I've been looking at the HCDB and specificly at the magazine/turret relationship of the Iowa BBs. On the turrets I notice that they each hold enough rounds that when combined with the magazines which hold 255 rounds, you have the total needed for each turret. Here's where I have a problem with that. If I remember correctly the magazines supply ALL the mounts of the same type. In other words, even if the front two turrets are blown up, the ship will continue to use the ammo supplied by all three magazines.

 

That being said, I find it hard to believe you're going to be running 2700lb shells from one end of the boat to the other. Wouldn't it make more sense to place the proper amount of ammo in each individual turret? I do understand the intent, but in this case it just doesn't make sense.

Wouldn't it make more sense to place the proper amount of ammo in each individual turret? I do understand the intent, but in this case it just doesn't make sense.

 

As you've noticed, the magazines aren't limited by their physical location in the ship, so we work with what we have. If all of the available rounds were placed in the turret, there would be no "time to reload" factor. IMHO, using the magazines is the lesser of two evils.

Seems like the only 'real' solution is to have three separate, but identical, rounds/types of ammunition and 3 separate magazines. That way, each turret can only fire 'its' ammo, thus there would be no switching (if anyone wanted to take the trouble to do it that way.)

Seems like the only 'real' solution is to have three separate, but identical, rounds/types of ammunition and 3 separate magazines. That way, each turret can only fire 'its' ammo, thus there would be no switching (if anyone wanted to take the trouble to do it that way.)

 

I think I understand what you're suggesting, i.e. 406mm Turret1 ammo, 406mm Turret2 ammo, and 406mm Turret3 ammo, each occupying a separate entry in the Weapons Annex.

 

I can see how that might would work, but its cumbersome, and unless someone can convince me that the current arrangement affects gameplay so much as to make it unworkable, the present method will stay in place. Personally, I've never encountered a scenario (yet) where the number of reloads aboard an Iowa (and how those reloads were allocated among turrets) made any difference.

Anyhow, if a designer wanted to have his cake and eat it too, because of a need for that functionality in a particular or set of particular scenarios, there is always the possibility of making a custom DB implementing such changes and embedding it in the Battleset

 

Seems like the only 'real' solution is to have three separate, but identical, rounds/types of ammunition and 3 separate magazines. That way, each turret can only fire 'its' ammo, thus there would be no switching (if anyone wanted to take the trouble to do it that way.)

 

I think I understand what you're suggesting, i.e. 406mm Turret1 ammo, 406mm Turret2 ammo, and 406mm Turret3 ammo, each occupying a separate entry in the Weapons Annex.

 

I can see how that might would work, but its cumbersome, and unless someone can convince me that the current arrangement affects gameplay so much as to make it unworkable, the present method will stay in place. Personally, I've never encountered a scenario (yet) where the number of reloads aboard an Iowa (and how those reloads were allocated among turrets) made any difference.

Anyhow, if a designer wanted to have his cake and eat it too, because of a need for that functionality in a particular or set of particular scenarios, there is always the possibility of making a custom DB implementing such changes and embedding it in the Battleset

 

Absolutely.

Seems like the only 'real' solution is to have three separate, but identical, rounds/types of ammunition and 3 separate magazines. That way, each turret can only fire 'its' ammo, thus there would be no switching (if anyone wanted to take the trouble to do it that way.)

 

I think I understand what you're suggesting, i.e. 406mm Turret1 ammo, 406mm Turret2 ammo, and 406mm Turret3 ammo, each occupying a separate entry in the Weapons Annex.

 

I can see how that might would work, but its cumbersome, and unless someone can convince me that the current arrangement affects gameplay so much as to make it unworkable, the present method will stay in place. Personally, I've never encountered a scenario (yet) where the number of reloads aboard an Iowa (and how those reloads were allocated among turrets) made any difference.

 

I agree, I've never encountered it either. I simply like to tinker with DBs and change them to suit my personal play style...and it was something I noticed. In my personal DB, I have changed the magazines and ammo to what you just described. Does it change game play? Eh, not really, but I feel better.