I kept calling the missile ships laser ships. I don't know why I kept doing that, since they don't have real lasers. 🤔 Also I forgot the actual name of the second Star Wars prequel. XD
Ships being female is a tradition from when sailing was dangerous af. It was the idea of a female or motherly figure guiding and comforting the men onboard through storms or towards the end. Might be related to how fathers are seen as more disciplinary and mothers are comforting.
I won’t make the same mistake from last time… I think crams will make a miraculous recovery, if they don’t win. I don’t know what I’m gonna do because I’m not planning to *LOSE*
Fun fact: In 1942 the USS New Orleans lost its whole bow forward of its second turret to a Japanese torpedo and survived. It proceeded to sail stern-first, or backwards, to port and was entirely repaired and then served out the rest of the war and ended up decommissioned in 1947. US damcon was insane back then. Edit: the term is 'crossing the T' and it was really the absolute worst during the Age of Sail when chase armaments were incredibly light, where two ships with ~40 guns apiece would fight and if you had to fire only from your fore guns you'd be lucky to have four light weapons on target. Ever since the first superfiring turret position it's been an extremely valuable tactic but many ships will still have at least half of their firepower still available while presenting a much harder target to hit.
"Ever since the first-" You're looking at the tactic in a vacuum of a 1v1. In a fleet action, crossing the enemy's T allows every single one of your ship to focus the enemy down, while the enemy's fire arcs are blocked by the preceding ships. Also, due to how shells inherent the momentum of the vessel they're fired from, the ships being crossed are more likely to overshoot a target, while the ships doing the crossing will end up "raking" the incoming ships with shells. Even modern missile defense involves "crossing the T" of incoming missiles to allow for more volume of fire from interceptor missiles and CIWS.
@@SuwinTzi Fleet actions have always been the rarity, and focusing on them has nearly always been a mistake. For every Battle of Jutland there are dozens if not hundreds of other engagements that shape their particular conflict, en masse, more than singular battles that attract the attention better actually do. Hell, Leyte Gulf and Jutland are the only two major instances 'crossing the T' in the last hundred-ish years that I can think of and neither played any sort of major role in their respective conflicts. Jutland because all the dying was happening on land anyway and Leyte because at that point it was just mopping up anything that could be a threat in the future. They weren't examples of 'crossing the T' being a super important aspect of battle, they were just examples of how inferior forces got further outplayed. Also of course everything always considers 'crossing the T' even if its effectiveness is not as world-ending as it once was. It's good if you can get it but the best it does is degrade performance, not nearly obliterate it. The biggest reason being that nasty pest physics - ships further fore and aft of you have to move faster to keep formation. Just.... just think of how the base of a lever barely moves but the tip moves a lot more. Also I think you're mistaking the battlegroup tactics of modern surface vessels (fleets are larger than even supercarrier groups) for fleet tactics.
@@darwinism8181 You imply that superfiring turrets reduced the value of crossing the T. You claim that there's hundreds of individual singular battles but don't bother to name even one to back up what you said. And then you go on a tangent. At this point it seems your sources are you made it up.
Overall cram benefits from size a lot more than anything else, theres not much point in multi barrel unless you are doing absolutely massive crams that would just overkill anything they touch.
I kept calling the missile ships laser ships. I don't know why I kept doing that, since they don't have real lasers. 🤔
Also I forgot the actual name of the second Star Wars prequel. XD
Ships being female is a tradition from when sailing was dangerous af. It was the idea of a female or motherly figure guiding and comforting the men onboard through storms or towards the end.
Might be related to how fathers are seen as more disciplinary and mothers are comforting.
@@SuwinTzi Makes sense. I'm just very literal minded and the thought of giving inanimate objects genders constantly amuses me. XD
Borderwise, we have great news! You *can* do tournaments, if you want. Probably. I'm sure you'd get enough entries for at least small ones.
@@oygemprime3864 I know. I'm just juggling too much stuff with FtD at the moment, and tournament done properly is a lot of work. 😅
I'd very much enjoy a tourny. Might even make a submission, if that's allowed
I won’t make the same mistake from last time… I think crams will make a miraculous recovery, if they don’t win.
I don’t know what I’m gonna do because I’m not planning to *LOSE*
Fun fact: In 1942 the USS New Orleans lost its whole bow forward of its second turret to a Japanese torpedo and survived. It proceeded to sail stern-first, or backwards, to port and was entirely repaired and then served out the rest of the war and ended up decommissioned in 1947.
US damcon was insane back then.
Edit: the term is 'crossing the T' and it was really the absolute worst during the Age of Sail when chase armaments were incredibly light, where two ships with ~40 guns apiece would fight and if you had to fire only from your fore guns you'd be lucky to have four light weapons on target. Ever since the first superfiring turret position it's been an extremely valuable tactic but many ships will still have at least half of their firepower still available while presenting a much harder target to hit.
It is pretty insane sometimes what ships can survive. XD
@@BorderWise12 "Oh, damn, about 40 meters of the front of our ship is just... not there anymore."
"Sail backwards?"
"Sail backwards."
"Ever since the first-"
You're looking at the tactic in a vacuum of a 1v1. In a fleet action, crossing the enemy's T allows every single one of your ship to focus the enemy down, while the enemy's fire arcs are blocked by the preceding ships. Also, due to how shells inherent the momentum of the vessel they're fired from, the ships being crossed are more likely to overshoot a target, while the ships doing the crossing will end up "raking" the incoming ships with shells.
Even modern missile defense involves "crossing the T" of incoming missiles to allow for more volume of fire from interceptor missiles and CIWS.
@@SuwinTzi Fleet actions have always been the rarity, and focusing on them has nearly always been a mistake. For every Battle of Jutland there are dozens if not hundreds of other engagements that shape their particular conflict, en masse, more than singular battles that attract the attention better actually do.
Hell, Leyte Gulf and Jutland are the only two major instances 'crossing the T' in the last hundred-ish years that I can think of and neither played any sort of major role in their respective conflicts. Jutland because all the dying was happening on land anyway and Leyte because at that point it was just mopping up anything that could be a threat in the future. They weren't examples of 'crossing the T' being a super important aspect of battle, they were just examples of how inferior forces got further outplayed.
Also of course everything always considers 'crossing the T' even if its effectiveness is not as world-ending as it once was. It's good if you can get it but the best it does is degrade performance, not nearly obliterate it. The biggest reason being that nasty pest physics - ships further fore and aft of you have to move faster to keep formation. Just.... just think of how the base of a lever barely moves but the tip moves a lot more. Also I think you're mistaking the battlegroup tactics of modern surface vessels (fleets are larger than even supercarrier groups) for fleet tactics.
@@darwinism8181 You imply that superfiring turrets reduced the value of crossing the T. You claim that there's hundreds of individual singular battles but don't bother to name even one to back up what you said. And then you go on a tangent.
At this point it seems your sources are you made it up.
Still dual barrel cram on medium sized crams ahhhhhhh, oh well will probably work out fine
You consider those medium-sized? They're 13x13 and pretty tall, so larger than most CRAMs in Neter.
@@BorderWise12 yeah but theres only like 1 decent Cram craft in neter that i can think of so that doesnt really compare well
(Casiophea)
Why is dual barrel bad?
@@oygemprime3864 less power, easier to shoot down, wastes more time on the reload.
The only upside is redundancy.
Overall cram benefits from size a lot more than anything else, theres not much point in multi barrel unless you are doing absolutely massive crams that would just overkill anything they touch.