Bl4ckh0g

I'm actually curious so please tell me. Is it possible that IJN cruiser are so easily citadel hit because they had rather underwhelming armor protection? http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/10553-progress-in-this-game-doesnt-make-any-sense/page__st__20__pid__185253#entry185253 according to this armor are nearly finished so the reason IJN CAs are getting their citadel penetrated is due to either: They have bad armor Barbettes does not have armor value ( due to be fixed in patch 3.1) This would mean that the only way you can balance them without changing their armor values (which is already more on the Mogami, 140 mm) would be to increase their maneuverability and/or detection ranges with possibly buffing their main armament and torpedoes. Feel free to correct me If I'm wrong (seriously though)

Currently a DD have to close in less than 3 km to make a torpedo run which cannot be dodged. Meaning that the battleship will at least eat most of the torpedoes instead of 1 or 2. Against a competent battleship player that's simply impossible. Currently The only thing that can effectively( meaning does not lose 80% of his/her life) kill a BB is another BB. Even if you can make a perfect torpedo run with a CV it will take more than 5 minutes to kill a guy since it requires at least 4 squadrons. CAs can kill BBs, but If we assume that they are in the same tier and at the same skill level , most of the time the CA will die. A DD can only kill a BB if the BB player pays no attention whatsoever to the DD. other than that, it is nigh impossible. So I do not really understand why would you even want to make the BBs stronger by buffing their secondaries giving them basically a full light cruiser's firepower as extra..... Battleships are already the strongest class of vessels in the game contrary to real life. Most of you guys forgetting the fact that in WWII battleships didn't really achieved much.......

Well you can improve the accuracy on the main guns and to balance it you can slow down the shell velocity or increase the air drag the shell suffers. I'd be more happy with more accurate BB guns but with let's say 20-25 seconds flying time at 21 km. Or something like that, you get the idea....

so anyway this thread was about some sort of problem with advancing with tiers amirite? About that It is rather interesting as why the USN destroyers have decreasing turn radius from tier 6 onward with reduced detectability, I mean 9 km on the Gearing? Seriously? The Japanese CAs does not seem to improve as well as I'd expect. Though my main concern is the CVs tier-to-tier balance. It is terrible, a tier higher CV player can dominate the other one with it's superior fighters. I had battles when I lost my whole fighter squadron while they managed to shot down 1 or 2 planes. It would be nice if you could tone down the tier-to-tier progression of the fighters. I even thought of something like reduce the number of different fighters to 3 or 4 kinds of planes. For example the USN would only have the Buffalo(for Langley, and stock Inde), the wildcat for inde and saipan, the corsair for ranger and Lexington and the Bearcat for Essex. If you make it in a way that they would not be so different in stats for example the Bearcat would only have a 10-15% more firepower( and ofc better speed and such) then it would still feel like you've progressed but by not that much that you can dominate the other carrier without considerable losses. For research you could make like a stock corsair with the 6 x .50 cal M2s and a top one with the 20 mm AN/M2 cannons same with the bearcat and the wildcat. The langley could have a stock biplane with an upgrade to the buffalo. You might also stick an only tier 4 MM on the langley so players can learn and not get annihilated by better Independence players.

YESSS YESSSSS I FOUND IT khrm Yes I found Evidence that I, in fact did not said any BS or at least not much http://yarchive.net/mil/naval_shell_types.html Well it's not clearly states that they did not used HE against battleships but it contains enough information that I can confirm my claim. I think..... I hope..... Other than that SORRY FOR HIJACKING THIS THREAD FOR THIS DISCUSSION! (It's censored so it's okay) hue hue hue hue http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-070.htm there's some info about all-or-nothing armor in the previous link they stated that there's no such thing as HE shell, there's only HC high capacity shells which are essentially AP shells with more explosive inside them. But seriously I'm stopping this discussion about the armor and all let's get back to the tier thingy or something

