Iowa - Historical Build with

Рет қаралды 8,555

Жыл бұрын

In our final build video, Drachinifel and I will be tackling the iconic Iowa class battleship in the game Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts. This powerful American vessel served during World War II and beyond, and was known for its impressive speed and armament.
We will be using all of the available tools and resources to build the Iowa class battleship as accurately as possible within the game, using historical blueprints, photographs, and other references to ensure that our replica is as faithful to the real ship as possible.
Join us as we bring this legendary vessel to life in Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts. This will be our last build video, so be sure to tune in and see the Iowa class in action!
Making videos is my job these days, if you loved the video and fancy leaving me a small consideration then you can! ko-fi.com/brothermunro
Want to submit your scenarios live? Head over to twitch and follow me there and join in on Warship Wednesdays! twitch.com/brothermunro
Perhaps you just want to join a friendly Dreadnought obsessed community? Well I have a discord server! This is also somewhere you can send in scenario ideas! / discord
Or you could join my wonderful patrons ( / brothermunro ) and (amongst other things) unlock the ability to send me UA:D ideas directly.
Captain of the 1st Company: Treefrog
Veteran Sergeants: 1stplaceonion, LCG Canyon, Welshy
Sergeant: Jackie, Twitchyknees, Alerik Rahl
Veterans: Telemonian Dan, Sunless Sky Nova, Threadoflength, Darth Vendar.
Battle Siblings: Jacky Chan, nagebenfro, scurvekano, Cpt Graftin, Icd, Iroey, Zadrias.

Пікірлер: 57

@khoipham8303 Жыл бұрын

That Iowa looking like it went back after a trip to Grandma's

@jackeyboy6538 Жыл бұрын

Lookin chompky 😍

@revan12009 Жыл бұрын

Didn't the Iowa have triple bottom hull? That's what I always hear Ryan Szimanski say.

@Captain_Brian78 Жыл бұрын

Yes, the Iowa's have a triple bottom.

@pilfit Жыл бұрын

they also skipped giving an RDF to both the American battleships, something they have given every other ship so far. Those boost aiming speed by 6%.

@tiedeman39 Жыл бұрын

@@pilfitAmerica is just too OP, they need to be nerfed, obviously

@42meep13 Жыл бұрын

I thought the Iowas had a triple bottom hull? I remember the New Jersey museum's KZfaq channel mentioning that

@RikaRikaItsumika Жыл бұрын

My money's definitely on the kamchatka this round!

@Hastur_the_King_in_Yellow Жыл бұрын

Idea for a future update to UA:D: Ability to alter keel length without changing displacement, so fast ships can go faster while needing to pile less money/tech into engines. Your thoughts, Munro/Commenters?

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

Totally agree. I'd like the ship builder to be like: - select a hull design - set length, beam and draught and the game calculates the maximum displacement - put on superstructure (which should also be size adjustable to fit the proportions of the ship - put on barbettes (I'd change it from just putting a turret on the ship to first needing to place a height adjustable barbette, the diameter should adapt to the size of the turret. A barbette would be the only possible mounting point for the turret, so you'd have to move that to move the turret then) - place a turret (you can choose from a handful of different designs, according to the selected hull design, also, turrets should be limited to certain calibers) - select a gun barrel (caliber according to the maximum caliber that the turret can house) and place it in the turret - place secondary guns, torpedo launchers (and maybe in the future AA guns?) - place funnels, rangefinders and radars on the superstructure - set your armor values, armor layout, shell and propellant type, speed etc -> the boiler and engine rooms' size would depend on your desired speed and the hull form (the greater the length to beam ratio, the faster your ship can go, or the smaller the engines need to be to achieve the desired speed). Hull form also affects accuracy etc I think that's pretty much all I have to say atm 😂

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

I also hate how the engine weight works. I mean, it's hard to build a "normal" destroyer (so any hull except the destroyer leader hull) that can go faster that 36.something knots cause at some point your engine weight makes such a jump that you have to basically reduce armament to the bare minimum just to have a ship that can catch some of the AI's 37+ knot cruiser designs

