Jump to content


0.5.1.0 AP Damage Model Clarification

0.5.1

  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

Teppa #21 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:21 PM

    Seaman

  • Beta Tester

  • 33
  • 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?

 

 

 

 

Can you redo the test with Fuso shooting the Furutala closer to the waterline? Maybe the BB shells riccochet off the citadel roof as mariouus stated, so aiming lower should mean hitting the side of the citadel.

 

Another assumption is that BB shells simply overpenetrate cruisers citadels, though i don't know if this is possible.



Admiral_noodle #22 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:28 PM

    Wheaton's Lawyer

  • Supertester

  • 6,016
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015
Thanks for the update. As said in the RU post there are explicit rules (the 14 something rule) about BBs shells at high caliber. It's about auto-overmatch or something. So I guess this is the reason big guns are affected.

Suggest something involving these "big guns" is the problem.

Regional differences in missions and rewards are acceptable to drive player behaviour and numbers. 

Selling unique content on one server (EU) which is free to earn elsewhere is not. 

My new YouTube channel where I might put up some replays: https://www.youtube....rLXorHICMtDRCxA


mariouus #23 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:53 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 140
  • Member since:
    03-22-2013

View PostTeppa, on 10 November 2015 - 02:21 PM, said:

 

 

Can you redo the test with Fuso shooting the Furutala closer to the waterline? Maybe the BB shells riccochet off the citadel roof as mariouus stated, so aiming lower should mean hitting the side of the citadel.

 

Another assumption is that BB shells simply overpenetrate cruisers citadels, though i don't know if this is possible.

No, tryed it, citadel of Furutaka is invulnerable against Fuso at 4km, hitting the waterline seems to be producing bounces. You will start to get some citadels at around 7-8 km. But 0-8km it seems to be rather invulnerable.



Trigger_Happy_Dad #24 Posted 10 November 2015 - 02:53 PM

    Admiral

  • Beta Tester

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

View Postmariouus, on 10 November 2015 - 02:05 PM, said:

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.

 

Watch the videos again please, there is almost NO difference between the shell trajectories at that range.

 

DD and CL AP shells hit the Furutaka at a pretty FLAT angle too.

 

Furutaka - model (red area = citadel area)

 

From this test: salvo 2 - big hole right above the waterline, where another shell from the first salvo struck the Furutaka.....

 

Following the shells in slow-motion:

 

At least some of those shells hit the Citadel from the SIDE and not on the citadel roof.......???


Edited by Trigger_Happy_Dad, 10 November 2015 - 02:55 PM.

 

mariouus #25 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:03 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 140
  • Member since:
    03-22-2013
Is there any module layout available, Red area might just be waterline belt and maybe citadel actually sits lower?

Orkel2 #26 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:14 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Supertester

  • 371
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postmariouus, on 10 November 2015 - 03:03 PM, said:

Is there any module layout available, Red area might just be waterline belt and maybe citadel actually sits lower?
Spoiler

 

Citadel is behind the red line in case of the Furutaka. Some ships have it lower, but the Furutaka's citadel is pretty much 1:1 with the belt armor.



Ectar #27 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:14 PM

    Warspite Captain

  • Alpha Tester

  • 671
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Regarding the HE damage - This is also being investigated.  It's not as widely reported/highlighted by players as the AP shell issue was but rest assured this is also being investigated to see if there is an issue with specific guns.


Trigger_Happy_Dad #28 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:33 PM

    Admiral

  • Beta Tester

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

View Postmariouus, on 10 November 2015 - 02:05 PM, said:

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.

 

Explain this:

 

 

 

HOW are these shells hitting "the citadel's roof"???


Edited by Trigger_Happy_Dad, 10 November 2015 - 03:47 PM.

 

mariouus #29 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:46 PM

    Leading Rate

  • Players

  • 140
  • Member since:
    03-22-2013

View PostTrigger_Happy_Dad, on 10 November 2015 - 03:33 PM, said:

 

Explain this:

 

 

 

HOW are these shells hitting "the citadel's roof"???

I agree, no explanation here. 

 

I am currently testing it against Nagato. At first glance looks even more durable.



Kris_Bullet #30 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:54 PM

    Seaman

  • Players

  • 4
  • Member since:
    08-05-2015

Hi,

 

From the most tuff ships, bb are now one of the weakest.

 

Tested several ships (North Carolina is my highest ) and update brought mess,  lower dmg, rare citadels distance >13km . 

 

It is some joke?  bb are easy target for cruisers fast shooting dd  , so keep investigation fast about this bug becouse nobody buy new armored toys in shop , for ohters that is so annoying , no wonder bb are camping , close distance fight for example with torp cruiser is suicide.



fnord_disc #31 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester

  • 2,107
  • Member since:
    01-24-2015

What I don't understand is how you get those salvo damages.

 

12852

10506

 

Penetration damage is 3400, overpenetration is 1020. There's no way to get to those odd numbers with that. And the HP of the midsection wasn't depleted yet or the next salvo wouldn't have kept damaging it.

 

To me it looks like the new damage model also caps penetration damage somehow.


Edited by fnord_disc, 10 November 2015 - 03:57 PM.

 

Armor Penetration Curves For All Ships

 

God was a dream of good government.


Orkel2 #32 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:58 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Supertester

  • 371
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View Postfnord_disc, on 10 November 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

What I don't understand is how you get those salvo damages.

 

12852

10506

 

Penetration damage is 3400, overpenetration is 1020. There's no way to get to those odd numbers with that. And the HP of the midsection wasn't depleted yet or the next salvo wouldn't have kept damaging it.

 

It's possible the ship section's health was depleted. When they turn "black" they take reduced damage (bow, stern, superstructure, hull) which would explain it.