Waitaminute Why wouldn't AP shells do damage against armored parts of the ship? And what unarmored parts are you exactly referring? All-or-nothing concept was about making the ships critical part armored against Capital ship guns while the rest was only equipped with light armor against HE. The 5-10k salvos are not penetrating the citadel they are doing damage by damaging other "unarmored" parts of the ship. If 152 mm guns would penetrate the citadel they'd do 3,5k damage per shot not per salvo. Edit: I mean I understand what are you trying to say, but why would you Shoot HE against 25-50 mm thick armor? HE is nice for carriers to set their decks on fire and DDs because they have at most 25 mm. IIRC the USN did not used HE against ships they exclusively used AP. HE and HC shells were against ground targets.

Okay we are just doing circles here. But once again I'll explain. First. The hit-point system in game represents the fighting capability of a ship. That means that when you receive for example a 5246 damage hit that means that your ship suffered some damage: 67 people died, 103 injured, the entire canteen got destroyed, splinters damaged the internal communications lines between some rooms etc, etc. When you receive a citadel hit that means that one shell penetrated your forward magazine ignited the ammunition, killed 300 people and nearly tore the aft of the ship apart. In order to take a ship of action you do not need to sink it. you just need to cause enough damage to the ship so it cannot function anymore as a fighting unit. This can be achieved via destroying the FCS, killing most of the crew and such. So do you see the deep darker blue parts? That is the citadel. Everything else can be damaged and destroyed with 152 mm gunfire. When 3 Clevelands gang up on a Yamato and kill it, that means that they destroyed everything that's not the citadel and not underwater. The Yamato would still have it's main Batteries but it would not have any FCS, most of her crew would be dead or injured, The funnels would be destroyed etc. Even if they batter the Citadel long enough the armor would eventually give up. And I seriously will not write a single sentence more about this matter.

Well I actually never saw a 152 mm shell penetrate the citadel of a BB , though I once managed to pen a Fuso's citadel with the Pensacola. As I said the damage that the 152 mm shells do are not citadel penetrations, they are the damage to the other parts of the ship, crew, superstructure etc. The 203 mm shell can penetrate the Battleship's citadel, the 8"/55 guns on the Pensacola can penetrate 203 mm at 11 340 meters and 254 mm from 8 230 meters. The only battleships that's currently in game and have thicker belt armor than 254 mm are Kawachi(305) , Fuso(305), Nagato(289) and The Yamato(420). These ship are relatively protected against 203 mm guns. However this only means that these ships cannot be citadel penetrated by 203 mm guns from a distance. They can still be damaged. As I said HP does not mean the HP of the citadel. It means the overall fighting capability of the ship.

Well I played really small amount of battles in IJN CAs but I think what they should do is give them the type 93 long lance torpedoes back, maybe increase their gun's range a tiny bit and improve their maneuverability so they can dodge better. in patch 3.1 they plan to fix the bug that causes the turrets to blown up when the ship gets hit in the barbette so that should do some good for IJN CAs. but other than that.... maybe increase the dmg of the 203 mm guns so they can perform better.. I'm only at the Mogami at the moment but it really seems to get penned easily but I think that's more due to the poor armor on the ship. Though If i can keep it in range it really can shine with them guns.

Well they said that the barbettes are bugged, they do not have any armor value and because they are part of the turret when they are damaged the whole turret blown up. Besides that, 152 and 155 mm guns do around 3-5k damage per salvo at ranges around 5-10 km against Kongo and such relatively poorly armored Battleships. I do not think that's wrong, they should do these kind of damages, below 3-4 km you can penetrate the side of a Kongo and do nice 8-10k rolls with a full broadside of a Cleveland but at the same time the Kongo batters the Cleveland as well with the secondaries. I played a couple of battles in the Galaxy and the Zaya ( Des Moines and Senjo) when they had this space event and I noticed that against a Yamato you do rather poor damage with AP shells, only around 3k per salvo but much better 5-6 k damage with HE so there's that. And consider that the damage these low caliber guns do are not citadel penetrations, the citadel pens are the big ones that takes half your health off. This damage comes from the superstructure and other not-so-well armored parts of a ship. HP is the combat potential of the ship. It contains the buoyancy, the crew and the overall fighting capability of a ship. When you hit a ship with a shell even if you do not penetrate the main armor belt you will cause problems and these "problems" are represented as damage in the game. So when you batter a Yamato for full 3 minutes with 8 inch gunfire from 14 km you actually never really penetrate the citadel, you just destroy everything else making the ship unable to fight anymore, this is represented as the sinking of the ship. Otherwise there would be a wreck floating in place for the rest of the battle there.

