Balance change: fires can cause minor, but cumulative, flooding

[CenturionsofRome]

The proposed change is simple: fires below the waterline - the bottom row of compartments - have a chance of causing minor flooding in said compartment, mitigated by bulkheads and anti-flooding techs. Individually, each bit of flooding is nothing to be concerned about, easily handled by even basic, non-upgraded dam-con, but it's cumulative. The longer, and more often, fires rage in a compartment, the more flooding.

Proposed base flooding chances per fire tick (reduced by bulkheads and anti-flooding): 10% for undamaged/green; 20% for yellow damage; 50% for red/destroyed.

This is intended to allow easier sinking of ships that have had most of their structure destroyed, as once you get to sub 10% it can be rather difficult for your guns, or the enemy's, to find and damage a compartment that hasn't already been blown to hell. Also to indirectly make it more difficult for ships that have received heavy structural damage - but no engine damage - to flee.

[Guest]

Another thing is hot enough fires should degrade the armor of your ship as the ruins the temper.

[Naval Enthusiast]

14 minutes ago, Absolute0CA said:

Another thing is hot enough fires should degrade the armor of your ship as the ruins the temper.

Didn't trials by the USN find that this was only a serious issue for aluminium fittings and equipment on ships that were subject to nuclear bomb tests?

Edit: Found the source sort of. Ministry of defence — design of ship's structures, Chalmers, 1993. I don't have access to the book itself, but here's a little tidbit from Ian Raymond's article "A Design Criteria for the Optimisation of Naval Transverse Bulkheads":

"Chalmers (1993) and others state that thermal loads from an explosion need only to be considered for aluminium and composite super structures subjected to a nuclear blast criteria. This is outside my area but, in the situation of a nuclear weapon detonation close to nuclear missile silo, you will have a thermal load. The thermal load will weaken a structure, by melting or softening it, and additionally make the structure more brittle. Brittleness comes from re-solidification of the materials. Like seen in welding with the heat-affected zones."

 

Overall, probably not something that'll be a factor in-game, unless nuclear shells like the 16'' Mk23 that were developed for the Iowas are added.

Edited October 28, 2019 by Naval Enthusiast
Found the source for my previous claim

[Guest]

I didn’t mean explosions I mean from fires on the ship, oil fires especially, but thanks for the source for the counter argument.

[CenturionsofRome]

Armor degradation is probably far to complex to code in to the game, much less balancing it. However the fire causing flooding is a percentage based IF-THEN trigger using already coded in functions, and thus much easier to do.

[Sir_Wulfrick]

I'd say no. No fire on a ship would burn hot enough for long enough to melt through the hull. if it did burn hot enough for long enough in the lower compartments then something like a sympathetic magazine detonation would be a far greater risk and any competent crew would flood the magazine.

[CenturionsofRome]

My thought was less "burn through the hull" and more "burn/warp/break seals and fittings". Basically the heat would cause metal to warp which would break watertight seals, causing leaks.

[ThatZenoGuy]

The largest dangers of fires was destroying equipment, and magazine detonations.

IMO if a fire burns for too long, it should run the risk of detonating magazines nearby.

[RedParadize]

8 hours ago, ThatZenoGuy said:

The largest dangers of fires was destroying equipment, and magazine detonations.

IMO if a fire burns for too long, it should run the risk of detonating magazines nearby.

That I would take. Not the flooding trough. Unless if the reason is hull got breached and no ones can get to the bulkheads to close them.

[Christian]

On 10/28/2019 at 5:53 PM, Absolute0CA said:

I didn’t mean explosions I mean from fires on the ship, oil fires especially, but thanks for the source for the counter argument.

normal fires should not have near enough power to ruin the temper on battleship armor

not only because steel is an excellent heat conducter and heat obsorber so it would take very long for it to happend but you also need very high temperatures

as far as i know (dont quote me on this) oil and so on dont burn hot enough to be a problem for the armor

also i assume a nuclear blast has significantly more thermal energy than fires especially since these results likely came from the bikini atoll tests where they detonated bombs as close as 400 meters to ships

 

 

other examples are akagi and kaga and so on

 

despite having fires rage in them for several hours the ships did not flood and had to be scuttled or torpedoed by their own forces

 

Edited October 30, 2019 by Christian

[sRuLe]

On 10/28/2019 at 6:53 PM, Absolute0CA said:

I didn’t mean explosions I mean from fires on the ship, oil fires especially, but thanks for the source for the counter argument.

Not exactly... only flooding that can be caused by fire, is flooding made by extinguishing the fire with water without bringing a countermeasures to pump it back into the sea. Most of the structural armor and hardened steel on ships have degradation temps from around 1600-1800 degrees by Celsius, not less. Oil fire without air-burn blast forcing actually burns under 1100 degrees max.

So I vote rather NO than Yes.

Edited October 30, 2019 by sRuLe

[ThatZenoGuy]

Another thing to note, is that ship fuel oil is notoriously hard to just set alight without proper preparation.

The fires you find on ships were these 100 tons of oil burning tier fires, they were more localized and spread through stuff like equipment and ammo.

[Christian]

11 minutes ago, sRuLe said:

Not exactly... only flooding that can be caused by fire, is flooding made by extinguishing the fire with water. Most of the structural armor and hardened steel on ships is degradation temps are from around 1600-1800 degrees by Celsius, not less. Oil fire without air-burn blast forcing actually under 1100 degrees max.

So I vote rather NO than Yes.

good point for example USS franklin almost sunk due to the amount of water she had taken on from firefighting and developed a hefty list due to it

she was actually at risk of sinking once the fires were put out

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/w/war-damage-reports/uss-franklin-cv-13-war-damage-report-no-56.html

Edited October 30, 2019 by Christian

[sRuLe]

2 minutes ago, ThatZenoGuy said:

Another thing to note, is that ship fuel oil is notoriously hard to just set alight without proper preparation.

