Jump to content


0.5.1.0 AP Damage Model Clarification

0.5.1

  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

karsun #1 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:15 PM

    Torpedo Bait

  • WG Staff

  • 19
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

*
POPULAR

The 0.5.1.0 update brought some great changes to the game. However, as you probably noticed (especially if you’re a Battleship captain), the 0.5.1 update also brought some significant changes to the Armor Piercing shell damage model.

 

We received a large amount of feedback from all regions on this matter immediately after update deployment on the live servers. Based on the feedback we launched an investigation into the issue and our dev team started working tirelessly to find what caused such a big difference in gameplay, considering the obvious intent of fixing an issue, not causing a new one.

 

In the 0.5.1 patch notes there is a line stating:

 

Improved how shots ricochet when they hit armour joints.

 

To give some background information, in case you are not aware - the World of Warships damage model of every single ship is extremely complex and is based on every ship being divided into several parts. The most critical and at the same time usually most heavily armoured part is the Citadel.

 

Technically all ship parts have some armour from all sides - it can be the real armour, some hull plating or even “dummy” 0 mm armour, which is needed only for correct functioning of the game mechanics. There is no room without a wall, so to say.

 

 

As you can see on this simplified, but explicit picture, there are two layers of armour covering the joint of citadel, casemate and bow of the vessel. There is both real Armor and dummy armour. Real Armour thickness depends on the ship, but as stated before, Citadel is the most armoured part of the ship. Dummy armour, on the other hand, is just 0 mm and does not play any actual role in ship survivability.

 

Unfortunately, there was a bug in this mechanics and it was addressed in the 0.5.1 update. The bug was quite simple – the mechanism mistakenly considered shots with Armor Piercing shells ricocheting from armour of the citadel as if they actually had penetrated the real armour of the Citadel and made its way into the critical and fragile area of the ship.

 

 

On the second picture, an Armour Piercing shell penetrates Casemate armour and goes into the armoured deck. But due to sharp angle, it ricochets, arms and explodes inside the Casemate.

 

It is obvious that in this case the damage should go into the Casemate - where the shell has actually exploded. But because of the bug mentioned before, Citadel suffered the damage.

 

As you can see the bug was quite critical and it basically neglected the role of internal armour layers. As soon as we discovered it, we started working on fix, and this fix appeared in 0.5.1 patch.

 

It was anticipated that the change would only impact calculations and the impact on the feel and battle performance of ships would be minimal. Unfortunately the rule “if it isn’t completely broken, don’t fix it” applied. As a result of the fix, two things worth highlighting happened:

 

  1. The impact of the change became really big in regards to battle performance of vessels relying strongly on Armour Piercing shells.
  2. There is high probability that during this fix, something else was broken in the damage model as well. We’re currently investigating the chain reaction as well.

 

These two issues combined have resulted in situation we have now - it has become a way more difficult to damage the Citadel. The survivability of many ships has greatly increased.

 

We believe that going back to the 0.5.0 damage model is not a good way out of this situation. One serious bug was fixed, and it is a good thing. However, we also do realize that the highest priority now is to check the rest of damage model and to make all necessary fixes, so we can all relax and play for fun and pleasure.

 

To sum up, we owe you an apology for harsh and unannounced change to game mechanics. The intention was not to impact your experience, but to improve the game.

 

Thank you for the patience and your timely feedback on the issue. We’ve put considerable resources into investigating every aspect of damage model that may have been broken or altered and we will do our best to make it right as soon as possible.
 

To address a comment that will most likely appear in just a few moments – yes, we could launch a guess-fix almost immediately. Keep in mind that we do not want to make matters worse and we are working hard on testing a solution and hope to deliver it to you in the quality we wish it to be delivered.


We will update you on the progress, so stay in touch.

 

EDIT: Update from 12/11/2015.

 

Captains,

 

As mentioned in the opening post, there was another AP vs. Citadel issue hiding under the floorboards. Luckily, our Developers were able to find it and drag it into the light - and it will be fixed in 0.5.1.1 (to be released on 13/11/2015).

 

What actually happened is that along with internal ricochet fix (see the opening post previous note to learn more) a new bug appeared. As a result, underwater shell ballistics was completely broken in 0.5.1. Let’s see how it worked before and actually should work after the patch:

  • AP shell hits the water near the ship;
  • It arms immediately;
  • Underwater it slows down and starts to “dive” towards the ship;
  • If it’s penetration power is good enough, it goes into the hull and detonates inside.

 

This scenario was quite common and it had particularly strong impact on battleships gameplay. It helped them greatly in damaging such modestly armoured targets as cruisers and not to worry about over-penetration. 

