Bl4ckh0g

JapLance You know mate You are like the samurai who tried to fight rifles, gattling guns and artillery with Swords, armor and honor. A Naval game without aviation. A ground combat game without artillery. A WW2 era game without planes. That's the stuff of fantasy....

ROFL Aircraft carriers do not belong in a naval game? Mate Aircraft carriers won the pacific. One of the most advanced Battleship of all times- The Iowa class was basically a Carrier escort throughout her whole career. damn Carriers do not belong in a naval game. Good one. They should paint the seas red with blood not degraded to some kind of support role. Hyay that was a good one....

This post is about the incorrect or at least vague description about the armor values on main gun turrets. It is both confusing and misleading that some ships have enormous values while others, while clearly better designed and armored *cough* Yamato *cough* have, for some reason underwhelming armor in the game description ( see Yamato with it's 57 mm gun casemate armor against a NO with 76 mm )

I'm not even sure they even implemented that patch. Like, I've never downloaded anything that's vaguely resembles 0.3.0.4

Yeah I know about that, but it just seems so weird if they are for the main guns. Might be some kind of translation error or something like that as well, because these numbers are pretty underwhelming otherwise.

That patch fixes bugs in the armor. It does not add suddenly 100 mm magic plating to poorly armored ships. The Aoba will still be as easily killed because she has terrible armor, that ship has 76 mm of belt armor.. The Cleveland could penetrate 127 mm from 14 300 meters. The Aoba has superior penetration which means it can citadel pen a Cleveland from her max range but the Cleveland can do that to her as well. The Cleveland is not hard to citadel pen because of her armor, she's hard to citadel hit because most of her important parts are under the waterline. The Cleveland is just a better ship and that's all.

First of all the Cleveland is overpowered because it is nerfed to tier 6 levels and it is still able to fight Effectively against cruisers up to tier 8. You have to balance individual ships against their own class not against Battleships or destroyers. An Aoba is just as effective against a destroyer as a Cleveland is but that does not change the fact that the Aoba faces severe disadvantages when is up against a Cleveland. The Aoba is already buffed considerably compared to it's real life performance, that ship could achieve a rate of fire of 3 with it's main guns....in game she has 5,5!! What is the point of putting a ship that is clearly strong in tier 6 and nerf it to oblivion instead of putting it in tier 8 when it can be a good ship with it's real life characteristics? Why would you do that?

Valar Dohaeris. All men must serve.

Aren't those for the secondary batteries and AA? I think it says 57 or something mm for Yamato and IIRC the Yamato had around that much armor covering the secondaries.

Well It should be 203 mm, how much is it in game I have noooo idea

The Cleveland was one of the best light cruisers ever built. It had a historical rate of fire of 10 round per minute. It's AA is also weaker than in real life. That cruiser should be in at least tier 7 probably in tier 8. The US built 27 and none of them was lost during WWII. You cannot leave such a ship in tier 6. The Des Moines was beast. It had the same rate of fire as the Cleveland. It had a displacement of 15 000 t. It was the last all-gun cruiser the USN has built and it was probably the best heavy cruiser in the world. Like seriously How cannot they be overpowered? Everything else is weak against them because there is nothing as strong as them.

I wholeheartedly agree. The Pensacola is a great ship. It's small and turns like a dream. The guns, DEM guns, They are absolutely great I had battles when I citadel penned Fusos with that thing. It can wreck stuff hard. The guns also have a great turning arc, they can turn so you can sail and fire all your guns in an angle that makes you incredibly hard to hit. I had battles when I get hit only 1 or 2 shell from a Full broadside of a Kongo at 9 km. I'd choose the Pensacola over any other Cruiser up to tier 7 to go up against a BB. On another note. Isn't the frequency to get citadel penned only depends on the armor covering the citadel and the location of the critical components on the ship? Modifying that sound like an awfully unhistorical thing to do. I think the reason why the USN cruisers have a lower tendency to get citadel hit is because their magazines are under the waterline and what's above it is protected by thicker or better quality armor than the IJN's. For example the NO class had their magazines under the waterline ( which sometimes not the best idea but whatever) and had a rather big leap in armor protection compared to the Pensacola's. Yet it seems that even that was not enough to be effective, and the NO is better armored than most of the IJN CAs.

