fnord_disc

This is only my guess, but: American BBs are much smaller than Japanese ones, and better armored, so they have an inherent advantage at long range where those things count. Giving them accurate guns and not the Japanese would encourage a lot of camping without any downside. Japanese BBs can camp, but most of them can still be damaged quite easily at those ranges. You could certainly balance that, but it would lead to rather one-sided cross-nation balancing where Japanese BBs have to chase down slower American battleships to be effective. Right now both nations trade something if they stay at range or close in, which I think is more varied. The same goes for Tirpitz, too. If she was accurate in addition to the generally good armor in the game, there would be no real downside to staying at 16km. I don't know if this was how Lesta thought about it, but I don't think things in a game should have strengths without drawbacks. Also, I don't think dispersion patterns can be generalized as good or bad across nations that easily. Japanese patterns for the Kongos were extremely tight at Samar, so tight that some Americans remarked that Japanese guns were too accurate to account for fire control errors. edit: The main issue I have with Lesta's approach is that USN and German dispersion is already so bad, it's basically impossible to make unusually bad dispersion a national theme for nations that actually had bad dispersion, such as the Italians. Making the Italians even less accurate than the Germans and the Americans would make them unplayable. So it's a little short-sighted.

You hold down ctrl and click on them. It can be a different target from your main guns if you want.

I hasten to add again that this is just my prediction based on other ships and similar shell constants as other German ships. I couldn't find the mined krupp and drag for the shells, so this is with default krupp and the same drag as German T9/10 shells. That said, many ships have additional armor layers behind the belt. These aren't usually very tick, but 300mm penetration will really only penetrate a 300mm belt and nothing behind it. In practice, the penetration will "feel" lower than what the graph shows, even if it is 100% correct (unlikely). I would be very surprised if Scharnhorst penetrates Colorado's and even Nagato's citadel over 9km.

Use a goddamn VPN then if imgur is blocked in turkey

I don't know why you're all using the data from navweaps. The game has been different many times before. I've tried not to respond to these penetration discussions in too much detail, because whatever I write would be merely an educated guess, but I can't ignore this anymore. Here's a plot of Scharnhorst's penetration over range based on the formula I've refined in my other thread.

It's just as much a point as wanting dreadnoughts. I want good-looking cruisers. You want WW1 dreadnoughts. Deal with it. Also, I saw the tree, but the cruisers are mostly just copy pasta. He obviously only put thought into his precious battleships without caring how it affects other classes. T5 Furutaka makes no sense in his chronology.

50-90k is still decent imo. Not great but I wouldn't throw a tantrum about a 70k Tirpitz on my team.

Your own fault both times. Bad map awareness from you.

Yes, he almost always ignores criticism and lavishes praise on those that agree with him.

Dude, Campbeltown.

Yeah, but what comes at T5? Furutaka is a clear interwar design with WW2 modernization and would be a better fit at T6 in your timeline. So IJN would have to move Kuma and Tenryu up one tier and use some other ugly cruiser at T3. Also, my point wasn't that there isn't something to fill the gaps. My point is that cruiser players will not want to see all the interwar ships uptiered to make room for ugly light and armored cruisers from before WW1. I like playing cruisers and I like having good-looking designs in T5 already.

Serious question: how is this going to work with the other classes? You put the first simple carriers at T4, so that works with the current lines. But to fit into your timeframe, we would need WW1 cruisers all the way until T5, and currently that tier is already interwar. A lot of cruiser players would be very upset with this because of how ugly and dull most WW1 designs are. The destroyers fit, I suppose.

6k??

Yeah but there's another 75mm layer behind that. Also they will be able to penetrate that in the game too, but even slight angles mean no citadel and most ships have a second layer of citadel armor. Which is thin. But still. 10-12km citadels is the best you'll be able to expect against broadside nagatos. and youll need to be closer for anything with fatter armor.

Just something simple to fill the time. Here is an in-depth explanation of the AA mechanic from Sub_Octavian: http://forum.worldofwarships.ru/index.php?/topic/16696-%D0%BE-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9-%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5/ The most interesting section follows as translated by Google: What this means is that a plane cannot live indefinitely, even if it continues to roll well and evades the aura dmg. It cannot live longer than a theoretical lifetime value, although it inherits additional lifetime from the previous plane if that one was shot down very early in its lifetime. In practice, while the AA is allowed to roll very well, the plane is not. The lifetime mechanic will kick in and force a shootdown even if its rolls would allow it to survive. Sometimes 10 dice just all have a 6. It happens, but it can't for the plane. This corresponds to an effective AA buff over the values shown in the port because while there is a maximum lifetime for the plane, there isn't a minimum lifetime. The plane can still get shot down immediately, and while it will give its maximum lifetime to the next plane, that plane can still be shot down randomly immediately. Here is a simple simulation of an infinitely large squadron of 1000 HP planes spending time in various DPS auras. Jumpiness due to randomness, green is the theoretical port DPS curve with no lifetime mechanic. At high DPS auras, the lifetime mechanic makes no real difference because the random rolls are so likely that most planes get shot down immediately, but at values of dps/hp ~ 0.3 we can see that the effective in-game DPS is up to 30% higher than we would expect without the lifetime mechanic.

You're right. I overlooked the 90% cap. I'll replace the simulation later. The ingame DPS is still considerably higher than what the port displays.

This was how it was done in CBT, but it was removed because it meant that fast planes could rush into the aura and drop their torpedoes before the first plane died (since it was a strict subtraction each tick and not a random roll). There were a lot of complaints that you needed AA of certain strength to be useful at all and it was understandably removed. It was very unfair to low-AA ships because those ships had effectively no AA at all.

Are you sure that those values are for half-turrets? Not for all four barrels?

I don't think it's a wise idea to split the playerbase at remodelled/unremodelled. I know it's a bad solution because it requires you to pay $$, but making the unremodelled ships premiums seems a more workable solution to me.

It won't be a good cruiser killer with the horrible dispersion it has. It won't be good versus battleships either. It will be great at very short range due to the torps and the fast traverse and I still think it looks competitive, but that "cruiser killer" thing is wishful thinking.

Sigma 2.0 doesn't say much if the horizontal dispersions is as poor as it is on Scharnhorst. It has one of the worst horizontal dispersions in the game.

4-8 is the general range, but 8 is very rare for battleships. It's an incredibly good value.

I'm surprised that nobody has commented on the fact that Gneisenau has fantasy dual purpose guns.

Better armor? The deck is nice, but otherwise...?

They're not the same because those values do not reflect how the armor looks. Above the 150mm citadel roof is another 50mm splinter deck. They are additive and don't cover different sections of the ship. The H classes are not vulnerable to plunging fire.