 

As we learned after two days of testing, the absence of this scenario in 0.5.1 was the main reason behind your negative experience with the update. We expect the fixed damage model to be almost identical to what you are used to.

 

We would like to thank you for your patience - now let's get out on the seven seas and let's sink some ships!

 

:izmena:

 


Edited by Tuccy, 12 November 2015 - 01:46 PM.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"It's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission." - Grace Hooper


Aerroon #2 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:29 PM

    Midshipman

  • Community Contributor

  • 1,695
  • Member since:
    03-23-2015

Thank you for the lengthy explanation. I don't quite get how you guys figured this wouldn't have drastic consequences but I guess it can happen. What I care about most is that we now know what was wrong. Thank you.

 

Could this also explain the HE change on super structure with low caliber guns like Mogami's? Where the reasoning is the same: where an HE shell that shouldn't penetrate the armor to deal damage was considered as penetrating it at times and thus HE damage was very high? And now since it's been fixed the HE shells with poor penetration can't do it well vs armored targets and are suffering. Is it the same reason?

 

Also the most important question: were those images drawn in MS Paint?


Edited by Aerroon, 10 November 2015 - 12:32 PM.

My Stuff:
Youtube  

Mister_Greek #3 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:41 PM

    cannot afford title

  • Supertester

  • 1,029
  • Member since:
    09-19-2013

View PostAerroon, on 10 November 2015 - 12:29 PM, said:

Also the most important question: were those images drawn in MS Paint?

 

 Probably the most irrelevant and funniest question i read for some time...Kudos to you:teethhappy:

Also thanks Karsun for the heads up.:honoring:

Is there even the faintest idea about the ETA of the Hotfix? I know the "WG immediately" very well....

And as von_ Chom said below me there are things that need urgent addressing...

 


Edited by Mister_Greek, 10 November 2015 - 01:07 PM.


von_chom #4 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:43 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 2,488
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

*
POPULAR

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 


Edited by von_chom, 10 November 2015 - 12:49 PM.

The Wargaming.net ID account will give you instant access to all of Wargaming’s products and enable the sharing of in-game Gold and Free Experience points.
In addition, the Unified Premium Account will allow users to benefit from premium features across all of Wargaming’s titles

MetropolitaN #5 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:45 PM

    Able Seaman

  • Alpha Tester

  • 97
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

First of all, thanks for the explanation of what was precisely changed in the game mechanics. However, am I the only one that who has a hard time hitting the Citadel on CL/CA if you are sitting in a BB? If no, than there is something else sort of fishy. At least I have no explanation for the fact, that if you hit a T8 CA with a T8 BB at a distance of ~5km with 6 confrmed hits in the citadel area, that you end of with somewhat like 6k dmg :sceptic:

 

The Mogami is completely different story and absolutely weird to play since 0.5.0.1...

 

a) The damage output with HE feels/is a lot lower now. You are destroying lots of AA modules without doing any damage. This problem is also addressed here: http://forum.worldof..._st__15#topmost

b) Turrets are now knocked out on a frequent basis like on an Atlanta. The last couple of matches with my Mogami I ended up with 1 or 2 turrets alive. However, my Mogami stats are now representative, but I have the feeling that a lot more people experienced the same thing.



JG4_sKylon #6 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:47 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Players

  • 585
  • Member since:
    06-30-2015

View Postvon_chom, on 10 November 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

 

+1 on the list.

I am wondering if someone managed to mingle around with the graphic settings / drivers to get the smoke from the smokestacks back.

As some people don´t experience this problem, we as users should be able to find a workaround.... unfortunately the time when i was able to do this myself has passed away silently.


 

NO TO RADIO POSITION FINDING!!


mtm78 #7 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:56 PM

    Admiral

  • Alpha Tester

  • 14,211
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postvon_chom, on 10 November 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

Spoiler

 

 

+1


"First they nerfed the carriers and I didn't speak out because I didn't play carriers.                                    Then they nerfed the torpedoes and I didn't speak out because I didn't play IJN DDs.

Then they nerfed cruiser HE and I didn't speak out because I didn't spam HE.                                             Then they nerved concealment on every class except BB's, and I didn't speak out because I didn't have common sense

Then the BBabies came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me."        