The fires you find on ships were these 100 tons of oil burning tier fires, they were more localized and spread through stuff like equipment and ammo.

Plus to that DCR says: - Can't handle it, seal it cutting from an air supply.

[sRuLe]

1 minute ago, Christian said:

good point for example USS franklin almost sunk due to the amount of water she had taken on from firefighting and developed a hefty list due to it

she was actually at risk of sinking once the fires were put out

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/w/war-damage-reports/uss-franklin-cv-13-war-damage-report-no-56.html

JUST WATCH THIS

[Cptbarney]

I would say if the several section turn red then the ship will start to crack and break apart, resulting in the death of the ship depending on where the giant split is or severe penalties to everything else (smaller cracks and major dents that make it harder to steer the ship and cause some minor flooding depending on how hard you turn and at higher speeds).

[goduranus]

I think it would make more sense if fire killed crew that could fix flooding elsewhere, and possibly can also disable the water pumps by burning through their wiring or cutting off the fuel supply.

[Illya von Einzbern]

Fires could just make some compartments in accessible and cause casualties among the crew.
Perhaps even contribute on crew evacuation if the fires can't be controlled. Air in some compartments could/ can get really.... stuffy with CO2.

[sRuLe]

2 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

I would say if the several section turn red then the ship will start to crack and break apart,

And immediately sunk due Structural Damage. 

2 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

smaller cracks and major dents that make it harder to steer the ship and cause some minor flooding depending on how hard you turn and at higher speeds

Depends what cracked, hull sheets or it's rig... in second case it's an immediate flooding and sinking.

But some seems right... flooding slows down the ship, give it a list that can turn into capsizing. 

 

Overall it s all called... COLLATERAL DAMAGE. After primary damage done by shelling. Fires by explosion of HEshes, Internal fires called as a result of APS/CPS hits and damage to internals, underline penetrations and overpens that cause a flooding. That's all is just an consequences not a major cause.

 

Edited October 30, 2019 by sRuLe

[PainGod]

Right now just about any damage even above the waterline has an impact on a ship's top speed, which I find doubtful.

[sRuLe]

14 minutes ago, PainGod said:

Right now just about any damage even above the waterline has an impact on a ship's top speed, which I find doubtful.

Absolutely agree with you. As example is funnel damage... Yes, it's true in the age of Pre-Dreadnoughts where forced vents and forced boilers wasn't widely used. But Since 1908 most of a ship are designed with forced exhaust vents. Which means... you can shoot-off the funnel and there will be just more smoke around the deck. 

Another thing is hull damage. If we talking about capital ships with capital armor... there is armor belt that protect waterline. If we talk about CA/CL/DD, yap, damage to hull in waterline level can do impact on sea keeping. All over the waterline, just burn or get destroyed without major impact on stuff below the main deck.

That's why we got 2 major figures in the game:

- Structural Strength in %

- Floating Capacity in % 

That is more than enough. Ending a Structural Strength make ship brake apart. Ending of a Floating Capacity, a ship starts to sail like a brick. Both of them already does impact on a model, modules, artillery accuracy it's ROF, speed and turn of a ship.

Edited October 30, 2019 by sRuLe

[Cptbarney]

42 minutes ago, sRuLe said:

And immediately sunk due Structural Damage. 

Depends what cracked, hull sheets or it's rig... in second case it's an immediate flooding and sinking.

But some seems right... flooding slows down the ship, give it a list that can turn into capsizing. 

 

Overall it s all called... COLLATERAL DAMAGE. After primary damage done by shelling. Fires by explosion of HEshes, Internal fires called as a result of APS/CPS hits and damage to internals, underline penetrations and overpens that cause a flooding. That's all is just an consequences not a major cause.

 

shush im talking about game mechanics and trying to simulate sillies.

'w'

I know how sinking works just thinking of extra mechanical themes and ways of simulating interesting behaviour from ships being struck over and over in the same or similar places.

This would stop the whole, shipfu refuses to die at 0% meme.

[Illya von Einzbern]

4 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

shush im talking about game mechanics and trying to simulate sillies.

'w'

I know how sinking works just thinking of extra mechanical themes and ways of simulating interesting behaviour from ships being struck over and over in the same or similar places.

This would stop the whole, shipfu refuses to die at 0% meme.

Reminds me of KC last dance.... that boss never dies but lending the vise words of Emiya Shirou. Ships die when killed
By the way. that 0% ship does not die has actually helped to do the sink whole fleet mission. NEVER have i been living on the edge as well wondering why am i still alive...
Why does it still float? Just to suffer? 

[Cptbarney]

10 minutes ago, Illya von Einzbern said:

Reminds me of KC last dance.... that boss never dies but lending the vise words of Emiya Shirou. Ships die when killed
By the way. that 0% ship does not die has actually helped to do the sink whole fleet mission. NEVER have i been living on the edge as well wondering why am i still alive...
Why does it still float? Just to suffer? 

Yeah lol, i've never played kancolle (played azur lane but heard of KC) i keep expecting a ship transformation with that sailor moon make up power theme in the background lol (not the first transformation theme) screen cuts to black and the ship begins to spin getting faster and turning bright white lol...and you can guess the rest.

But still at least you wouldn't have to torture the poor sod while she is dying after getting hit by the 500th salvo from biscuits (bismark) half way across the ocean.

[sRuLe]

17 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

This would stop the whole, shipfu refuses to die at 0% meme.

If it still afloat, like KMS Bismarck IRL... it can be even 0%, until it floats. I'll be whole relentless it self than.