Tribals, Battles, and Darings doesn’t have any specifics of the Daring’s 1959-60 modernisations, however it provides the following document as a source, “ADM 1/27569, Staff Requirements for Modernisation of Daring Class Destroyers.”
Royal Navy destroyers since 1945 by Leo Marriott mentions more detailed information about these modernisations, however there is no citation for this, so I cant follow exactly what source they used for this information.
Daring Class Destroyers by Neil McCart would probably contain more detailed information if you want a book source, however I do not have a copy of this.
@HK_Reporter how has your experience with the new fire mechanic been?
I have been playing Queen Mary and it takes a fire in the barbet 3 seconds to blow you up. Happens three times now, you don’t even have a chance to extinguish it
Yeah the new fire system has really destroyed the survivability of most ships. Worst hit seem to be American and Japanese, but in the worst case any ship can be basically immediately destroyed. I’ve seen lots of near instant detonations that don’t quite feel fair. Notably shell room detonations now account for the total explosive mass of the shells in the module, so you really shouldn’t ever bring HE if you have a choice now and shouldn’t fill your stowage entirely as it can be about as lethal as a magazine detonation now just with a longer death time. I like the system in theory but I think it needs two big changes. First, marginally increase the time it takes for fire to get to and detonate ammo modules on the low end, giving the player more time to extinguish fires and avoid detonation. Second, make shell room modules only detonate to fire damage. IRL they were not particularly vulnerable to detonation from shock but would eventually detonate if exposed to extreme heat long enough, with devastating consequences similar to their new level of damage. Lundgren’s revised analysis of Kirishima’s wreck goes into it in detail as that happened to the ship, very interesting read available free online.
Yeah, those would be good changes. Actually have the fire propergate from section to section and for it to take at least a few seconds to move down each layer.
As it stands currently there’s a lot of variation in the actual models as well which isn’t helping things. I don’t think there was ever a ton of modeling when it came to flash protection on the ships, but there’s also the disparity between ships with the powder handling room modeled as part of the magazine dm on some but not others. Probably things ought to be more standardized in that regard since I’d imagine that was a poor man’s way of accomplishing what the current system does but I would guess now makes those ships doubly vulnerable.
I’m hopeful they’ll improve it. There’s at least the bones of a good system here this time and I don’t think it’ll take a terrible amount of work to fix
However developers cannot make the DM exactly as shown in the plans because it adds up a lot of complexity while giving very little difference to gameplay, because the projection of magazine in line of incoming gun fire is always a rectangle. Besides, as explained many times, the X-ray model is only for cosmetic and does not reflect the actual DM. There’s no problem with the height of magazine either, the DM exactly matches the dimension of magazine compartments in the blueprints in side projections.