nah sadly It's not. Even the magazines were only covered by 127 mm. I tied searching for the internal structure of some of the IJN CAs but I found nothing. Info about them is rather scarce. but what I found is that they were rather poorly armored compared to USN CLs and CAs. One of the reasons why the american ships are hard to citadel might be due to them having their magazines under the waterline. Also some ships like the Baltimore and Des Moines have a rather good armor, their IZ was around 10 km to 20 km against 8" shells. And that's with the Super heavy 8" shells which could penetrate 203 mm from 14 km. So yeah even if they fix the turret barbettes the IJN ships will still suffer from destroyed turrets due to them having poor armor. For example the New Orleans had 203 mm armor at the turret fronts, The Cleveland had 152 mm on the turrets and 150 mm on the barbettes.

I checked on wikipedia and tried other sources but as far I as know the Mogami only had 25 mm of all around turret armor so yeah even if they implement the corret barbette armor the Mogami will suffer from losing turrets.

Hmm I doubt over-penetrating is an issue here. Over penetrating is more of the stuff of destroyers when the shell goes through the ship and explodes after it penetrated the hull the other side. Mostly because the shell doesn't slow down enough I guess? Or maybe the fuse does not trigger fast enough? Probably something like that. But I doubt that would happen to any Battleship or Cruiser. Could it be that the machinery and magazine is under the waterline thus you are not hitting it, only at longer ranges? Or it could be some kind of semi-over penetration when the shell penetrates the armor but explodes after it went through the magazines or machinery, exploding behind them? Or you just got unlucky and all your shots missed the important parts. It could also be a bug, you might want to report it to support maybe they can say something about it. Anyway if you are only encountering this problem at shorter ranges, then just stay away from those ranges.

Wouldn't It make more sense to cause flooding after such a hit? given the fact that If you give only one nation a shell that does 50% more damage if it hits under the waterline would cause a rather big storm of hate among the community...

You have 5 turrets and their armor is like 25 mm. You are gonna lose them when you get hit. But yeah might be the barbette bug, though I'm not sure whether they implemented the micro-patch already or they are yet to implement it..

Make it in a way that when a Battleship repairs itself and receives damage the repair would simply stop. I propose this because it's annoying and quite probably unfair that when a CA works his bottom half off to take down a battleship just to see that said battleships repairs the damage in 20 seconds while It's under fire. Basically make that repair a "non-combat" ability. When a battleship do not receive any damage for like 30-40 seconds then he can began repairing itself, but if she takes any damage during the repair process the repairing will just stop. You could even increase the amount healed, just please take this ridiculous healing potion away. That's it.

Hyay, I did not quite tell the whole story so I apologize for that. We played on Fault Line Domination , both that Amagi and I went for C, but when he saw that we had an Amagi as well and some other cruisers he decided to turn to A. We had a Yamato in that battle who reaped the Enemy at A so we nearly win that side. I decided to go for A as well because I saw that the Yamato is struggling with some DD and of course a full HP enemy Amagi was sailing towards him. Through out the time we get there I constantly tried to batter him and hide behind the islands so I wouldn't get pwned. By the time we get there the DD run away and the Yamato advanced past the Islands and was in the open sea. The Amagi was at around 13 k HP and was coming through the Islands. I was 8 km from him. He was pre-aimed at the Yamato so I could get 2 salvos into him by the time he turned his turrets around, with his first salvo (I think he only fired his rear turrets) he downed me to 10-13 k from 30k. My first salvo was 7 k into him. My second was 5 k. My third was 3-5 k. Right after I fired the fourth he killed me. Someone I think the Yamato killed him. In this situation NO matter what I had to engage him or watch Our Yamato burn. The infuriating part was that I should have killed him. By the time my second salvo hit him he was on 7 k HP from his magic potion. I get the whole repair thing, I do. I played Battleships myself. But in these situations when 1 or 2 k health means So much, It's just .... It is undoubtedly the most frustrating, infuriating thing ever happened to me in this game....

