are 18-20" guns worth it ?

[Lonesomepoet]

I've never really experimented with using 18-20" guns before but in my recent playthrough as the brits im wondering if they're worth the extra cost. What are peoples thoughts on the matter

[Steeltrap]

They probably are in this game, but not really from a 'reality' perspective.

It's been suggested by some reputable sources (gunnery nerds and the like LOL) that the differences between the USN 16"/50 of the Iowa class vs the 18.1" of the Yamato were negligible at expected combat ranges.

One of the many issues I have with this game is the way IMO it hides TRULY important factors and/or largely removes them from a player's control while shifting their functions into other elements that really WEREN'T responsible.

By which I mean the gunnery system particularly.
Locking shells and propellant into a ship's design is, I suspect, a consequence of how they designed their system in this game, but it is a long way from reality OTHER than the fact certain shell developments might not work in a newer rifle model (such as the USS Colorado class not being able to use later developments of 16" shells due to their breech/chamber size vs later guns).

With the crudity and 'hidden if not exactly clear' mechanics of the game, it's entirely possible, all else being equal, a larger calibre is always better, not least because the game bases accuracy to a significant degree on MAX range (which is largely nonsense IMO).

Well, that went a bit off track, LOL

[Soylent_Greene]

I have always found the 15" guns get up the tech tree so much sooner than the massive guns.
A MK-4 15" is always vastly superior to a MK-2 18"... that tech difference means everything, accuracy, rate of fire, weight...

And even in matching tech levels, I prefer the 15" but then again that's always been my mantra.
Prefer the ROF vs ALPHA STRIKE...
But this is a subjective matter. That Alpha Strike might be preferable when shooting at enemy battleships.

[mlangsdorf]

I'm with Soylent_Greene. Up until about 1945, a 15" gun has better range, accuracy, and rate of fire than an 18" gun. You can mount more 15" guns on a well-armored ship than you can with 18" guns, and the ship is smaller - which means a faster build time that uses less yard space, as well as less crew. Would I rather have 3 large BBs with 3x3 18" guns or 5 medium BBs with 4x4 15" guns?

Any individual hit from an 18" gun is going to do more damage, but more guns firing faster means the 15" gun will likely get more hits and do about the same damage over time. And the faster cycle time means that the 15" armed BB can afford to maneuver to break targeting more often than the 18" armed BB could.

I honestly prefer 14" guns until about 1935, when they start to underperform against the best French, British, or American BBs. Then I go to 15" guns. Anything larger tends to be too much crew and weight for too little benefit.

[Rear]

Probably best to wait until they get to at least Mark 2 or Mark 3 before you start using them, so they can catch up on the stats of the 13-17 inch guns a bit (rotation speed & reload times in particular).

While it is nice to one-shot enemy battleships with a good deck pen, the 18-20 inch guns are generally not very efficient when it comes to weight.

The largest guns sometimes have problems with over-penetration so you also have to tweak them a bit more than usual to get the desired results.

[Bramborough]

I go a little higher than some folks above, generally topping out with 16" for my "main-line" BB's. Haven't yet run into a 100K+ ton AI super-BB which 16" couldn't deal with (well, okay, 16.9", lol). I also keep around my 15" BB/BC until campaign end too, they do fine all the way through.

That said, I do still build a couple of 100Kton 18" or 20" monsters myself. Are they needed? No, not at all. lol, but they're fun. So it's not really an "either-or" question. 15" or 16" fine for most of the BB's; they'll remain competitive through 1965. But no reason not to build one or two big ones anyway just for kicks.

[Kuma]

Originally posted by Steeltrap:

It's been suggested by some reputable sources (gunnery nerds and the like LOL) that the differences between the USN 16"/50 of the Iowa class vs the 18.1" of the Yamato were negligible at expected combat ranges.

Arguably the better gun, the 16"/50 is not the more powerful gun. With super heavy AP shells, the 16"/50 has nearly the same penetration capability but with HC it is a no contest.

The Iowa class never fired AP shells at an enemy ship. During Operation Hailstone, New Jersey and Iowa sank Katori with HC shells.

There is evidence of 46 cm/45 firing AP, HC, and Sanshiki rounds in combat.

Both of these guns can fire two rounds a minute.

