If I were in command I would be rubbing my hands together with glee seeing such an easy target steam into view. Dreadnought was literally designed to wipe out any existing battleship in service at the time.

 

On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:

English histories always do that "Only one Battleship lost during World War 1" Wikipedia quote you know? Ps the British lost way more than one *Capital* ship during World War 1 but we all know that.

Try Peter Padfield's book "Battleship".

You'll find it much better than whatever tripe gets posted to Wikipedia.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

Yeah, but they were long gone by the time Rule the Waves starts. The invention of the quick-firing gun put an end to that.

Yeah but like, why does Rule the Waves start in 1900 is the point. If it's a game about the history of the battleship, seems a bit disappointing to me that they'd go and leave more than half of it out. 

2 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

In a WoWS type engagement, it's the same as sending a Tier 1 against a Tier 3. I would take those odds all day, and twice on Sunday.

Really? I mean, devil's in the details but the details don't reveal a staggering mismatch or trivial encounter. I can't imagine i'd be as cool with the idea of facing off against another Capital ship regardless of how "revolutionary" mine is. Bad luck happens you know but even if it doesn't, her guns are just as big as mine. That it doesn't have as many is hardly encouraging, she has enough to make me worry. Someone is going to die and I can't guarantee it won't be any of my crew...

2 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

Try Peter Padfield's book "Battleship".

You'll find it much better than whatever tripe gets posted to Wikipedia.

I found the scope of the book too wide to adequately cover the topic. Like it's a fine book but...prefer Friedman.  Most nations had very distinct influences behind their warship designs and the tendency for British authors is to just assume everyone was trying to beat the Royal Navy. Germany maybe but most countries had to consider more than the Royal Navy as a competitor, and many didn't at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

Yeah but like, why does Rule the Waves start in 1900 is the point. If it's a game about the history of the battleship, seems a bit disappointing to me that they'd go and leave more than half of it out.

You'd have to ask the devs, but as I stated previously the idea was to cover the Dreadnought Race, which it does.

 

20 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

Really? I mean, devil's in the details but the details don't reveal a staggering mismatch or trivial encounter.

The devil is not in the details, the details are in the details. It'd be a rather easy slaughter in a straight up slugfest. Period.
Like sending the Colorado against the Yamato. It'd be fun for about ten minutes. Then the Colorado would sink with all hands.

 

22 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

I can't imagine I'd be as cool with the idea of facing off against another Capital ship regardless of how "revolutionary" mine is. Bad luck happens you know but even if it doesn't, her guns are just as big as mine. That it doesn't have as many is hardly encouraging, she has enough to make me worry. Someone is going to die and I can't guarantee it won't be any of my crew...

Get turned before the mast for cowardice then. Meanwhile, I'll be busy sinking your navy with MUH BIG GUNZ and MUH SPEED.

Your example for measurement was a World of Warships style one-on-one engagement, and I've already explained to you just how outmatched your old 'traditional' ship is compared to 'the new hotness that set the standard for decades to come'.

 

26 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

I found the scope of the book too wide to adequately cover the topic.

Which is why Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history.

Good talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

You'd have to ask the devs, but as I stated previously the idea was to cover the Dreadnought Race, which it does.

By leaving out more than half of it lol. Tbh I don't care all that much. Battleship fetishization is so tiresome and dominates the narrative, unfairly. Most sailors never served on a battleship, most in a navy surprisingly never even served on a proper "warship". 

Quote

The devil is not in the details, the details are in the details. It'd be a rather easy slaughter in a straight up slugfest. Period.
Like sending the Colorado against the Yamato. It'd be fun for about ten minutes. Then the Colorado would sink with all hands.

Get turned before the mast for cowardice then. Meanwhile, I'll be busy sinking your navy with MUH BIG GUNZ and MUH SPEED.

Your example for measurement was a World of Warships style one-on-one engagement, and I've already explained to you just how outmatched your old 'traditional' ship is compared to 'the new hotness that set the standard for decades to come'.

Yeah this is why I shouldn't bring up any of Wargaming's awful products. Your reasoning here is based (so far?) only on the advantage that your ship has twice the throw weight. Crucially worth pointing out on your behalf that both ships have practically the same armor arrangement, actually Dreadnought is minus the belt on a Lord Nelson class by one inch, and its belt doesn't extend all the way up like Agamemnon. Fundamentally both ships used the same scheme that was used on the King Edward VII class. Since Dreadnought was proofed against her own guns this in theory makes the throw weight matter a lot less since, at least in theory none of those 12in shells should be able to penetrate such a scheme. You and I both know though that there's more going  on here behind a tiresome belt armor battle though. One crucial difference also was that Dreadnought had a somewhat thicker armor deck, but I doubt either ship would've been able to stop a 12in shell crashing in through the roof and blah blah god I hate battleship theory battles for precisely this reason. Tell me you actually read of that and I won't believe you lol. 

