KPN Choe Hyon

[cunning tartan]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choe_Hyon-class_destroyer
KPN Choe hyon is considered by squirrel .
while the arnament is in doubt , i will be using this forum to make clear its arnament .

The choe hyon has

• The destroyer also has what looks like four turreted four-cell Bulsae-4 launchers , which is a anti-tank guided missile , which is nouse for mk .
  But its sister ship
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_destroyer_Kang_Kon
  which is also a choe hyon class has
• The destroyer also has four turreted four-cell launchers, capable of firing short-range guided missiles, anti-submarine charges, or loitering munitions
  so this could be considered .

it has 4 torpedoes 533 mm .
And it has cruise missiles and balastic missiles

• Notably, the exhibition displayed a Hwasong-11-series ballistic missile, as well as Kumsong-3 and Hwasal-2 cruise missiles.[12] The ballistic missile model apparently similar to Hwasong-11S.[17]

it has a speed of 30knots
https://baike.baidu.com/en/item/Choe Hyon-class destroyer/1499937 [source]

[cunning tartan]

the air defense in the ship

according to wiki , this air defense :/

[cunning tartan]

yeah there are 2ships CHOE yon and Kang Kon

so oth have different air defence i

I am using the first one's air defense

-# currently remodelling KPN Choe Hyon , Currently reworked and the superstructur is perfect !

[lavish mulch]

excited to see it

[cunning tartan]

Pongae-5 [SAM]

533mm 53-65K torpedo launchers [Torpedo]

Hwasal-2 [Cruise Missile]

Kumsong-3 [Surface to Srface Anti ship missile]

hwasong-11a [Ballistic Missile]

[cunning tartan]

Remodeling Done 🎉

Hwasal-2 [Cruise Missile]

533mm53-65k - torpedo

Kumsong-3 [Surface to Surface Anti-ship Missile]

Pongae-5 [SAM]

tried modelling hwasong-11a [Ballistic Missile] , but cldnt to hard

[tawny wagon]

looks like a 055

[cunning tartan]

they re clearly diffeent but ,yeah North Korea uses Russian and chinese techniqes to build so they are similar in shape

[tawny wagon]

i mean like the model of it

[cunning tartan]

yeah smewht

[cunning tartan]

hwasong-11a [Ballistic Missile]

[cunning tartan]

KPN Choe Hyon in-game be like 👇

[karmic ore]

You Mean The Flamingo rocket????????

[cunning tartan]

uhm , Not sure

[tawny wagon]

is this ever gonna get added ?

[cunning tartan]

It will be added mostly in the next Mk48 update , Squirrel is busy updating other games atm

[tawny wagon]

ok dokey thanks

muad dib is so curious idk why

[lavish mulch]

what lvl will it be?

[cunning tartan]

Mostly level 9

[ember verge]

Choi Hyun’s stealth and propulsion aren’t as good as Zumwalt’s, and its VLS count is lower than the 055. Wouldn’t putting it at tier 9 be a bit too high?

[cunning tartan]

Main reason , it has kirov sized large VLS , meaning you couldlanch Kirov like missile in any direcion nlik kirov which is only front .. and maybe squirel might make a new system where ballastic missiles nee more SAMs to intercept ..

[ember verge]

I’m more into the second part you mentioned. Rumor has it that missiles like the Hwasong-11 can carry cluster munitions, making them way harder to intercept, with insane penetration capability. Maxing out the fire rate and performance on something like that feels way better than just spamming more missiles. Gotta respect how thorough you guys are when gathering info👍

[normal kindle]

hear me out

considering North Korea, or DPRK, is a globally notorious conuntry, especially for the conditions its people live in, and being a very aggressive dictatorship, wouldn't adding an NK ship be considered glorifying NK

because apprently Russian/Soviet ships aren't added so as to not glorify Russia because of the war in Ukraine, but I don't see why we shouldn't expand that logic

[cunning tartan]

uhm no , thts not logical at all , its a game , we are not creating something political to see all this details , if we do then there is no country that innocent with navy to be in mk48 , dont be offiended but its the reality ...

and for us NK cld be bad but there are people for whom Nk is good , and for us USA could be good but there are people who dont like USA too , if we were to consider ur perspective and then surely shld consider theirs too and if we keep cnsidering these i dont think there should be any ship in mk 💀

[normal kindle]

i agree

my point is in the light of everything else, giving that treatment to russia is surely unfair

[ember verge]

yeah, gotta keep politics out of the game

[normal kindle]

definetly

[sweet anchor]

I feel like putting a 5000 ton light (tonnage wise) destroyer above the Kirov, Hyuga, Zumwalt, and Yasen would be a bit much

You also do have to remember that Squirrel nerfs these ships for balance

The Arleigh Burke in game doesnt have access to any of its tomahawks, and the Kirov only has 8/20 of its carrier killer missles

After Balance Level 6 would probably be the best

The 055 also has 112 VLS cells, yet only has access to 14 in game

Also I have a feeling that we already have too many ships

Between Levels 6-8

Yes the design is good, but we have 6 ships already in all of those levels

Even if we added more ballistic missles for a special ability for the destroyer and put it at level 7, it would still be 7 ships