The choice between guns should be about weight and the distribution of tonnage between speed, firepower, and armour depending on what the ship is built to do.

[FireWhenReady]

Like the folks above me said, The damage of an 18-20 gun can be hilarious when it hits, but 15-16 inch are usually better range and dpm wise untill you get the mk 2 or 3 18 -20 inch. And by the time I get mk 2-3 18-20 inch, the game is almost over and I don't usually get to actually use them that much.

[Lonesomepoet]

Thanks everyone for the input . I think I might try a small batch of BC with a pair of 18s .

[MSgt Peterson]

From what I've noticed, 16 seems to be the sweet spot, especially if on a fast battleship like design like the Lowa's. In every single campaign, I have yet to lose a Lowa like battleship. 35 knot + 16 inch guns + plus endgame radar seems to be game breaking if you ask me LOL

As for super battleships, while fun as flagships or as a pride of the fleet, there kinda useless given the weight of the 18+ guns and their lack of accuracy, even on 130T SBB's. Like Fire said, by the time you get accurate marks of those guns, the game basically over and you probably have a highly efficient fleet.

!5's are pretty solid too. I find 13-14 to be pretty difficult to use later on for obvious reasons unless your going with an all big gun, shell spamming warship, which is viable since it's pretty easy to knock out a enemy warship through structural/fire.

[Nitemares]

I've tried the 18 and 19 inch guns, never the 20.

And I've had the enemy use 18-20s on ME!

My observation from the 18/19 is: they wreck even battle ships with just a couple of hits. Seriously. Sank a 110kt german battleship with 16" armour with just 3 shell hits.

The issue is getting those hits. The guns re very slow to fire leaving you waiting for a long while.

Being on the receiving end.... SUCKS!!!

My battle ships are bricks. 20" of deck and belt @ 147% armour strength.... It's wet paper to a 20.9" shell. Every hit was 7k to 18k damage without hitting anything vital. And sadly, more often then not, they hit some thing vital right through the armour (all or nothing internal amour adds 6" more) And there goes an engine, or a magazine.

Thankfully they are SLOW to fire.

[Lord_Clang]

i use a variety of calibers from 11in to 18in it really depend on what the role of the ship is

[Soylent_Greene]

I built a late game BC with MK-V 11" guns, max caliber, and a 47sec reload before modification, got it down to just over 40 seconds
Had A, B, X & Y turrets, as well as two broadsides, all in triple mounts
Also had 32 (16x side) quad MK-V 2,9" which had a 14km range, anything small (DD or CL) came close was smashed
All the enemy CA, BC and some of their BBs were all smoked
The later from fires and superstructure hits

But then again, wasn't that what the Battle Cruiser was made to do?

[Hidden Gunman]

Under the current tweaks, yes,although the rof means you need them paired with the gear and design to make them hyper accurrate (relatively speaking).

The current version amd patching has made ships, particularly the large ones, very difficult to sink when they are equipped with high survivability tech. I've had mine and AI destroyers survive hits from 16" guns, and high tonnage BB's take hundreds of hits from 15"+ and thousands of smaller calibre and still continue fighting.

I suspect thats likely to be a mainly late game issue, in the area where the devs have stated that the modelling goes wonky due to pushing out the ending period of the game.

[Steeltrap]

Originally posted by Kuma:

Originally posted by Steeltrap:

It's been suggested by some reputable sources (gunnery nerds and the like LOL) that the differences between the USN 16"/50 of the Iowa class vs the 18.1" of the Yamato were negligible at expected combat ranges.

Arguably the better gun, the 16"/50 is not the more powerful gun. With super heavy AP shells, the 16"/50 has nearly the same penetration capability but with HC it is a no contest.

The choice between guns should be about weight and the distribution of tonnage between speed, firepower, and armour depending on what the ship is built to do.

I agree, and you concluding sentence sums up nicely the point I was trying to make about assessing various merits/compromises of differing armament sizes, using the 16" vs 18.1" as potential examples.
Cheers

[CheapSushi]

Other than the pure cool factor of it, I found more success with using a small BB/BC with a single barrel 19/20inch center hulled, that's set up to basically be a sniper, while optimizing the stability & accuracy of the platform. I just have it following my main battle division. But of course, doesn't look or feel realistic, which is fun in itself.