Also the Royal Navy didn't prefer its Captains to fight at stand off ranges. The pressure on both of you would be to charge right up to each other and go to broadsides where what would matter most is belt armor, and actually a Lord Nelson type might have an advantage over Dreadnought in some slight ways on that. The thing that annoys me about this though is the assumption, proven wrong often enough times, that anything would happen according to highly formal European models of fighting. 

Why don't we ask the crews of ships like USS South Dakota or HMS Prince of Wales how screwed up your day (night?) can get sometimes. Bismarck was doomed by a friggen biplane because it's AAA mounts were, I kid you not, unable to track such a slow target. Then for a ship that was supposed to be the literal terror of the Atlantic, and who had major firepower and tonnage advantages over both her opponents Bismarck proved rather disappointing a foe the next time around. Bismarck actually lost the capability to reply with more than half of its guns only about 20 minutes into the battle but...teh bigger throw weight??? Course neither Tovey or Hamilton were, crucially, about to underestimate the threat posed by an opposing Capital ship, crippled or not. 

tl:dr of it is that I agree with you that Dreadnought was revolutionary and held many crucial advantages over the competitors of pretty much any peer ship in class or tonnage. But a "wipe out" is way oversimplifying things as shown in a side by side comparison of mere stats. (I want to emphasize the near insignificance of such a struggle between two closely matched ships.) Such was Dreadnought's reputation that the marketing and hype remain powerful to this very day. Just important to remember that it was, in many ways, hype. 

Quote

Which is why Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history.

Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history because the developer was lazy, unimaginative, or both. Padfield spanned 100 years of history in his book because his intent was to summarize. It's a good summary too. 

 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:

By leaving out more than half of it lol.

Well that's just wrong.

We've been over this at length already. Historically, the Dreadnought race began in 1906 and was finished at the start of WW1. Rule the Waves game period of 1900-1925 with an optional extension to 1950 is more than adequate to cover the entire period and represent the concept completely.

 

On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:

Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history because the developer was lazy, unimaginative, or both.

I'll be sure to pass on your opinion.

Actually I won't.

In fact, why don't you head over to their forums and tell them directly?

I'm sure they'd be happy to hear from you.

 

On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:

Yeah this is why I shouldn't bring up any of Wargaming's awful products. Your reasoning here is based (so far?) only on the advantage that your ship has twice the throw weight.

and the speed, fire control, sea-keeping, communication, turret arrangement, engagement range, etc. You're the one hung up on gun caliber as the single deciding factor of a naval engagement, and YOU are the one who decided the acid test was a "World of Warships style one-on-one match".
Don't get mad because you set the terms of argument and they didn't work in your favor.

If you're going to have an argument, you should seek to read and understand your opponent's point of view, rather than relying on ad-nauseam re-iteration of your own.

Now I'm going to place you on my ignore list, you are the only such forum member to be so recognized.

Congratulations.

 

On 4/27/2020 at 4:19 AM, StieliAlpha said:

Since the discussion already digressed quite far from the OP anyway: Did any one of you ever play Clash of Arms “Fear God, Dread Nought”?

I bought it a long time ago, but never really dared to touch it.

Are you telling me you roll dice?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/9/2020 at 5:22 PM, General Jack Ripper said:

naval engagement, and YOU are the one who decided the acid test was a "World of Warships style one-on-one match".

Who's arguing? You this whole time about nothing.

The best part of it is that nominally I don't even disagree with you, I'm just trying to add a bit of context here to the claim that Dreadnought was "revolutionary". It was, but as anyone can see doing a simple side by side match up of stats it was more than a little overrated.  The myth that HMS Dreadnought sparked an arms race is squashed by the fact that the Germans had already gone through with the Fleet Acts in 1898 years before the ship was launched embarking on the nation's biggest naval armaments program ever. The Germans didn't even know HMS Dreadnought existed when they finished designing the Nassau class of dreadnoughts. All the British did, literally, was beat them to the christening ceremony. 

Sorry about the whole World of Warships goalpost move but hey, you continued down that path. 

Quote

and the speed, fire control, sea-keeping, communication, turret arrangement, engagement range, etc. You're the one hung up on gun caliber as the single deciding factor of a naval engagement, and YOU are the one who decided the acid test was a "World of Warships style one-on-one match".

That you explain none of these quantities but constantly expect me to quantify every sentence of my own reasoning is exasperating.

Quote

Don't get mad because you set the terms of argument and they didn't work in your favor.

U mad bro isn't really an answer man. Pretty sure that even if you are arguing it's in bad faith anyway so I wouldn't make the mistake of engaging in one with you. It turns out even discussing things with you isn't feasible. 

Quote

 

If you're going to have an argument, you should seek to read and understand your opponent's point of view, rather than relying on ad-nauseam re-iteration of your own.

Now I'm going to place you on my ignore list, you are the only such forum member to be so recognized.

Congratulations.

 

You're very odd. 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...