Well, yeah "CAs should not kill BBs" is all fine and nice, I can live with that. When a 13 k HP Amagi kills me in my Full HP Pensacola, that's fine too, It's rather annoying but fine I can live with that as well, just completely avoid third of the enemy team, I get it. But when said 13 k HP Amagi kills me after I pump 17-18 k damage into him, well that is a rather big go and bury yourself under cement moment of mine. So I think It is quite understandable that I am slightly upset about such a thing, Is it not?

The damage control system mod 1 reduces fire chance by 5% so that's something, also the commander has the fire prevention with -7% chance of fire. Put the two together and you'll get 3% chance on Pensa with HE. Though I have the feeling that fire is and RNG heavy business and might be influenced by the impact point of the shells.(hitting deck has higher chance etc.)

It is more of a personal preference. HE do a more stable damage against destroyers but AP can do some nice citadel crits even on long range, so far I did not really suffer or at least not much from firing AP against DDs. Some cruisers which have 76 mm of armor or less can be citadel penetrated with the USN 5"/38 guns from less than 6 km. Against Phoenixes and Omahas you can achieve some nice results, managed to kill mid-low HP Phoenixes with Nicholas and Farragut couple of times, which is nice. Though I do not really get the difference between the 127 mm AP and HE rounds afaik the USN only used HC rounds on the 5"/38 guns. It does not really matter that much whether you use HE or AP against other DDs, HE does less damage per shot but critical hits stuff while AP with proper aim does bigger damage with some risk of low rolls, I think it mostly depends on the aim and dodging skills of the opponent rather than ammo choice. This is mostly personal experience ofc.

First of all the optimal ammo choice is depends on your gun and target. With a DD's 127 mm gun you should shoot AP against poorly armored cruisers in close range and against DDs, everything else HE- the damage in this case does not matter since you will do extremely poor damage against armored targets with both ammo. 152-155 mm guns have enough penetration for dealing with cruisers so AP all the way against them. Against DDs HE will wreck them hard. Battleships are slightly more difficult. MY preferred choice is AP with small calibers since then have a low chance of fire, with 203 mm guns you could set them on fire first with HE wait for them to use the repair and do it again, after that AP. For battleships well cruiser and other BBs AP anything else HE. Also note that low caliber guns have a small chance of fire and there's a module and skill that reduces the chances of fire by around 5-10% maybe? something like that the use of HE kind of depends on a situation as well. for example if you are in a division with 2 Clevelands and you come across a Kongo then one of you can pepper him with AP to do damage while the other sets him on fire and crits his turrets with HE. but basically HE was never really meant against ships in real life it was for shore bombardment mainly.

I think 2 days ago I did a Dive bomb attack on a Kongo with my Independence and managed to do a staggering 70 damage. But my best strike which was around 11 torpes in one go? managed to take around 50-60% of the BBs health. I also was on a receiving end when I collected around maybe 10 torpedo strikes from 2 langleys in my Myogi, they only managed to halve me so yeah. But I'd like to tell that I'm okay with things like CAs getting pwnd by BBs or the Damages of the CVs but I'm really not okay with the fact that DDs are near useless in higher tiers. There's just ins't anything in this game than can counter the BBs and that's why there's so god damn many of them which makes battles quite passive. I much much much more love the fast paced dog-fighting of cruisers and Destroyers than the lumbering pancake throwing contest of the fat Battleships.

There isn't really plunging fire in game the 360 mm and 410 mm shells strike at around 17-18 degrees at 20 km. They might seem like they do plunging fire but that's supposed to be an illusion to deceive the enemy. Given that I doubt a lot of shells penetrate the hull below the waterline the other side.