Jump to content

RichardNixon

Players
  • Content Сount

    340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    134

About RichardNixon

  • Rank
    Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia
  1. RichardNixon

    Understanding WGs Armor Penetration Curves

    Moskva air drag: 0.2549 New Orleans and Pensascola have the same shells and so the same air drag. What target ships do people use for testing mid range armour values, like 150-250mm?
  2. RichardNixon

    Understanding WGs Armor Penetration Curves

    Air drag values as requested: Myoko AP: 0.337 Kongo C hull AP: 0.331 Tachibana: 0.35
  3. RichardNixon

    Understanding WGs Armor Penetration Curves

    Ugh, very old typo. Broke my earlier attempts to match the formula. Physical drag may fit the travel time evidence. I suspect the "Krupp" number is used as a constant multiplier, with ~2400 as a divisor, but there are a lot of unknowns to fit. If you want to demonstrate that it does something then Murmansk vs Omaha should be a good test.
  4. RichardNixon

    Understanding WGs Armor Penetration Curves

    If anyone else is playing around with this stuff, here's an inverse trajectory calculator: http://jaj22.org.uk/trajectory/trajcalc.html Pick a shell, set a target distance and it'll calculate the travel time, impact velocity and angle. Drag is applied in direction of travel, fixed air resistance assumed. Apparently this isn't strictly what WoWS does, although if you simply divide the travel time by 3x then it's very close for the larger shells. The lower calibre shells appear to fly a little further in the same time than predicted, regardless of constant multipliers. There are some drag coefficient values there. Automining them is a bit tricky so they're extracted piecemeal. If you have penetration data for any particular ships then I can get the drag coeffs for them. Edit: Also some close range BB citadel pen data for checking against the armour formula: SC vs Montana: Pens 409mm @ 15 degrees belt armour at 3.3km SC vs Iowa: Pens 307mm @ 22 degrees belt armour at 6.1km
  5. It isn't. For most BBs, max dispersion is 1.8 times the standard deviation. The Nagato's 2 times, like a cruiser or DD. On the other hand it's a radial RNG plus an angle RNG, so when considering the vertical dispersion alone it's a bit tighter than a normal distribution. The 3sd estimate might be ok in practice. In retrospect that's normally an overpen against a broadside Myoko citadel anyway. It's possible that you were only getting citadels with water shots.
  6. 2km isn't that close. Taper distance for the Nagato is 4km, while "minimum dispersion" is 84m. Assuming that it's now 84m @ 4km and 0m @ 0km, that gives 42m horizontal dispersion radius @ 2km. Vertical dispersion radius for IJN BBs is probably 20% of horizontal dispersion at close range, so 8.4m. If the 4km value is instead interpolated from the minimum and maximum dispersion values then these values will be a little lower. The Myoko had around 1.3m of armoured belt above the waterline. Ship models are multiplied by a scale factor of ~2.5, so the visible belt size in-game would be around 3.3m. Hence even at 2km, the vast majority of shots will miss the belt.
  7. http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/29632-ru-dev-talks-about-the-new-accuracy-buff-on-041/ I think I've seen a better description from a developer somewhere but I can't find it. This one implies that the port dispersions are also slightly wrong, which may be true (they're still calculated using 60m @ 0km for USN BBs, for example). The taper to zero is definitely real, as it's obvious in a training room.
  8. It's possible that it did work like that before patch 4.1. Since then, dispersion tapers to zero below 3-4km.
  9. RichardNixon

    Some interesting info around the world

    They're talking about 5.6. It's probably this fix: Incorrect working of the secondary armament at shorter distances
  10. RichardNixon

    AP working as intended?!

    Well, the safest angle at close range is 45 degrees. The exact angle you need to avoid overpenetration depends on shell velocity (after penetration) and target width. Higher impact angles increase both the target width and target armour, so you get two benefits against overpenetration. Above 45 degrees you have ricochet risk, unless it's USN 203mm AP.
  11. RichardNixon

    AP working as intended?!

    The Hipper has a sub-waterline citadel, so it's pretty tough to hit at close range. Even if you hit it in exactly the right place, the angled internal armour will ricochet some shots, although probably not from USN 203mm guns. The Kuma has a huge citadel, but it's very easy to overpen due to thin armour and narrow ship. You can overpen it with St Louis guns.
  12. RichardNixon

    immune svietlana to my budyony shots.. hacking?

    Note that to cross the zero-damage module threshold, the target needs to lose at least 75% of its HP. Above that, zero-damage hits are either bounces or turret hits. There are no public armour models for the Russian cruisers, but Kurbain's advice is probably on the right lines.
  13. RichardNixon

    How can i improve my win rate?

    You can't generally subdivide winrate in WoWS because people don't play enough battles for it to be remotely accurate. For most players, per-tier winrate is just noise. For example, your tier 5 winrate is 9% above your tier 6 winrate, which is only partly because the Gremy is OP. Using winrate for short-term feedback is even worse, and is likely to give you false impressions about your progress.
  14. RichardNixon

    Training Room

    WoT training rooms require at least two players to start a game, which is an intentional restriction to reduce popularity. WoT training rooms also don't allow you to add bots.
  15. RichardNixon

    Some interesting info around the world

    This should be Tm = Tp - Kp + (Tm1)/2 The rest looks reasonable so far.
×