"Are one barreled main guns more effective than two?

[CUNK]

Or how I learned to stop worrying and love the ammo detonation."

I've been researching this, and I find that one barreled main cannons can be more effective (Faster reload, faster traverse, etc.). But I think this may be up to how you guys like to build ships. Some input would be welcomed!

[Soylent_Greene]

I had the same kind of question, whether it was worth the weight to change from triple main batteries to quads when they become available.

The French very early on had quad main batteries, when most nations were still working with twins

[Aleks96]

as everything in life, it depends, but if there is a huge disparity in rate of fire and accuracy go with the lesser amount of barrels and save up the weight

[Spoe]

It may depend a bunch on tech level. E.g. in 1890 Custom Battle, US:
1x 12" MkI, 373 tons, .4 rounds/min, 2.6% accuracy at 5k
2x 12" MkI, 575 tons, .27 rounds/min (.52 per turret), 2.3% accuracy at 5k

So, in 10 minutes you had:
1x about a 10.0% chance of getting at least one hit at 5k
2x about a 11.0% chance of getting at least one hit at 5k

Now at the other end, in 1940:
1x 12" MkV, 382 tons, 1.92 rounds/min, 2.6% accuracy at 15k
2x 12" MkV, 592 tons, 1.42 rounds/min (2.84 per turret), 2.6% accuracy at 15k

So, in 10 minutes you had:
1x about a 39.4% chance of getting at least one hit at 15k
2x about a 52.2% chance of getting at least one hit at 15k

So, in 1890, probably not a whole lot of difference. In 1940, 2x seems a lot more effective, especially when you consider that often weight isn't the limiting factor but deck space and/or limits on the number of turrets: you can't just choose between 4 2x turrets or 8 singles or even, in a lot of cases, 3 and 6.

The other aspect to consider is gun technology. In 1940 custom battles, I prefer quad 15" MkIV to triple 16" MkIII which are close to the same weight.

4x 15" MkIV with Auto II, Triple Base, TNT IV, Capped II, and Superheavies is 2785 tons, 0.94 rounds/min (3.76/min for the turret), 15k accuracy of 2.5% with 48" of penetration and 39.9 km max range
3x 16" MkIII with that above techs is 2577 tons, 0.74 rounds/min (2.22 rounds/min for the turret), 15k accuracy of 1.4% with 50.5" of penetration and 34.3 km max range.

I think that's a clear win for the more advanced 15" quads. 70% more rounds every 10 minutes, which are more accurate. Sure, the 16" shells do more damage by 36.8% - not enough to make up for the increased number of rounds downrange even if the 16" was equally accurate.

[NT_Dave]

I've found that the 13.5" is a very cost/weight effective gun against ships mounting 16" or larger late era AI BBs. The AI opponent seems to sacrifice speed and armor for turrets and tube size. Thus, a late-era BB mounting 4 Triple 13.5 is significantly faster and better protected. Add that to the thinner AI deck armor, and those long-range, plunging fire hit make short work of them - frequently they flash-fire from magazine hits.

Just my empirical experience. I'm not that good at math.

[ohthot1227]

Buuut.....double barrel main gun turrets are SEXY

[ohthot1227]

Originally posted by NT_Dave:

I've found that the 13.5" is a very cost/weight effective gun against ships mounting 16" or larger late era AI BBs. The AI opponent seems to sacrifice speed and armor for turrets and tube size. Thus, a late-era BB mounting 4 Triple 13.5 is significantly faster and better protected. Add that to the thinner AI deck armor, and those long-range, plunging fire hit make short work of them - frequently they flash-fire from magazine hits.

Just my empirical experience. I'm not that good at math.

for me: 10~12" guns are best for pre dreadnought era BB.
11~12" works great for early dreadnought era.
If the enemy ships get too THICK, move on to 13.8~15" guns.
15~16" is the best caliber for modern BBs.
They have excellent pen, destructive power, and reload much faster then Larger guns.

Kind of actually follows the historical calibers.

[Silence Suzuka]

Originally posted by ohthot1227:

Originally posted by NT_Dave:

I've found that the 13.5" is a very cost/weight effective gun against ships mounting 16" or larger late era AI BBs. The AI opponent seems to sacrifice speed and armor for turrets and tube size. Thus, a late-era BB mounting 4 Triple 13.5 is significantly faster and better protected. Add that to the thinner AI deck armor, and those long-range, plunging fire hit make short work of them - frequently they flash-fire from magazine hits.

Just my empirical experience. I'm not that good at math.

for me: 10~12" guns are best for pre dreadnought era BB.
11~12" works great for early dreadnought era.
If the enemy ships get too THICK, move on to 13.8~15" guns.
15~16" is the best caliber for modern BBs.
They have excellent pen, destructive power, and reload much faster then Larger guns.

Kind of actually follows the historical calibers.

Ah OK, for my experience it was a bit overkill. I prefer smaller guns in early ages. So in pre-dreadnought era I usually stick to 10, or at most 11 for BB, and 9 for CA, 4 for CL. And fill it with a bunch of smaller 2-3 inch guns, as much as your deck/casement can hold. This goes until Krupp II comes into play and I will have to improve the penetration.

Sadly this game doesn't allow us to design different shell type for secondary guns, like use heavy shell for main gun and light one for secondary.

[ohthot1227]

Originally posted by Silence Suzuka:

Ah OK, for my experience it was a bit overkill. I prefer smaller guns in early ages. So in pre-dreadnought era I usually stick to 10, or at most 11 for BB

My brain understands that is efficient. But my heart keeps saying
"Buuuut 10" pew pews on a BB is not sexy...."

[michaelbcurtis]

Originally posted by Silence Suzuka:

Originally posted by ohthot1227:

for me: 10~12" guns are best for pre dreadnought era BB.
11~12" works great for early dreadnought era.
If the enemy ships get too THICK, move on to 13.8~15" guns.
15~16" is the best caliber for modern BBs.
They have excellent pen, destructive power, and reload much faster then Larger guns.

Kind of actually follows the historical calibers.

Ah OK, for my experience it was a bit overkill. I prefer smaller guns in early ages. So in pre-dreadnought era I usually stick to 10, or at most 11 for BB, and 9 for CA, 4 for CL. And fill it with a bunch of smaller 2-3 inch guns, as much as your deck/casement can hold. This goes until Krupp II comes into play and I will have to improve the penetration.

Sadly this game doesn't allow us to design different shell type for secondary guns, like use heavy shell for main gun and light one for secondary.

It kind of does, usually you use AP for main guns and HE for the secondaries. And you can choose the type of ammo for each of those

[Tomn]

Broadly speaking the thing is that while multi-gun turrets have a penalty to reloading and accuracy, when you consider that you're firing two shots instead of one for less weight that usually mitigates the penalties. Or to put it another way, if you can fire one shot 50% faster you're still putting less lead in the air than you get by firing two shots at once. And by the same token, having a 10% chance to hit is good, but rolling the dice twice on an 8% chance to hit still gets you better overall hit chances. Throw in the fact that the weight savings means you can pile on a lot more guns in general, with better firing arcs, and going multigun is USUALLY a good choice. The penalties just make it so that multiguns aren't as absolutely dominant a choice, especially when you first unlock them.

[CUNK]

I've read all these replies, and you guys are great! I never expected to have so many in depth replies! thanks people!

[SievertChaser]

Unfortunately the drastic difference between gun marks introduces a drastic step in performance that, realistically, probably shouldn't be there.

I generally just stick to historical preferences and try to make them work. So, e.g. French and alt-history post-WWI Russian ships (before the new variable flag was introduced, at any rate) get quad 16-inchers.