I looked around a little bit about gun penetrations and while I did not found the IJN 356 mm and 410 mm guns penetration I found the USN 14" and 16" gun's. The USN 14"/45 could penetrate 226 mm at 14 630 meters and 302 mm at 10 920 meters, bear in mind that the IJN 356 mm gun had a little bit more penetration so maybe add 500-1000 meters to those ranges. But basically If you are fighting against a Fuso stay from more than 15 km from him and you'll have a nice chance against her, The 41 cm guns on the Amagi and Nagato could penetrate her citadel while her 36 cm guns cannot yours...hopefully

Well The Omaha's have only a 76 mm of armor protecting the machinery under the smokestacks so if you show them your entire side you'll get killed fast. Sail in a sharp angle towards the target if you are under 10-11 km or use your range and dodge. Basically your armor only protects you from DD fire, even against 127 mm guns you'd better not show your side under 6 km.

True I'm born as a Hungarian TPBM never licked a camel before

That's because152 mm guns are capable of penetrating most of the ships at ranges below 10-11 km and because damages are not really well toned between guns, for example Pepsi's 203 mm guns do 5k damage while Cleve's do 3,4k. the answer lies in the Damage of the guns. The difference between high caliber and lower caliber guns should be much bigger than it is now. Maybe. Not so sure. Might be a bad idea.

Do you see where the rudder is? Good luck hitting that. And I kinda doubt that a 152 mm shell has enough explosive material on board to do any kinds of damage against something that's 5 m under the water. And even if It could damage the rudder the bloody thing is so huge you cannot possible cause any significant problem to it by a measly 152 mm shell. And actually on a side note 3 Clevelands might not be able to sink a Yamato Class battleship, but sure as hell they can wreck everything that's not under the water... The superstructure is unarmored and the AA mounts and secondaries at most have 57 mm of armor. After 10 minutes all that would be left from the bloody thing are a floating hunk of metal with 3 turrets strapped on top of it.... Half the crew would be dead or injured, most of the ship would be in flames and probably everything that's not the citadel would be flooded as well.... Just because you cannot sink the bloody thing does not mean that it will be anything more than floating scrapyard

Well yeah but the Bismarck had a pretty bad design since one torpedo could jam the rudder making it uncontrollable so She might not be the best example..... anyway I think ArdRaeiss said that torps could damage the steering, maybe what they could do is make the rudder part of the steering system so when a torpedo hits the rudder it would knock out the entire steering of course if it's not already implemented..... Well they could also play with the idea to make the ship less maneuverable when a torpedo hits the rudder Also to hit the rudder with a bomb.... the luck you'd need to do that you'd be better off going to Las Vegas, same with high caliber shells

I think he meant ship launched torpedos... A Type 93 long lance had 490 kg of explosives, a Mark 15 had 374 kg while an american 1000 lb GP bomb has 202 kg, a 500 lb only 87 kg

I thought about it for some time, Would it be possible to display a ship's IZ against it's own guns in the port at the survivability tab? Would help a lot of people immensely

