WesWorld

I just noticed this tidbit in another thread...

Hooman said...

"The Doc is right about the hull strength. It´s a gentlemen´s agreement on this board.

(If you still use a cross-sectional hs of below 0,5 your design has to be rated as weak or flawed what could be reflected in some news reports. Should we ever go to war among players such a vessel would also be rated inferior to opposing units that have a s-c hs above 0,5 but are otherwise similar.)"

Several DD designs of mine were about 3 points under this agreement, so I made some adjustments.
The Admiralty type 2 and Basilone class's were particularly understrength but now they are fixed. They still achieve speeds of 35 knots but as expected are still poor seaboats. I may change DD deployments to reflect their poor sea quality's.

Quoted

"The Doc is right about the hull strength. It´s a gentlemen´s agreement on this board.

Well, I never agreed to that, but decided to go along with it. One thing I do want to know is why this was decided
...and if possible who, although I have a suspicion I know who did it (it was either the cook or the butler. If they didn't do it, it was probably Lady Cherry-Blossom with a Tanto in the Imperial Winecellar).
:-)
After all, in the SS notes, it is mentioned that "To sim them successfully, I have had to go as low as 0.50 -- just above the HULL FAILURE warning." You only get the "Hull Failure" warning when your relative composite hull strength drops below 0.50. No mention is made in the notes that relative cross-sectional hull strength is not allowed to be below 0.50.

Just curious.

I don't recall when it was decided, hence my overlooking this little gentlemans rule. It wasn't too painfull to alter the designs somewhat.