[tawny wagon]

hes shifting around the levels

[sweet anchor]

Interesting, can you link squirrels original message? (Its not that I dont believe you but I want to see it from squirrel himself)

[sweet anchor]

Also since this is a light destroyer like squirrel said, subs will absolutely demosh this thing, along with most of the level 8+ capital ships

Balance wise you cannot tell me that the kirov with its insane amount of sams gets 6 and this thing gets enough to protect it from a kirov salvo

This is like firmly level 6 due to its low health and relatively eh systems AFTER BALANCE, but its ballistic missle thing is cool

[sweet anchor]

In mk48 terms think of it like a level 6 osa

[sweet anchor]

@fresh bison Either the russian argument breaks or this ship does...

[tawny wagon]

bruhh we dont need more bans ngl

[tawny wagon]

umm icl icba to find it its fine if you dont believe me

[cunning tartan]

bruh please , the russian ban is somewhat fine as of its the developers personal choice , dont make up things to ban NK 😭 , yall dont like new ships in mk or wht?

[ember verge]

The Choi Hyun was something Atlantis spent a ton of time researching and modeling — honestly impressed he managed to dig up that kind of detailed info from a country as closed off as North Korea. Putting aside all the debates about tiering and role, I really like the ship. I hope it gets added, and I also hope the other great ships Owl modeled make it in too , just to make the game feel more complete

[sweet anchor]

Ngl the russian forward facing ships are kinda cool, Im just pointing it out edit: oh also its not made up north korean troops did fight in the ukraine war
Edit: For squirrel, upon further inspection they never fought inside of ukraine and only fought in the Kursk Counteroffensive

we need more levels ngl cause when we were just quickfiring destroyers for level 5 a lot of interesting ships came up

10->12 levels would free up 12 slots of ships, this easily could go in level 7 with a 12 tiered system, along with the burke

[sweet anchor]

@cunning tartan The ship does provide a unique vls ballistic missile glass cannon, as of current how do you want to balance it in game?

[cunning tartan]

tbh , I am not the one who is deciding its balance in-game , its squirrel , he told he would test the ship with different ammo counts and decide which suits the best ..

my plan was

[sweet anchor]

I'd say like 2-3 of the ballistic missles at max because not only have they never been publicly tested (and NK WILL show us when they do) but also due to the fact that it is one shot from any sub lev4+, so for it to be balanced it would need to have a realistic damage count for a ship level 5-7

Also for a ship to have more than 2 offensive Missiles just doesn't exist in Mk48, so either the kumsong or the hwasal has to go

@fresh bison just some suggestions for the ship

Another thing is no ship in Mk48 has 7 armaments but the planned upgraded Burke will have 6, so your ship would be fine if you removed one of the offensive missles

[fresh bison]

the actual (soft) limit is 5

[sweet anchor]

Interesting

Potentially 4-6 ballistics to replace both kumsong and hwasal

[cunning tartan]

@fresh bison have you planned its arnament?

[sweet anchor]

Otherwise very interesting ship! I am interested to see in real life how it operates, but the ship design in game is very nice!

[fresh bison]

not precisely, but it doesn't seem too hard

[cunning tartan]

i mean everyone are just flushing it out to be in lvl 9

[sweet anchor]

This thing gets demolished by every sub level 4+

As well as that no ship gets flushed out

[cunning tartan]

it has 4 torps..

and a heli

[sweet anchor]

Yeah so does the kirov yet my Seawolf and a decoy demolished it

[cunning tartan]

uhm i mean isnt tht the game..

[sweet anchor]

Look this is very impressive of the North Koreans but there is no way this thing could go up against capital ships like the kirov or yasen, and it is a glass cannon

[cunning tartan]

u can test the ship in mk49 new room lvl 9

[sweet anchor]

I am fine with it being level 5-7 but with the Burke's anti ballistic sm2, 3, and 6 it goes head to head with it

[cunning tartan]

all the weapons are not its actual

[sweet anchor]

Mk49 is a good testing ground before mk48

[normal kindle]

that is the thing though

i do want more ships int he game

the russians have tons of good ships

I don't get why only russia is being treated in this way

[sweet anchor]

Like ngl their ship philosphy is very distinct

I get the treatment because of the devs wishes but that doesnt mean their naval doctrine and ship design is any worse

[normal kindle]

yeah

[sweet anchor]

Quick side note let me check how its going

Giant stalemate

IN 46 DAYS WW1 WILL HAVE BEEN SHORTER

DANG

Squirrel will there be more levels per chance

Ik adding more levels is a heavy design desicion

But I just want to know if its in consideration

[fair girder]

@fresh bison May I ask why you are fine with adding this North Korean ship and not Russian/Soviet ships? North Korea has been a strong supporter of the war in Ukraine, sending munitions and thousands of troops to fight alongside the Russians. It seems like a double standard.