 


celeb2k #8 Posted 10 November 2015 - 12:59 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 160
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

questions to WG:

  •  there were at least public tests.  How that this was not handled there?
  •  how the hell you were not presetning this HUGE change in game model in patch notes ( I really dont take that one line as explenation)
  •  you really thought that when you fix that citadel 'bug' that were here several patches ago and ship were ballanced according it, that it wont affect whole gameplay?
  •  how is this related to changed HE performace of some ships (e.g. Mogami)?
  •  why some low calliber APs now do more dmg to BB's - like cleveland's APs to 5-8 km tier 8 BBs - angled.
  •  do you really think you can keet that citadel 'FIX' and just change all the other ships/shell mechanics/armors/... and make game ballanced?  Good luck! 
  • and one last Q:  what about the premium time, you've broken the gameplay, now you accepted it,  will be premium time returned (from date of 0.5.1 patch release to time of a new fix - at least 5 days)?

Edited by celeb2k, 10 November 2015 - 01:01 PM.


WWladCZ #9 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:01 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 198
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postvon_chom, on 10 November 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

 

This is really good explanation of the problem but I completely agree with von_choms post! There are also other issues which will need attention after this critical one is fixed.

Demanding better EU services, pricing and specials!


Hanszeehock #10 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:04 PM

    Commander

  • Supertest Coordinator
  • Alpha Tester
    Supertester

  • 3,681
  • Member since:
    01-17-2013

View PostMetropolitaN, on 10 November 2015 - 12:45 PM, said:

a) The damage output with HE feels/is a lot lower now. You are destroying lots of AA modules without doing any damage.

 

I've also experienced this. Plus 17 AP hits in just two salvos by my New Mexico vs another New Mexico and no damage at all. In the same battle I citadelled a Kongo for 20k plus damage.


Sinking deeper since 2014


_The_Plague_ #11 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:04 PM

    Seaman

  • Beta Tester

  • 30
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I am not a pro player, but a good avg. player. But this changes with the AP or citadel,are not that what this game need. I am a BB driver and what my Yamato do after the patch is a big Joke. 4-6 hits (range 10km) on a cruiser with 2400dmg. You have the stats sites where you can look what you done to the BB drives with this patch.

 

P.S: Sry for my bad English, i hope you can understand my post (what i mean)


 

 


Koutsuki_Haruna #12 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:07 PM

    Seaman

  • Players

  • 32
  • Member since:
    07-05-2015

View Postvon_chom, on 10 November 2015 - 12:43 PM, said:

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

+1

 

also the original speed of Amagi is 30.4 knots, and the HE of Mogami

 


Edited by Koutsuki_Haruna, 10 November 2015 - 01:10 PM.


t0ffik1 #13 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:08 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Players

  • 253
  • Member since:
    03-14-2015

Since almost everyone seen this post in russian version from 3 days ago:

 

Questions to WG:

Will this stuff also get fixed?

- way longer loading times with patch 0.5.1,

- Accuracy max range gunfire mod not working at all when looking at stats (doesnt affect max dispersion if its on or off),

- Will you return BB's disperion to pre 0.5.1 value? as currently on AP thread you have a movie that iowa FARTS (AS ITS NOT SHOOTING) a shells with 150m dispersion on 5k range - what wasnt happening before,

- Will the doghfight commander ability get fixed?,

- will you guys give current stats on what ships had their shells slowed-draft changed?,

- whats up with the new absurd number of XP for capping? a DD with 40k dmg done (mutsuki) and capped ALONE 1 point gets 1,5k base XP on a losing team (yes i did it) and its an abusrd value - considering that BB's would need over 130k dmg to get even close to that value on this tier.

- some of cruisers HE's are overperforming, while some do 0 dmg,

- some cruiser AP's guns seem to overperform (i've seen pepsi citadeling nagatos daily recently where earlier it was rare), while other guns (seem to suffer the fate of BB's (probably ty to angling rule with new armor calculation system),

- so considering you guys didnt made new improved logic of bouncing but made new idiotic one that with current rules makes yamato shells bounce off at 32mm armor and 30,01 deg angling while anything under 30deg is bounced off automaticly what is probably the reason why battleships (exept for the dispersion nerfs) have such lackluster performance as a DD can now bounce off a BB shell. Will you guys improve the rule of when shell is bounced from armor or make the BB's way more accurate, or increase dmg on overpens (or fix the overpenning value to lower?

 

- Also why are we not returning for next 1-2 months to old system while you guys would actually be able to test out the new one on test server and balance it out, instead you took the game to PRE ALPHA BALANCE SETUP with only 1-2 classes viable to play, while 3rd is bugged and 4th is unplayable? - where is the logic behind this? Because its quite shure that you wont even decently balance things out in 1-2 months.

 

On a side not - nope you cant make the matter worse for now, as then you would have to shut down 3 classes of ships and leave only 1 what wont rather happen.


Edited by t0ffik1, 10 November 2015 - 01:54 PM.