 

Edit: Yep you can see the middle section go black after the first salvo in video 2.



fnord_disc #33 Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester

  • 2,107
  • Member since:
    01-24-2015

View PostOrkel2, on 10 November 2015 - 03:58 PM, said:

 

It's possible the ship section's health was depleted. When they turn "black" they take reduced damage (bow, stern, superstructure, hull) which would explain it.

 

Edit: Yep you can see the middle section go black after the first salvo in video 2.

 

Yes, but the next salvo he fired did roughly the same damage. It can't have been depleted yet.

Edited by fnord_disc, 10 November 2015 - 04:00 PM.

 

Armor Penetration Curves For All Ships

 

God was a dream of good government.


GeneralRushHour #34 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:03 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Beta Tester

  • 354
  • Member since:
    05-21-2015

This is honestly the best post i´ve seen here yet. Thanks for the explanation and more importantly, the communication!

 



Teppa #35 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:18 PM

    Seaman

  • Beta Tester

  • 33
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Well i still think BBs simply overpenetrate cruisers citadels broadside on. I don't really understand why it happens after the armr rework though, since armor should have become stronger. But since the patch side-on hits overpenetrate and as soon as ships start to angle alot of my BB shells bounce, especially for high caliber guns.

 

On the other hand, with Arkansas Beta i still get alot of citadel hits on cruisers, carriers and BB easily.



Martaloc801124 #36 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:23 PM

    Able Seaman

  • Players

  • 62
  • Member since:
    02-11-2013

The 203 mm guns on CA's are useless too when we shoot Ap ammo.I tested yesterday and today my Atago ,Ibuki and Zao .Atago and Ibuki AP ammo is not working, they ricochet and bounce off all the time even when the enemy CA show her broadside total useless to shoot Ap, aganist BB's the AP do zero damage , lol!!! HE is the only damage source. Zao are interesting too, zero citadel hits but constans dmg with Ap around from 4 too 6 k dmg, when i shoot  HE i make 8-9k dmg, hilarious. When i shoot high tier BB's Yamato ,Montana ,Iowa and Izumo i can damege them with AP around 5-6K, then why cant i citadel some the lighter armored cruisers? This 5.1 patch is total garbage.

I hope some patch will fix this because the constans HE pew pew is boring and miserable.


Edited by Martaloc801124, 10 November 2015 - 04:25 PM.


dlbomber #37 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:25 PM

    Seaman

  • Beta Tester

  • 3
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

There are a few things that seem likely 

 

1. I think that citadel hits are overpenning, which from what I understood prepatch was not possible . If you hit the citadel , it was a citadel. 

 

2. Compounding this the dev's have highlighted that compartments are involved. Maybe after each slab of armor is penetrated , the arm reset of the shell is reset instead of only being set on the 1st armor hit, This would explain why you are getting an operpen on the large caliber's which may have a longer arm time than the small calibers. The arm time is never actually long enough to trigger before the shell has gone completely through the ship as it keeps getting reset.

 

This can explain why the smaller calibers in the same tier have no problems getting citadels while the large calibers just show bounce and overpen. It can also explain while ships are angling they get citadelled, but while broadsided they overpen. 

 

 

 

 


Edited by dlbomber, 10 November 2015 - 04:27 PM.


Martaloc801124 #38 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:33 PM

    Able Seaman

  • Players

  • 62
  • Member since:
    02-11-2013
With small calibers are some issues too, i played my Murmansk , after 5.1 was not problem to her citadel pen high tier cruisers Pensacola and Myoko. Today i cant citadel one Aoba from 6 km , i shoot my first citadel to her form 3,4 km .The 152 mm CL guns suffer the 5.1 patch too. AP suck very hard now.

Edited by Martaloc801124, 10 November 2015 - 04:33 PM.


44smok #39 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:48 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Players

  • 2,903
  • Member since:
    07-02-2015

I think I might found the root cause of the problem. At least one of them.

 

The game currently takes under consideration the last armor contact when defining the damage applied. The situaton described on the pic:

 

shows a shell for which the last contact was a bounce. Therefore zero damage is applied to such hit. It gets counted as a bounce and not as a normal penetration.

 

This would explain situation where you get 6 hits from BB to CA for only 4k damage. So 4 of your hits were standard overpens through unprotected parts of armor and 2 have been counted as bounces (from internal citadel armor).

 

What does this mean in practise when firing BB to CA? Here's a comparison how such an example salvo (6 hits including 4 standard overpens & 2 internal citadel bounces) would be resolved under:

a) 4.1 = 2 citadels + 4 overpens = 2*10+4*1 = 24k damage. That's the kaboom situation we've been quite used to.

b) 5.1 as intended = 2 normal pens + 4 overpens = 2*3+4*1 = 10k damage. Still a bit too small penalty for a reckless cruiser but giving both sides chances. For CA to withdraw, for BB to be able to kill him. Acceptable I'd say.

c) 5.1 as implemented = 2 bounces + 4 overpens = 2*0+4*1 = 4k damage. In your face!

 

This still doesn't explain why CA's are still able to citadelother CA's. Perhaps as in the comment above:

 

View Postmariouus, on 10 November 2015 - 02:05 PM, said:

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.

 

 

 

 


"We go in do dem KABOOM and win EZ"


ZuupermaN #40 Posted 10 November 2015 - 04:51 PM

    Able Seaman

  • Alpha Tester

  • 82
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I also was very surprised when playing the mogami against an angled Izumo I did 5k damage with 9 AP shells, dont know how many hit them but it should have been 0 damage, or maybe a couple of hundred.

How the hell am I bouncing with an Iowa's 406mm shells on the Izumo from the same angle, and dealing decent damage with 155mm shells from a mogami....

 

How much more broken can it be...






7 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users