@glauberglousger6643 Жыл бұрын

The modern battleship I with maxed displacement is a much better fit for Iowa, sleek thin profile too, (beam reduction is unnecessary), this one looks exactly like a North Carolina, (which was wider than an Iowa) minimum displacement for North Carolina sized, stubby too, and no beam adjustments needed Also Yamato and Bismarck have similar issues (Vanguard doesn’t have the right hull so can’t do anything bout that)

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

That's mainly due to the limits we get set from the game tbh. They have a bunch of hulls which make you able to recreate historical ships, but a lot of the hulls just don't give us the options we need unfortunately (like for example being able to reduce the size of the superstructure to actually fit on the hull in some cases or just simply to not make it look oversized compared to the turrets)

@robertserafini560 Жыл бұрын

so the brits leave the us ship with a massive weight offset and reduce beam thereby crippling iowa's accuracy

@dougjb7848 Жыл бұрын

Pretty much.

@dec_thesussy Жыл бұрын

Cry about it

@TheRacingmenace Жыл бұрын

They also gave her far thicker armour than she actually had. Really, a bunch of things are squiffy with this build, but the game itself is so off-balanced it's hardly a good way to compare realistic designs anyway...

@bamafan-in-OZ Жыл бұрын

Would be interested to see someone build one as per Ryan Szimanski's recent video listing what he would have changed if they built the Montana Class

@peterseifert1318 Жыл бұрын

As an Idea for the radar on towers issue, maybe it's easier to code that you need a tower with radar on top as a part to be able to put radar on? Would be a nuisance for refits. Or a separate radar part piece that you can put on a special hard point, like funnels and guns etc. In the same range of parts you could put reconnaissance airplanes faculties to boost your recon stats. So instead of the simple menu choices we have now some proper parts to play with

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

I'd make the point with the radar as a placable part also for the rangefinders. More rangefinders -> faster aiming, better accuracy More radars -> better recon (and also better accuracy and aiming speed) I also support the addition of scouting aircraft

@peterseifert1318 Жыл бұрын

@@DJKenTuckyOfficial the aircraft doesn't need to be flying around, just a placeable part as predecessor for radar. I understand that aircrafts flying around is a little much to ask for. Maybe later with an aircraft carrier dlc or so. But first a proper working base game...

@williamgandarillas2185 Жыл бұрын

You might be able to decrease the draught, which decreases the freeboard and reduces weight

@mikey29211 Жыл бұрын

I am a USS Iowa Plank owner MT Captain MT 56 a GMG2 (SW) from April 84 to October 86

@Lonewolf-dy5yb Жыл бұрын

Using real world logic, my money would be on Yamato to win. Using game logic, it's gonna be Bismarck taking it, Turtleback is just too broken.

@silverhost9782 Жыл бұрын

Those are my predictions too

@Lonewolf-dy5yb Жыл бұрын

I recreated their Bismarck as accurately as I could, and also created Montana to the best of my ability (using their Iowa as a base and doing a couple likely upgrades) and Bismarck has won. So Bismarck is most likely going to win

@Plastikdoom Жыл бұрын

Ehh, real world, an Iowa could win against them, just as easily as they could win. Ours were better in some ways, equal in others, theirs were better in someways also. Not very many, and pretty much equal in others. The German ships had the worse power plants by far, cobbled together, temperamental land based, high pressure steam. They broke their own radar when firing, unlike us. People are like the Yamato class had super thick ‘armor’ yeah, really thick. But garbage armor for the time. They were using decades old, weak alloy types, for long out of service armor plate by any major nation, lol. So they made up for it. With more displacement and making the armor thicker. Ours truly were the far better all around ship, that had everything that everyone else had, that mattered and was good, and being as small/fast, light as she could be to achieve that goal. Built in a logical manner, with fully working systems in all ways. That doesn’t mean everything was far better, piece by piece, it means everything was good, functional, reliable, about as easy to maintain as possible, and worked as a whole system, together.

@Lonewolf-dy5yb Жыл бұрын

@Plastikdoom Yes, Iowa was a better ship all around, but would still probably lose a 1 on 1 vs Yamato in good weather conditions (which the game is using). Iowa would certainly beat Bismarck in a 1 on 1, as would most of the ships in both Div 1 and Div 2, but the game really caters to Bismarck's strengths.