[fresh bison]

as I've said, I don't want to add ships that glorify an ongoing offensive war. relative to Russian/Soviet ships, I don't think North Korean ships are anywhere near as related to any ongoing offensive war, even accounting for highly-transactional arms deals. it's not a double standard, just two categories of ships that happen to land on opposite sides of the threshold I have chosen.

I was inclined to delay the inclusion of additional US ships, due to the war in Iran, but that is hopefully coming to an end (?)

[sweet anchor]

To back up squirrels point NK troops only have helped in the Kursk Counteroffensive

[sweet anchor]

Nimtz my guy please

[fair girder]

So this is all just to prevent glorifying wars in a war-based game?

[fresh bison]

I see a distinction between real ongoing wars and fictional naval battles in a 2D game

[fair girder]

So who is going to play mk48.io and think “wow the ukraine war is so cool because of these russian ships in game”?

[sweet anchor]

And technically geopolitcally Iran and Russia are allied, sending weapons and aid to each other. It is morally gray for the Anti-US one as Iran, like North Korea, is also sending aid in the form of drones to Russia.

Morally things like this get complicated

[fresh bison]

it's not hypothetical; multiple players have sent chat messages or used names/team names closely related to the war, including all sides

[fair girder]

And you think that this is caused by the Russian ships in game? To me there’s no causal link. I think it’s just people either trying to get a reaction out of others or spread a political opinion.

[sweet anchor]

Hypothetically, if one were to create lore for Mk48 and you kinda skirt over the ships to a new nation that functionally is the same, it should make the problem less severe

Also names like that are kinda guaranteed in io games

especially ones dealing with war

Dont even tell me how Diep looks bro

Diep names are instagram comments

[fair girder]

I just don’t like the double standard personally and don’t see the need for all of this. It’s a 2D io game.

[fair girder]

Agreed.

No one played Kirov and went “wow let me change my name to something political about the Ukraine war”

[fresh bison]

happens all the time

[fair girder]

They don’t choose the name for the ship. They choose the ship for the name.

[fair girder]

And this game has moderators so wuy not just restrict them?

[sweet anchor]

I havent seen much of the war after the news reporting on it front lines then

[fair girder]

It’s been 4 years for crying out loud.

[sweet anchor]

But at the same time @fair girder I could imagine some people, especially the europe servers, being angry at an addition like that

[fair girder]

If people can’t distinguish between a game and real life, they have the issue.

[sweet anchor]

I could imagine people in Europe being somewhat annoyed at Russian content considering they are now the logistics backbone of the Ukraine war

[fair girder]

We call for unique ships but then decide to remove a nation that has some of the most unique designs out there.

[fresh bison]

the more extreme position would be to remove existing ships when their country of origin starts a war. that's basically what Ukraine is doing, but for street names and stuff

there are already 8 Russian/Soviet ships in the game, which is plenty

[sweet anchor]

Guy aint wrong

[fresh bison]

(just like the # of US ships is also "plenty")

[sweet anchor]

ALSO @fair girder

I just rememebered

[fair girder]

We have WW2 German ships, US ships and will now have a NK ship.

[sweet anchor]

If you want the older soviet designs you can go to the indian navy

[fair girder]

Then why don’t you remove all US and Russian ships?

[sweet anchor]

The Indian Navy were allies of the soviets and when I was researching for the new LVL5 I saw a lot of their destroyers were soviet designs

Problem solved chat

[fair girder]

I personally see a double standard.

[fair girder]

Oh so now we’re going to bypass this issue theough India? It’s the same ship just with Indian flags on it.

[fresh bison]

I'm not currently doing "the more extreme position"

[sweet anchor]

I mean it satifies the Unique ship requirement

[fresh bison]

in turnfight we have the J-5, a Chinese derivative of the MiG 17

[sweet anchor]

You can question squirrels morals but theres 1 Indian ship in the game to 8 Russian, I think another Indian ship wouldnt hurt, especially to add another unique ship ability

[fair girder]

I’m mind boggled at how much of a mixed message this is. We want to avoid glorifying Rissia but then everything else goes.

[fair girder]

The Indian ships are garbage. They have worse weapons than the Russian ones.

[sweet anchor]

Well you can question his morals but the too many ships of a nation thing is a legimate concern

[fresh bison]

even before 2022, US/USSR ships were over-represented

[fair girder]

I don’t care about morals, this is common sense. Not allowing Russian ships does nothing other than cause confusion and a double standard.

Over representation is valid.

[sweet anchor]

From a gameplay perspective this argument is kinda futile

Squirrel wouldnt add any more soviet ships anyways for a while

[fair girder]

So will Nimitz get added?

[sweet anchor]

Lemme count american ships rq

10

Man I really want the nimtz to be added

It and the Arleigh are icons

[fresh bison]

yes it's planned. things that could delay it:

• not having a suitable F-35 model
• working on other games
• resumption of hostilities in Iran

[fair girder]

Also Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 but ships were still added to the game (Idon’t think this game is older than 2014)

[fresh bison]

nuance.

I said "ongoing" war

mk48 didn't exist in 2014 (or during WW2, obviously)

[sweet anchor]

There was no indication untill early 2022 that they were going to invade

[fair girder]

But the US has started a war with Iran, bombed Venezuela and threatened the sovereignty of Canada and Greenland.

