fnord_disc

Also """designed to have""" 25kg bursting charge so the AP damage will be high as hell, almost Yamato shell dmg. 88kg charge on the HE is also monstrously high, so mega HE dmg.

Acheron in Tirpitz: 56% WR, 63k dmg atsf in Tirpitz: 60% WR, 75k dmg

Russia can make a decent navy until T6-ish and after that it's unicorns and rainbows.

Those are some sweet prizes. Nice job.

The armor models had to be "completed" by Lesta because historically much of the ship was unarmored. But those areas still used steel for structural integrity, so Lesta is modelling them as sub-30mm steel armor, which is perfectly legitimate. These values are essentially fantasy because the only way to find out what thickness they had historically is to look at the plate specifications from the manufacturer and the naval yard, which is very obscure information.

?? In what context? What do you mean? The line has offset, i.e. mx+b w/ b>0. Your calculation is inaccurate and only works if the two ships have the same range. You are ultimately correct, though, because their linear coefficient is basically the same and Scharnhorst does have more sigma. My mistake, I didn't check the numbers.

Assuming you mean this @ the same port dispersion value - it is significant because of the nature of hitting a target area. An ellipsis 10% less fat does not lead to 10% more hits. It leads much more hits than that. Draw an ellipsis onto a piece of paper and then draw a ship inside it, which is also an ellipsis (roughly). Then draw a 10% less fat ellipsis and calculate the percentage of both ellipsis that she ship covers (=hit by shell). It will be a lot more than 10% more hits once the ship is not smaller by an order of magnitude than the ellipsis.

The value given in port is the long side of the probability ellipsis - it goes left and right from where you are aiming. Sigma defines the relation from this value to the short side of the ellipsis, i.e. the range or vertical dispersion. A high sigma means the shells are more range-accurate. A high sigma value makes the dispersion ellipsis increasingly thin and line-like. At least that is the current theory if you read NA/Reddit. Either way, sigma is only meaningful in relation to the base accuracy displayed in the port. And Fuso has so much better accuracy that the poor sigma is not enough to make it less accurate than Dunkerque. That's why Nagato and Yamato have such railguns with 2.0-2.1 sigma and Colorado with 2.0 is kind of meh.

The effects of good sigma are hard to spot in only 5-6 salvos. Even with lasers like those on Nagato you can have spurious salvos. It makes more sense to look at the numbers and what you know about them and the do a sanity check with reality. Besides, what Darth_Glorious says there is not entirely correct. Sigma modifies the horizontal dispersion to get the vertical dispersion, so the 1.5 on Fuso is still slightly better than the 1.8 on Dunkerque. Scharnhorst and Dunkerque, for example, have roughly the same accuracy at long range because the 2.0 sigma more than offsets the lower base accuracy on Dunkerque. If I had to pick, I'd even say Scharnhorst is more accurate. And that kind of fits what you see in those reviews.

I play Nagato a lot and I'm also almost always top tier because the T5s suck me down. I don't think Scharnhorst would scale badly to higher tiers, though.

How is someone like him a beta tester?

German battleships do not have bad dispersion - all non-Japanese battleships in the game have similar dispersion with only the sigma making their depth dispersion quite different, and German ships have above-average sigma values. So, for all intents and purposes, German battleships have slightly above-average dispersion.

I don't have a problem with Jingles. I have a problem with people taking his opinion without a large pinch of salt.

Yes, he has a bunch of accounts. But it doesn't really matter how many accounts and games he has, because most of the things he says are still wrong.

Which is really silly considering that there is basically no historical reason to do this. Reload could simply be a balancing factor chosen however you want.

The great tragedy of all IJN torpedoes is that anything remotely historical immediately """"kills the fun"""" for the players """"unavoidably"""" hit by it. Lesta has maneuvered itself into a corner with IJN torpedoes it will never get out of unless they do something drastic. What they did to T8+ torpedoes made this fundamental design problem only worse. I'm not even saying that IJN DDs are completely underpowered... I think they perform badly, but still kind of okay. But the fundamental design of the line at high tiers just goes to the dogs.

Jingles is a nice enough bloke, but his knowledge of WoWs was dubious at the best of times and most things he says in this video are flat-out false and misrepresent core game mechanics and stats.

Lesta shot themselves in the foot when they made reload dependant on tube count.

Friedrich_August, on 11 August 2016 - 05:43 PM, said: Ship as shown above: Stock Fuso, Tripod mast. Got it? The numbers I am referring to is from "how far do I have to be above water to see how far" That drawing is not stock Fuso. It's the 1925 remodel. That tripod is not 25m. The top platform is at 37.5 meters, the same as it was when the ship was built in 1915. The ships as built had only 3.5m rangefinders in the superstructure. The 4.5m rangefinders were low, in the turrets. It is doubtful that with a 3.5m rangefinder even 37m up in the tripod mast they would have gotten the range for anything over 15km. And even that range is optimistic.

Care to explain how you got to this number? Also which ship are you even talking about. Make some sense, man.

The T4 stock hull really is kind of strange...

Looks like a plausible remodel to me. Care to explain which parts of it you think are unrealistic for a 30s remodel?

Three overpens of the superstructure. One shell overmatches the bow for penetration damage. Two shells autobounce on the 76mm belt. He aimed too far in the front and too high, so the overpenetrations hit the bridge and didn't overmatch the bow armor in front of the citadel. A heavier shell like Nagato's 410 might have citadel'd the Omaha with the bow penetration, but otherwise the damage would have been the same. It was just bad aiming.

Timecode? Maybe I can tell you what happens there.

I plan on doing exactly that, except I will buy the Scharnhorst and not hack it into my client. The modus operandi will be the same since it works quite well. Just be sure you're only counting one armor layer. In any case, since I've more or less reverse-engineered the penetration formula by now, the above curve for Scharnhorst should be correct +-5%. I don't know the krupp and the drag values for the shells, so I had to guess them for this simulation. Scharnhorst has bad penetration compared to battleships, but it's still a mile above Kutuzov.