@manilajohn0182 Жыл бұрын

@@Plastikdoom What you've said regarding armor plate of the Yamato's is internet mythology and isn't even remotely true. USNPG reports described Japanese heavy armor as slightly inferior to U.S. armor, while Britain's Armour Technical Committee regarded Japanese armor as superior to all foreign armors. The difference in armor quality of the major navies in WW2 was positively minimal. Type and thickness of armor was of far greater significance.

@cathyharrop3348 Жыл бұрын

Did you forget the bow AA guns?

@dec_thesussy Жыл бұрын

Honestly a historical build of HMS Nelson or HMS Hood would be interesting

@robertserafini560 Жыл бұрын

ww2 us battleships use stereoscopic rangefinder

@jerbear3915 Жыл бұрын

You guys should do cruiser build especially mogamis or alaska or admiral hipper

@brodyvoss8239 Жыл бұрын

I say the hull is too tall to be iowa or even a ship of that class

@ChessieSystem2101 3 ай бұрын

I find it strange that the game decided to give the Iowa's superstructure the modern tripod mast instead of its configuration during World War II.

@BrotherMunro 3 ай бұрын

🤷‍♂️

@BrotherMunro 3 ай бұрын

(Depends on what they were looking at as a reference when making the model)

@ChessieSystem2101 3 ай бұрын

@@BrotherMunro yeah that's true, it's still good regardless

@kapteinzilla Жыл бұрын

i used this voideo to build my own Iowa and its displacement is 58469

@dougjb7848 Жыл бұрын

The NoCars were barely 2” wider. I don’t know if UAD’s sliders can produce such granular results.

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

I don't think that small nuance will change anything significantly

@Plastikdoom Жыл бұрын

And pff, even in the gulf war the original electro mechanical plotting/fire control computer, that was built in the 1930’s was better and more accurate, and reliable, proven for 6 decades, than the modern stuff in the 90’s. They found that one out.

@darthimperious8661 Жыл бұрын

my money is gonna be on iowa or Yamato to take it all

@polymathart Жыл бұрын

Have you ever played Naval Art?

@BrotherMunro Жыл бұрын

Yes I completely suck at it

@robertserafini560 Жыл бұрын

at this point if the us wins this division it will be in spite of everything theses two can do to cripple them

@silverhost9782 Жыл бұрын

Cope

@Abukard Жыл бұрын

I don’t understand why you giving the American ships more belt armor because its inclined, so it is on the Yamato in fact there is 20 degrees to 19 on Iowa, so what’s the point?

@DJKenTuckyOfficial Жыл бұрын

The game doesn't have the option to incline the belt, so they have to make it thicker to achieve what the incline did irl

@Abukard Жыл бұрын

@@DJKenTuckyOfficial but only on the American ship? ?

@ursmersmann6736 Жыл бұрын

First, and love your vids...

@Plastikdoom Жыл бұрын

Historical? Not so much, wrong hill shape, that has an external belt, none of the Iowa’s had that, not a triple hull…etc, etc. more like very roughly based on reality.

@silverhost9782 Жыл бұрын

That's the best this game can do

@pilfit Жыл бұрын

@@silverhost9782 its really not. its infact quite easy to build an accurate Iowa in the game, its about the only US ship you can build right now. That makes it all the more annoying that they screwed this one up. The entire series we have only had 1 US battleship and yet again it was put in the wrong division because at the time they couldnt build the one they wanted. Despite being to old for the Division it was put in the Ten still did well. Now we finally get to some more US battleships and we get the abomination from last time and this quickly skimmed over version of the Iowa where they missed a number of key things that will make it perform much worse then it should.

@silverhost9782 Жыл бұрын

@@pilfit Oh no, anyway! All of the ships in this tournament have been a mess from a historical perspective, its just for fun. There's no way you can extrapolate the results to a real historical battleship engagement so there's no need to take it seriously

@pilfit Жыл бұрын

@@silverhost9782 yeah it is just for fun... kinda like watching a football game. and when you see a team or in this case ship that you like getting the short end of the stick because of a bad call from the ref its fairly normal to make a stink about it. The American ships have been getting allot of bad calls.