[sweet anchor]

Canada and Greenland are kinda over atp

Venezuela and Iran have done "great" things to their people

Just to muddy the moral waters even more

[fair girder]

Oh, not to mention forcing the people of Cuba to starve to death and completely destroy their exonomy.

Again, why can’t we separate wars, morals, politics and religions from mk48.io?

Focus on gameplay and variety, not wars.

[fresh bison]

while valid, under those standards, many other countries wouldn't be eligible for new ships. I prefer the "don't glorify and ongoing offensive war" standard that I mentioned above.

[sweet anchor]

Cuba has also done "great" things to their people

Yall wondering whose side im on while im just here for the love of the game

[fair girder]

Then why not remove Arleigh Burke? They’ve fired hindreds of missiles at Iran, including one of which that hit a school.

How about this, allow ships that are not actively partaking in war while banning the ones that are.

Seems reasonable.

[sweet anchor]

Haelos let the man live lmao

[fresh bison]

I'm not going to defend obvious war crimes however the standard I discussed was in relation to new ships. I've never removed a ship.

[fair girder]

Well then keep your dysfunctional, useless, wishy washy, wiggly piggly, double standard. I don’t know what to say man.

[sweet anchor]

Thats great

Like I said this changed nothing

Anyways moral conflcit aside @fresh bison will there potentially be more levels

[fresh bison]

I'm not against adding level 11, 12, etc. if level 9, 10, etc. were full

[fair girder]

Sure, lets add more levels and fill them with some dinky ahh Indian knockoff ships lmao.

[sweet anchor]

10->12->15 would be my best guess for long term level additions should there be eneough ships

[fair girder]

Let’s add a paddleboat, at least it’s not involved in wars.

[sweet anchor]

They are the same designs

Some of them are direct purchases

[fair girder]

So we will add a ship that is Russian built, and who’s profits are used to fuel the Russian warmachine. Great idea!

[sweet anchor]

Dude when I was asking for more levels I meant ships of any nation like Europe or South/SE/E Asia

[fair girder]

Or just do like any other game and block out the war. You look at War Thunder, Cold Waters or SeaPower, all of them are able to keep game and real life separate.

[sweet anchor]

At the end of the day if squirrel doesn't want to add ships from nations in active conflict thats fine

Its not like the dudes personally attacking your existence

[fair girder]

Of course, he built the game. I’m just trying to show my point of view .

[sweet anchor]

And youve very obviously shown it

[fair girder]

Good.

[sweet anchor]

Now Sh*t Up and continue on with your life

Apperntly shut is blocked

[fair girder]

We want uniqueness but these nations all copy each others designs.

[sweet anchor]

Yeah and some of those designs haven't been made inside the game

[fair girder]

Calm down pal.

[sweet anchor]

Whos double standards now?

[fair girder]

Like which?

[sweet anchor]

Anti Air Frigates, more Forward facers could be added, minesweepers, different armaments and missle configs

[fair girder]

I think that picking on Russia while allowing North Korea who is engaged in an active war is wrong and constitutes as a double standard.

[sweet anchor]

WW2 Heavy Cruisers, Battlecruisers

[fair girder]

And which level would they go? And which ships?

[sweet anchor]

I argued this ship down to a level 6

And argued for the Arleigh to go to level 6

Thats what this whole forum is for

[fair girder]

Those are types, but which ship specifically.

[sweet anchor]

Not just this post but mainly all of them

[sweet anchor]

Newest one me and owl proposed is the county class

To fill in the level 5 destroyer role

[fair girder]

What country?

[sweet anchor]

British

In new level 5 destroyer theres like a dozen ships of different nations

[fair girder]

But we already have British ships.

[sweet anchor]

https://discord.com/channels/847143438939717663/1497413916719054898

Above level 4 theres two light cruisers

We got like 5 man

And like more than half of them are kinda mid

[fair girder]

But level 4 already has a destroyer and Britain is already represented.

[sweet anchor]

My guy you either just called the dreadnought a destroyer or the Fletcher british

Yall this is pure ragebait atp

[fair girder]

Are you fr?

Which country is dreadnought from?

[sweet anchor]

The British, the "Destroyer" with giant guns

What is your argument here dude

[fair girder]

You have it the wrong way around.

[sweet anchor]

Thats what you implied idiot

[fair girder]

What are you saying my guy?

Dude think clearly for a second

[fair girder]

this ^

level 4 has Fletcher destroyer, and Britain is already represented via Dreadnought

[sweet anchor]

Im talking about level 5
And im talking about buffing every destroyer level 5+

[fair girder]

I wouldn't be so quick to calling people idiots.

[sweet anchor]

to make room for the county

[sweet anchor]

Once again, whos the double standard now

[fair girder]

But County is British. We have Fairmile D, Oberon, Dreadnought, Leander, Town and Astute which are all British.

[fair girder]

Your claim is false. You misunderstood what I had said.

We have 6 British vessels and want to add the 7th? Why?

