fnord_disc

German battleships are considered almost overpowered by most experienced players right now. Muh Russian bias ruining the Ge— Wait... edit: Let's look at your stats mate. Win Rate 46%. Hm yes this guy must know what he's talking about. Highest tier BB T5 Kongo. Hm yes this guy must know what he's talking about. No games in German battleships at all. Hm yes this guy must know what he's talking about. 57 games played in Kolberg, 30% win rate. Basically, you're a seal clubber, and you even suck at doing THAT. Why do people like you even try to post?

The belt armor on Kongo is deceptive. It has only 203mm belt, yes, but to get to the citadel under the smokestacks, you also need to penetrate 110mm of angled armor and another 76mm vertical armor. This armor is only 19mm on the stock Kongo, but it's quite thick on the upgraded hull. Also, the citadel under the smokestacks is extremely low in the water. A better target is the magazine under the third turret because it rides so high in the water and doesn't have the 76mm armor layer. The area under the third turret is where you have to aim at.

What DG said is correct. You won't hit the citadel anyway, so you have to make sure that at least all your shots hit. Aim between the waterline and the deck. That will give you a full salvo of penetration damage (33% of shell damage). If the GK is low on HP, the casemates are depleted and you will do less damage than that, though, so don't expect to one-shot a 30k HP GK.

Yeah, I had some wrong numbers in my head. My mistake.

Yeah, that's true. I agree with you.

Replays conserve player actions like reticle movement, so post-commentary using a replay looks just as authentic.

Laut warshipstats gibt es 10 Spieler EU und 48 NA mit KA die alle zusammen 0 Spiele mit dem Schiff haben -> kein Tracking = alles Supertester / CC. Würde also vermuten, entweder ist das mit der Verlosung inkorrekt oder der Code ist nicht freigeschaltet worden bisher. Spielen tut jedenfalls kein Normalsterblicher mit dem Schiff.

The thickness of the turtleback is not very important as long as it isn't overmatched. The angle is much more important. God, the armor viewer can't come fast enough so that these silly discussions end.

They do.

Shoot a part of the armor that's thick enough to trigger the fuse + also has enough ship behind it to not explode out the other side. = Aim properly.

Added.

Des Moines added.

Added.

I can't believe there are people who don't look at these stats and think the British cruisers are completely overpowered. How can you think these cruisers look weak or even vaguely balanced? It boggles my mind.

Yes.

Yes, the Soviet gun has extremely poor krupp, perhaps the lowest in the game. So in the end, USN and USSR AP are kind of similar even though the Soviet should be much better.

Yes, this is pretty much correct. A bigger shell is a disadvantage unless it also considerably heavier. Scharnhorsts shell is about twice as heavy, but since it's also bigger, this advantage isn't actually that big. Moskva on the other hand has insane muzzle velocity and loses very little energy in flight (lowest drag in the game). Krupp is a simple scaling factor: higher krupp, higher penetration. 10% more krupp = curve is 10% higher. Moskva has ~2600 krupp and Scharnhorst has 2312, so that's a free 10% penetration bonus for Moskva unrelated to hard shell characteristics. This pushes Moskva over Scharnhorst in penetration. Again, krupp. Arizona has 2600 krupp and Bayern/Warspite have 2300-2400. Free bonus penetration for Arizona. Fuso has almost 2700 krupp, one of the highest in the game. Kinetic energy is not reliable. P [mm] = C * V [m/s]1.1 * M [kg]0.55 / (D [mm])0.65 V: velocityM: mass D: diameter C is a constant scaling factor and krupp scales the resulting curve. Higher krupp = better. Drag coefficients seem to be based half on history and half on what Lesta likes to imagine about the shell. German and Japanese shells generally have good drag, which I consider historical. Moskva's 0.26 is just insanely low and shouldn't really be used to judge other shells. Dunno. Higher damage? The penetration isn't even very different, so I don't think it's a contradiction in the strictest sense. They look basically the same to me.

That's correct - my mistake. The curve above should start a lot later, around 21.5km, when normalization is applied last. Also, Iowa needs more range for plunging fire because of the higher muzzle velocity - don't forget that. And I have no trouble with underwater citadels, personally. It's all I get against Clevelands for example.

That's correct. Higher velocity and better krupp values (thanks, WG) are greater than the higher weight of the 420. The overmatch mechanic means that the 420 might subjectively feel like they have more penetration to you, but in terms of pure broadside armor penetration, they are inferior at most ranges.

This is with the new normalization. Old NoCal had more normalization and normalization makes a big difference for deck pen. But at 16km it might just be the thin upper belt and then through the citadel roof, which is only about 150 angled upper belt + 100 flat citadel roof = maybe 400 or so including the angling and NoCal still has about 450 at that range. At shorter ranges this gives you autobounce on the citadel = penetration damage. Tirpitz's salami armor makes it hard to tell which areas you penetrated exactly to get the damage that you go.

The belt armor: No. But your deck armor: Yes ;-) [removed because it was inaccurate]

I can, but I have to add an additional function to the script because right now this only calculates for belt armor. It's very little work, though, and I'll add a deck armor plot for NoCal later this evening.

90° means the shell hits perfectly "broadside", so to say, and with impact angle is also broadside but including the angle of descent of the shell at the end of its ballistic curve and including internally angled armor (but set to unangled in these plots). Yes, but not in the same plot.

Hopefully the mod will move it, then. To be able to look up any ship in the game, a web dev has to design a front end around my formula (which I will give to anybody). He can then either make a database with the shell constants and generate the curves dynamically with Java or something or pre-generate them. I hate website dev, so I will definitely not do this myself. I'll edit the Zao in above. I'm about 95% sure that WG made a mistake when they published the NoCal penetration data for the 5km distance because there is not way to fit that point into a decay curve, whatever you try to do. The other two points at 10 and 15km are fine, but I don't want to confuse readers by including a spurious dataset.

North Carolina / Alabama / South Dakota Dunkerque Nassau Königsberg / Nürnberg Yorck Katori / Tenryu / Kuma / Iwaki A / Yubari / Kitakami / Nagato (secondaries) / Amagi (secondaries) Gnevny, Ognevoi, Kiev, Udaloi, Tashkent, Khabarovsk, Udaloi, Blyska, Mogami 155mm HERE Perth, Belfast, Leander, Fiji, Edinburgh, Neptune, Minotaur HERE Akizuki HERE Spee HERE Grozovoi HERE Conqueror, Hood, KGV, Lion, Monarch, Nelson, Queen Elizabeth (scroll through the posts) HERE COMPARISONS Arizona, Fuso, Warspite, Mutsu, Bayern, Nagato HERE Bismarck, Amagi, North Carolina HERE Gaede, Maass, Z-23, Z-26, Z-52, USN DD HERE