I can double that they really seem to do a sudden drop at the end of their fall

well If a Pensacola closes to 5 km from a Battleships she's already dead If that BB pays any attention whatsoever so a Cleveland could penetrate 127 mm of armor from 4700 meters, the Kongou has a 120mm belt armor IIRC so yeah Edit: A 8"/55 gun could penetrate 254 mm of armor with a 152 kg AP shell from 9880 meters On the matter of torpedoes the problem is that they can be spotted from relatively far away rendering them rather useless... Basically if you want to hit a BB with most of your torps you need to close in less than 3,5 km against a cruiser less than 2,5 km which is suicidal On another note the Carriers have some terrible tier to tier progression a one tier higher carrier can annihilate the other one with ease rendering the other ship completely useless also It's rather unsatisfactory to play with carriers, your only dmg source is the torp bombers the dive bombers usually do no more than 5k dmg per battle which is rather bad And yeah it would be nice that if Higher tier DDs would be you know actually better than a lower tier one

Hmm I still have one concern. That is If you'd make the rockets in a way that they fired from the aircraft at around 1-1,5 km and each individual rocket would have 3k +/- 500 damage that'd mean that DDs would be in a rather a tight spot. If the rockets would behave like shells and they'd have a dispersion of around 25-50 meters maybe? Then One squadron would heavily damage any DD and CL given the fact that one would have 12 rockets with 36 k damage potential? Basically you'd have to hit the guy with like 4-6 rockets and he's fish meal. Integrating it into the game so that it'd have some kind of skill requirement and not just a point and click would be hard. But other than that it might be doable. Making it into the tier system though.... you have a rocket for 10 tiers and they'd have to be tier 8-10 on only one nation? (If fighters but a Helldiver and avenger could also carry them so maybe from even tier 5?)

Hmm yeah It might be that actually. I think they said it in one of their videos that they won't implement rockets because they are rather underwhelming against ships. Well you can see why the Tiny Tim only had a warhead of 67 kgs while a HVAR rocket had 11 kgs and Corsair could carry I think around 6 HVARs? You'd be better off with just bombs... I had an idea not a moment ago about carriers that they could implement armor-piercing bombs for the Dive bombers so they can damage Battleships and CVs while the fighters could be equipped with HE against DDs and such poorly armored targets. But really the main reason why they do not implement rockets is because they carry way less explosive compared to bombs making them rather underwhelming. Also The Helldivers might not carry 250 lbs bombs those bombs only had 44 kgs of explosive compared to the 202 kgs of the 1000 lb on a side note a 500 lbs carried 87 kgs so a Tiny Tim would be in between those two

Tiny Tim rockets might be a bit problematic. 1 Hellcat could carry 2 rockets,1 rocket had 148 lbs or rather 67 kg warhead ,The type 93 torpedo's was 490 kg, One torpedo doing 20k dmg means one rocket's would be around 2600. That means an entire squadrons damage would be 31 200 If they have a 20% accuracy on the rockets that'd make 6240 max dmg probably against a DD and most likely 1-2k against a BB or CA. Just for comparison a Hellcat could also carry 2 1000 lbs or 450 kg bomb each having a 202 kg filling mass which is 3 times the size of the tiny Tims. Conclusion rockets are weak and puny. Edit.: I used the Type 93's because I have no idea what kind of load-out the dive bombers use Edit 2: So I looked up some things and the Helldiver at tier 5 could carry 1x1000 lb or 450 kg bomb with a damage of 2480, so the Tiny Tim's would be third of that around 826 which means that 1 squadron of hellcat could theoretically do 9912 maximum damage Only if, of course we assume that the maximum damage displayed in port is for individual planes and not the entire squadron.....Which I highly doubt

Well the Aoba is a rather bad ship so you need to have a lot of da skillz to play it properly. On the matter how to make cruisers more valuable....well just buff the DDs to godlike heights so cruisers will be needed to keep them in check P.S.: dodge like a madman you'll do better

I do not think Wg should even run tests about this mod. I mean just look at the amount of people who are against it. This is ridiculous. They want to run test to see if the mod has any significant impact on the game whatsoever yet they completely ignore the reaction of the community. It does not matter if the mod affects gameplay or not at this point. This has become more of a PR issue rather than a game development or balance issue. If they want to ignore the community then go ahead, they're only digging their own graves at this rate.....