[sweet anchor]

And if squirrel wants to not add it for that reason thats fine

Like I said, theres a very multinational selection of destroyers to choose form in https://discord.com/channels/847143438939717663/1497413916719054898

Its just its both country and ability uniqueness

[fair girder]

Only 4 missiles at level 5? Bro what?

[sweet anchor]

Its more anti air

8 anti air missles

That's its destroyer ability

[fair girder]

Okay but either way Squirrel will not allow too many British ships.

[sweet anchor]

Ok then it just fails

[sweet anchor]

Fun discussion if your here for the Cheo Hyon then you can go here to the reply to get passed all the yap

[fair girder]

Nah mk48 is doing Russia dirty.

Allowing North Korea and US but not Russia is crazy.

What's next? Iranian navy vessels?

How about we add Israeli ships? That sounds cool.

[sweet anchor]

My guy dm squirrel or some shi let us talk about the Choe Hyon here

[fair girder]

Okay.

How much damage will Choe Hyon do?

[sweet anchor]

He'll test around with the values but prob somewhere close too kirovs missles

[fair girder]

Then why is it planned for level 9 if it does less damage?

[sweet anchor]

Thats why I am here to get it down to level 6 preferably

[fair girder]

Level 6 is Kolkata.

[sweet anchor]

We are probably adding more levels

[sweet anchor]

^

[fair girder]

But they aren't full yet.

Level 9 and 10 still have space.

[sweet anchor]

Soon though

I dont nesecarily think that the top two levels need to be completely full

[fair girder]

What about just give Choe Hyon more damage than Kirov?

[sweet anchor]

Its sub meat

Thats why

[fair girder]

It has torpedoes no?

[sweet anchor]

Have you heard of the concept of a singular decoy

[fair girder]

Does it have decoys?

[sweet anchor]

I really dont want to explain all of this again so please go back before all the yap and see my reasoning

[sweet anchor]

Submarines do

[fair girder]

Does Choe Hyon have decoys?

[sweet anchor]

No

Your talking about towed decoys which no ship in mk has

[fair girder]

So why not give Choe Hyon decoy?

[sweet anchor]

Because it doesn't have it

In real life

[fair girder]

What kind of destroyer has no decoys?

[sweet anchor]

Have you touched mk48 before?

[fair girder]

Perhaps.

No but why would a country build a destroyer and not give it decoys?

I highly doubt that it has none.

[sweet anchor]

NK is secretive and all the things we know from it are from propaganda televisles

The ship could very well be a floating scrap pile but we have seen it launch cruise missles

Also no ship in Mk has towed decoys so it doesnt matter regardless

[fair girder]

Okay so why not just give it decoys?

We give submarines decoys, why not Choe Hyon?

[sweet anchor]

Because no surface ship in the game has decoys

Choe Hyons not sub meat cause it doesnt have decoys its sub meat cause its a 5000 ton ship

[fair girder]

And why can't that change?

[sweet anchor]

Its been proposed squirrels just working on other things

[fair girder]

What does tonnage have to do with anything here?

[sweet anchor]

Tonnage is one of the key factors in deciding ship health

[fair girder]

I doubt it's difficult to make decoys work. Subs have them, just do the same for ships.

[fair girder]

Oh, what are the others?

[sweet anchor]

Not my call

[sweet anchor]

Ship Armor Belt, Size

I'm assuming at least

[fair girder]

Oh you don't actually know.

[sweet anchor]

I can assume based on ship healths

[fair girder]

Then tonnage claim is pointless.

[sweet anchor]

I mean you can go look at the ship healths yourself

That is if youve even played the game

[fair girder]

Leander is 7000-10000 tons. Dreadnought is 18000-20000 tons and has more armor. Explain why Leander has more health AND torpedo resistance than Dreadnought.

This contradicts your argument about tonnage and belt armor.

[sweet anchor]

_' < ' _ /
Balancing is all I can guess cause like the leander kinda needs it

[fair girder]

Needs it? Leander is complete dogpoop.

You would have to give the guns like 50% more range and 25% more damage.

Same for Town.

[sweet anchor]

Thats a buff that can probably happen but yet again, not my call

[fair girder]

Tanker has more health than Dreadnought. A floating bomb more resistant than an early battleship? Really?

[sweet anchor]

For the third time not my call, also tankers are hard to sink

Crude Oil is also less dense than water

And Tankers are also just really large

Even the one ours is based off of have reserve buoyancy

[fair girder]

Um but it goes BOOM.

Also I’m not calling for a nerf, I’m trying to figure out what health is based off of.

[sweet anchor]

My other two points still stand (also crude oil is more flammable than boomable)

[fair girder]

So far it seems random for balance.

[fair girder]

Not really. A warship can soak up way more damage than a small oil tanker.

Dreadnought has like what? 12 inch thick metal armor belt?

[sweet anchor]

Tankers are highly compartmentalized

[fair girder]

So are warships.

[sweet anchor]

They dont have that much of an difference in health

[fair girder]

Dude imagine a battleship firing at a tanker? The tanker would go up in flames first hit.