Why is RNG in bounce off mechanics - its ILLOGICAL as penetration is math based in real life (and in other games). Shell will always pen (or not pen) a plate on X angle, while having Y speed and Z weight while the plate remains the same, as long as all the values remain constant!!.

DELETE THE RNG from bounce mechanics and remake fire mechanics to be more realistic - then this game could go Esport and would stop bleeding players WG!!.

 

And from the day of 7.06.2016 NO MONEY FOR WG for treating their communities!.


clancy774 #14 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:30 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Beta Tester

  • 276
  • Member since:
    03-23-2015
Are the massive amounts of overpenetration BBs get against close, broadside cruisers wanted?

I think those were already there before the patch, but the occasional citadel masked the issue. I'm definitely not seeing the detonation in the casemate which is sketched above.

This may be the origin of this whole mess - even without the false-citadel bug the pre 0.5.1 armor model wasn't working correctly (i.e. too many overpens), but the occasional false citadel masked this lack of damage. Maybe this is why the devs thought it would not have a big influence - because they still counted for the pens to happen, only they didn't and maybe never did.

I definitely remember close shots at cruisers pre 0.5.1 with only overpens, but usually the next or the volley after would squeeze a citadel then.

Just a theory, what do you guys think...?

OM Odem Mortis


Trigger_Happy_Dad #15 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:34 PM

    Admiral

  • Beta Tester

  • 6,753
  • Member since:
    09-21-2014

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

View PostTrigger_Happy_Dad, on 09 November 2015 - 11:13 PM, said:

Gnevny vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 13 citadel hits, 22 seconds to kill target

 

Omaha vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 6 citadel hits, 22 seconds to kill target

 

Fuso vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 0 citadel hits, 61 seconds to kill target

 

.....

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 


Edited by Trigger_Happy_Dad, 10 November 2015 - 01:40 PM.

 

Pastaiolo #16 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:35 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Supertester
  • Alpha Tester

  • 648
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Glad to hear about the issue and that you are working on solving it.

t0ffik1 #17 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:36 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Players

  • 253
  • Member since:
    03-14-2015

View Postclancy774, on 10 November 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

Are the massive amounts of overpenetration BBs get against close, broadside cruisers wanted?

I think those were already there before the patch, but the occasional citadel masked the issue. I'm definitely not seeing the detonation in the casemate which is sketched above.

This may be the origin of this whole mess - even without the false-citadel bug the pre 0.5.1 armor model wasn't working correctly (i.e. too many overpens), but the occasional false citadel masked this lack of damage. Maybe this is why the devs thought it would not have a big influence - because they still counted for the pens to happen, only they didn't and maybe never did.

I definitely remember close shots at cruisers pre 0.5.1 with only overpens, but usually the next or the volley after would squeeze a citadel then.

Just a theory, what do you guys think...?

 

Yes it could also be the reason, as mostly there were only overpens and then citadel, but considering the thin armor around the citadel on cruisers it could be also made for semi realism and to mask also the bouncing off everything 30deg rule since shells bounced/some overpenned and you got 1-2-3 citadels and enough dmg to be happy (where only highmed and high range bb shots get over 30deg :) ).

 

Either way they wont balance the crapout even remotly fast now


Edited by t0ffik1, 10 November 2015 - 01:52 PM.

Why is RNG in bounce off mechanics - its ILLOGICAL as penetration is math based in real life (and in other games). Shell will always pen (or not pen) a plate on X angle, while having Y speed and Z weight while the plate remains the same, as long as all the values remain constant!!.

DELETE THE RNG from bounce mechanics and remake fire mechanics to be more realistic - then this game could go Esport and would stop bleeding players WG!!.

 

And from the day of 7.06.2016 NO MONEY FOR WG for treating their communities!.


Johnny_Phate #18 Posted 10 November 2015 - 01:53 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Beta Tester

  • 105
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostTrigger_Happy_Dad, on 10 November 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

 

Just fixing the citatel roof doesnt explain this at all. Something else is definitely broken. 

mariouus #19 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:05 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 140
  • Member since:
    03-22-2013

View PostTrigger_Happy_Dad, on 10 November 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

That is easy, shell trajectory. For 130mm it is allmost half of its firing range, For Omaha it is 1/3 and for Fuso less than 1/5. So shell hit the citadel at different angles. 130mm at good angle, 6.inch at slightly worse angle. And Fuso shells hit the citadel roof at autobounce angle, or very close to it.


Edited by mariouus, 10 November 2015 - 02:11 PM.


oruor #20 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:19 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Players

  • 269
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Well, they said, they fixed the "roof" but they saw something else is now broken. Those 3 videos are a clear example.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users