[sweet anchor]

But it would take a while to sink

[fair girder]

Not if torpedoed. And it would either way be much faster than a battleship.

[sweet anchor]

It could take the full salvo though and then sink

[fair girder]

Like I'm sorry, but there is literally no way a small tanker will outlast a battleship if attacked. Like no.

[sweet anchor]

It doesnt

The dreadnought takes some time, but it does very quickly go down

i mean in retrospect to the tanker

[fair girder]

Only if you hit the ammo mags. Otherwise the Tanker will go down much faster. Tanker damage control is not even close to a battleship.

[sweet anchor]

Like the dreadnought takes a bit to kill the tanker, but it does quickly go down launching full salvos

in the game

[fair girder]

I don't want to take this too seriously, but the health levels are strange.

Like why does Leander and Town get more torpedo resistance than Dreadnought?

What the hell? Kirov gets 20% torpedo resistance? Tf is that all about?

I swear we making up numbers as we wish lol.

[sweet anchor]

I See why

Dreadnoughts followed all or nothing armor belt philosphy

Meaning below the waterline they were vunerable

[fair girder]

Didn't they have torpedo netting?

[sweet anchor]

Not in game they dont

[fair girder]

But so was every other ship.

[sweet anchor]

Torpedos also got better and outclassed netting

[sweet anchor]

Im talking specifically agaisnt the leander

[fair girder]

You can't convince me that a WW2 light cruiser has more armor than a battleship.

[sweet anchor]

It has torpedo bulges

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-torpedo_bulge

[fair girder]

But Dreadnought would also have those no?

[sweet anchor]

DN is WW1

Tech just didnt exist

And they relied on destroyers to begin with

[fair girder]

It has 4-11 inches of belt armor. Leander has a maximum of 3 inches to protect the mags.

[sweet anchor]

Yes but not at the waterline

[fair girder]

Belt is waterline.

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

[sweet anchor]

All or nothing belt armor

[fair girder]

The article says that belt armor is for shells and torpedoes.

[sweet anchor]

And they didnt have wikipedia back then

Technology was developing

[fair girder]

Yeah, the belt protects all vital components. Leander is a tin can.

[sweet anchor]

The top part of the image I sent shows all or nothing philopshy, clearly ending at the waterline

[fair girder]

I'm sorry but this is like comparing a modern armoured truck to a Tiger 1. Yes the armoured car is newer, but there's like no comparison.

[fair girder]

It goes slightly below the waterline though.

And torpedoes would run just below the waterline back then.

[sweet anchor]

Not enough

Back then

[sweet anchor]

Anyways you are right

Guided Missle Destroyers rely more on SAMS to protect agaisnt threats

[fair girder]

According to google, the Dreadnought could tank minimum 2-3 torpedoes before significant/dangerous flooding. Leanders got completely diabled during WW2 by a single torpedo.

HMZNS Leander for example got fully disabled from 1 hit and it was a Leander class.

A max of 3 inches of armor aint gonna stop shi.

And Kirov has 20% torpedo resistance too. Why is that?

[sweet anchor]

idk

game balance?

I left this out too but game balance is probably 1st in like most decisions

[fair girder]

According to Wikipedia, the Kirov class has 76mm of armor plating around the reactor and some light splinter protection. Good luck stopping a torpedo with that. I would take 11 inches of steel any day over that.

[fair girder]

Kirov is good though.

[sweet anchor]

Its had its 20% torpedo resistance for a long time

Its a pretty good level 8

[fair girder]

Yes but why? I always hear people claiming realism concerns with new ideas, but then they fail to see just how "fake" this game is.

[sweet anchor]

Thats just the balance you have to make while developing a game based on irl things like war

[fair girder]

So then why can't Choe Hyon get 1 or 2 decoys? Just copy pasted from a submarine.

[sweet anchor]

And like I said, not my decision

[fair girder]

@fresh bison Can Choe Hyon get decoys please?

[sweet anchor]

Alr so it has electromagnetic countermeasures

[fair girder]

Perfect, just add those for torpedoes.

[sweet anchor]

So to our current knowledge it doesnt have decoys

[fair girder]

Okay but logically it should have them, and we can bend realism anyways.

[sweet anchor]

A strawman (or straw man) is a logical fallacy and debate tactic where someone misrepresents, exaggerates, or fabricates an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. Instead of engaging with the actual, more complex argument, they defeat a weak, "straw" version of it. It is a form of dishonesty used to make one’s own position seem more reasonable.

You seem to be doing this a lot

[fair girder]

How so?

It is true that the game often bends realism to improve balance, so why not do the same for Choe Hyon?

[sweet anchor]

Just because we remove weapons for balance in game automatically means we can go to the extreme and add a weapon that doesnt even exist on the ship

[fair girder]

This isn't extreme, I'm asking to add decoys to a modern destroyer; something very common.

[sweet anchor]

Yet its not on that destroyer

Other destroyers go on, I would love to see towed decoys

[fair girder]

But how do we know that?

[sweet anchor]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choe_Hyon-class_destroyer

[fresh bison]

if they're like the ones that the subs arleady have, probably. if they're not real, no. if they're towed, they will have to wait until I implement those.

[fair girder]

The ones on subs would work.

Just copy and paste so no need to do extra work.

[fresh bison]

i need a credible source that they actually exist like that

[fair girder]

But balance.

Otherwise you'll have a level 9 ship that gets smoked by every sub out there.

[sweet anchor]

Dude its not going to be level 9

Its level 6 at max

[fair girder]

But it gets Kirov missiles that are VLS.

[sweet anchor]

That havent ever been publicly tested and the game frequently reworks the amount of missles on ships

[fair girder]

Oh and also, why does Kirov have 20% torpedo resistance and how is health determined?

[fresh bison]

cruisers and destroyers (kirov is a battlecruiser) have torpedo resistance in mk48

[fair girder]

Okay but it still has them. test or no test it should be fine.

[fair girder]

But why?

[sweet anchor]

The other point still stands

[fair girder]

Well then where will Kolkata go?

[sweet anchor]

We're working on it

[fresh bison]

thicker armor/hull? more watertight compartments? more motivation for them not to sink? game balance.

[fair girder]

Sorry I don't understand. Dreadnought has no torpedo resistance, Essex has no torpedo resistance, but then Kirov gets some? Seems strange to me.

[sweet anchor]

Essex is the ship with the most health in game

[fresh bison]

dreadnought might get torpedo resistance in the future

[fair girder]

Montana and Iowa have more.

[sweet anchor]

Fair fair mb

[fair girder]

So Kirov just randomly gets torpedo resistance even though it is largely unarmoured?

While Essex, which has armor, gets none.

Let's make hovercrafts immune to torpedoes. They "float" above the water anyways.

[fresh bison]

most of the information about Essex's armor is concerned with the top, which isn't what gets hit by torpedoes

[fair girder]

And what about Kirov?

[fresh bison]

Kirov = cruiser = ability to resist torpedo attacks is assumed without specific evidence

[fair girder]

Bro what is this voodoo magic?

[sweet anchor]

Its a level 8 ship that needs to be balanced with the likes of ohio and yasen

Meanwhile the essex is arguably the best anti sub ship in game

[fair girder]

"No evidence" for Kirov armor, but "need evidence" for Choe Hyon decoys 🤦

Considering how quickly the Moskva (Slava class) cruiser went down, i doubt Kirov is very resistant.

[fresh bison]

unlike cars, ships are not subjected to consistent crash-tests, especially not with armed torpedoes, so the lack of evidence should not be surprising

[fair girder]

It has 76mm armor at the reactor, no armor anywhere else, and yet has more torpedo resistance than an aircraft carrier and early dreadnought.

[fair girder]

There is evidence for armor, but modern ships mostly lack such armor.

[sweet anchor]

Early dreadnoughts, like I said, followed the all or nothing armor design philosphy

[fair girder]

Just because it's labelled as "cruiser" doesn't automatically give it armor

[fair girder]

But the heavy armor is placed on key parts.

[fresh bison]

usually, you don't add armor to protect against torpedoes, because it's not effective. you make a multi-layer hull with a gap in between, along with other design features.

[sweet anchor]

And that doesnt go for beneath the waterline, where most modern torpedos hit

[fair girder]

Battleships combine armor and gaps, modern ships don't.

there's no reason for modern ships to have any armor, because a single torpedo hit would break the keel in half anyways.

[sweet anchor]

Technically a singular mk48 torpedo sinks most ships in the game, but a lot of this is done for game balance

[fresh bison]

0% chance the designers of Kirov didn't consider enemy torpedoes, and how to defend against them

[sweet anchor]

Were you not the one arguing agaisnt the arleigh burkes changing because of game mechanics?

[fair girder]

The defense is through evasion, not tanking them

[sweet anchor]

You cant evade in game

[fair girder]

No armor can stop an mk48. Even the Yamato would suffer huge damage from an mk48

[sweet anchor]

But it has to be nerfed so that it could have a chance

[fair girder]

I'm saying irl to counter Squirrel's point.

[fresh bison]

I haven't yet implemented anti-torpedo munitions, other than sub-launched mobile decoys

until then, ships must be able to tank torpedoes for game balance

[fair girder]

Yeah well that is what modern surface ships use, not armor. Unless you're using armor as a stand in for these weapons.

Oh I see.

[fresh bison]

you can think of it like that

[fair girder]

That makes a lot more sense. Then will other destroyers get the same?

[fresh bison]

I don't think the game would necessarily be better if, instead of torpedoes hitting and doing 1/4 normal damage, an almost-invisible anti-torpedo munition deployed and destroyed 3/4 of the torpedoes, allowing 1/4 of them to do 100% normal damage.

that sounds like it would add confusion and reliance on luck

regarding destroyers, they can also tank torpedoes, just only 80% as well as cruisers

[fair girder]

I think that irl a destroyer would have a better chance since it's smaller and faster.

Also what do you think about making hovercrafts immune to torpedoes?

cause like fr, how can an underwater weapon kill an above water vehicle?

[sweet anchor]

I wouldnt actually mind that, but torpedos with magnetic detectors still can do the job

[fresh bison]

I don't think a torpedo that catches a hovercraft would have a problem destroying it

hovercrafts are not entirely above water. note the splashes/mist/wake

[fair girder]

I guess only wake-homing torpedoes could kill them though.

Because how else could you track it? The propulsion system is above water and they have no sonar.

[fresh bison]

also, torpedoes passing through hovercraft = players think the enemy is cheating

[sweet anchor]

I mean it could just get a lot of torp res

Cause haelos does have a point in torpedos being relatively harmless

[fair girder]

I also think that those images are of the hovercraft at low speeds. Generally the faster it goes the more it rides up over the waves.

I don't have evidence though, this is purely speculative.

[fresh bison]

the thing is that ships float due to buoyancy. they must displace water equal to their weight. the zubr has a non-zero weight, so it displaces non-zero water. nothing about the design looks capable of producing enough lift via air to overcome that.

[fair girder]

I think that the amount of hull in the water would be too small to produce a sufficient sonar return for a torpedo to accurately track it. The lift fans drastically reduce the displacement at high speed.

Of course it won't be zero, but it would be incredibly small.

But I guess hovercrafts are fast enough to dodge anyways.

[sweet anchor]

There is a little bit under

[sweet anchor]

Ngl if you get hit with a torpedo in a hovercraft you kinda do deserve it

In game

[fair girder]

It happens when a submarine is under you and you don't see it. The torpedo rises faster than you can react.

[sweet anchor]

I mean its happened to me before but thats kinda rare

[fresh bison]

is this proof by 3d rendering? 👀

[sweet anchor]

Yes, you can match it to the image

[fresh bison]

it's unclear how the artist got access to the underside of the zubr to make this accurate

[fair girder]

I mean how is a torpedo supposed to track something with such shallow draft and no active sonar?

[fresh bison]

this is something that torpedo designers almost certainly considered, and I don't need to know the details

if hovercraft = anti-sub cheat code, I think there would be more hovercrafts

[fair girder]

Well torpedoes are not designed to target hovercrafts and would never be used in combat against them.

[sweet anchor]

They are easier delt with in small arms fire

[fair girder]

Like in order to drive on land, it must be able to lift a high amount of its weight above the sand or water.

[sweet anchor]

And I dont think they are particuarly efficent past a certiain point

[fair girder]

Otherwise the drag would be way too much.

Google says that it can navigate over obstacle up to 1.6 meters high.

So it must have very powerful lift fans.

[sweet anchor]

The non torpedo idea does have merit

But game wise you would kinda have to be a noob (or rarely unlucky) to get hit by torps

As a reminder zubrs take more torps to kill than they give back in exp and are really not worth it unless the dude just wants to screw around

[fair girder]

I think this is from a video game or something, but it does say that torpedoes cannot track hovercrafts https://www.beyondallreason.info/guide/basics-on-sea-warfare#:~:text=Basics-,Naval Basics,‍

Yo check this out https://christyhovercraft.com/company/military-style-of-hovercraft/#:~:text=Hovercraft do not set off,and the craft will travel

[sweet anchor]

@fair girder if you could move onto another forum for game balance vs realism issues, cause this is still for the Choe Hyun

[fair girder]

It says that mines would not destroy hovercrafts.

[fair girder]

My apologies.

[sweet anchor]

Back to the Choe Hyun

[fresh bison]

one thing I could do is make moving hovercrafts stealthy to torpedoes, like stealth ships and missiles.

a percentage wouldn't lock on. those that hit would still hit.

[fair girder]

Good idea.

[compact onyx]

This is true ngl

[compact onyx]

Don’t forget extrajudicially kidnapped their president

[compact onyx]

I think Arleigh should go to level 7 with 8 tomahawks and 6 SAMs

And buff 055 by giving the yj18s a Mach 3 terminal phase like irl

Buff Zumwalt by giving it hypersonics and 6 ASROCs and put it at level 9

What do you think

[cunning tartan]

😲 What happened to my poor KPN Choe Hyon forum

[sweet anchor]

The president who ran a rigged election and crashed Venezuela's economy

[frozen cave]

Lmao

[sweet anchor]

Anyways politics aside what do you think about the Choe Hyon in a level 6 or post level change adjacent role with 4-6 ballistics as a small but mighty glass cannon

[normal kindle]

I guess that's fair, sorry if you've answered this but I didn't read chat, but NK troops have been proved to be fighting on the russian side, and i think it is still a little unreasonable, but what do you think about adding ships that are russian designs or some such operated by other navies?
Also Fletcher 5th Turret please

[fresh bison]

• Russian-side troops fighting in internationally recognized Russian territory, which is where most/all North Korean troops fought, is relatively defensive not "offensive"
• very different scope and scale
• North Korean navy was not involved

For these reasons, I don't think adding a North Korean ship glorifies an ongoing offensive war.

[cunning tartan]

agreed ✅

[ember verge]

In geopolitics, North Korea’s real target isn’t Ukraine.💀 🤲😭🤲😭🤲😭🤲