Unintentional_submarine

The value is 33% for a penetration. The 'lost' damage is due to the section hit having reached the 50% damage threshold and some of the damage of the penetration hit being reduced.

And what is that supposed to say? I know that T5 can face T7, and always have. My point is that now it is considerably worse.

We have been dealing with these issues over in this thread for a while now. http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/57181-broken-damage-model/ It is a living thing so it has moved on from the initial post and discussions, but it still deals with these confusing hits. I suggesting giving it a read.

Not today, but I still think it was pretty wild...

Business6 touches upon the overpen + pen issue here (it is mentioned earlier in the thread). He is clearly confused, and highly annoyed at it. Yes, I have determined to treat them as a case of an overpen where the shell re-enters the ship for a penetration. But it happens with a rather high frequency, and at times where you would not expect it (short range flat trajectory, where the shell should just overpen). Business6 isn't the only content creator that is annoyed at it, in stream iChase has also been wondering what it is a few times now. Now naturally people have told him what it might be, but it just goes to show that people otherwise in 'the know' are also confused and surprised at this. Both issues happen too often for me to be comfortable with. So what can be done about it? Well, I'm beginning to think we could look to other games for a solution. War Thunder's hit-cam would be one such. But instead of following a single shell in, we just see the target ship and then where the shells strike and if they detonate inside or pass through. That way these overpen + pen and soaked pens could be determined easily. Of course I can see an issue when it comes to a DD unloading AP into the flank of a BB... constant stream of shells for a long time. But maybe the hit-cam could have an 8 second cooldown or something like that. Naturally it should be something you could turn off, heck something that could be turned on/off on a per ship basis (I wouldn't like it on my DDs and CLs, but I would certainly like it on my German and USN CAs and all BBs).

Old fashioned or not (I'm of the same position myself), the game moved towards that goal, but ended up confusing people even more. Why go to the effort of giving us all these nice markers, if they can't be relied upon to show us the correct information. Or rather, if they show us too little information to work. That's wasted resources as I see it. We get overpen markers that really are overpen + pen and these weird 'soaked' penetrations, and they don't always make sense to me. Someone who hasn't read the findings and speculations here (the vast majority) will be way out of his depth trying to figure it all out. That can't be good for the game.

What? No, Fuso doesn't have to get that close. My experience says around 5-6km, which fits the penetration tables very nicely. But you have to be perfectly broadside on. New Mexico has a lot more than 343mm of protection. That's just her belt, but she has a turtleback deck of 51mm and 115mm of citadel armour behind that. At the angles involved that adds up to around 550mm total, which matches Fuso's penetration at 6.5km. So I have some range to make up to get optimal penetration. But I'll put that down to ship angles. Citadels can certainly also be achieved further out, but those are nearly always due to below water hits, bypassing the 343mm belt and hitting the 203mm lower belt instead (which by the way isn't that far below the waterline). Arguably most of the citadels achieved against New Mexico and Colorado are due to this, as they are really badly protected from such strikes. Even the 203mm belt can be bypassed (as it too isn't that deep), and then there is nothing to protect the citadel at all. However, at short ranges the shells don't have enough fall to make it very deep, and will thus hit the main belt.

Heh... just looked up their sizes and damn. Nassau is only about 6.5m longer and twice as wide. That means Tashkent is considerably longer than Mikasa, but then again she is so short and fat.

Yes and yes. The serverside ribbons would certainly help and I would like it, but it is probably a relatively small percentage of the 'wrong' hits. So if cuts would have to be made, I would prefer to get that fifth module hit marker. But preferably both things. If a module eats a hit, well then we should be told so. This not knowing and speculating, is just not positive to creating a feeling of understanding of how the game works. By this I mean people that might not frequent the forums or other places that distribute our shared knowledge. A newbie would be utterly confused, and would perhaps give up trying to understand the markers... which is counter to their entire reason for existing.

No, all premium consumables add another charge, if there are charges involved. So the only consumables with no extra charge is DCP for everyone, and Defensive Fire for Atlanta and Flint (right?). That said, you can get away with not using the premium Repair Party, I don't always use it on my lower tier battleships either, but I have literally facepalmed at myself when I left port without premium Damage Control Party. Don't leave port without it.

Yeah... until I was 15 of so (36 now), I thought cider was that 0.3% stuff... then I tried some odd English cider by the name of Strongbow, and learned that you can get drunk rather easily as the taste is nearly the same but as strong as a mildly strong beer. Since I have learned that you can get up to wine strong ciders and have decided not to venture into that... But the last 10 odd years hard ciders have been on the uptake outside northern France and the British Isles. Can't go to any party without there being plenty hard ciders these days.

Back to the latest video... It didn't turn out to be A New Bot 3, but more Return of the Bot 3 or perhaps most likely, The Bot 3 Strikes Back. These battles were hilarious though. And while totally onesided, I felt that they were more entertaining than the previous Montana vs Yamato battles (it should be noted that I apply 0 balance value in these battles; pure entertainment).

Cheers. And Ryujo... heh, the smallest and flattest box outside of Bogue. Ingame that's in fact a significant advantage. I didn't know she was this clearly the smallest IJN CV... I mean I knew she was small, but this small? Nah.

According to fnord's work http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/59528-armor-penetration-curves/ Fuso and Bayern have practically the same penetration values. Both start just above 700mm and sit just above 450mm at 10km. If that holds true, and according to the test values, his work does appear to be rather believable, then it is certainly believable that a person has seen citadels against New Mexes with Bayern, but not Fuso. The overmatch mechanic probably played a large role in this, as Fuso should certainly be able to citadel New Mexico with some frequency (and personal experience confirms that). But someone who has had less luck with Fuso, could possibly have seen citadels under similar circumstances with Bayern.

I think there is a mistake in the Soviet Cruiser lineup. Budyonny and Molotov appears to have reversed positions on the list, as clearly Budyonny is just above Murmansk. And damn... I knew Yorck was small, but this drove home just how small she really is.

It doens't preserve the looks though. You lose the lines for instance. And you also lose the obvious buttonpresses; in replays the actions just happen, leading to a more mechanical presentation. There is no doubt in my mind that replays are considerably less engaging than an actual recording. It is a fine tool (especially since you can release yourself from the actions performed and look in other directions for instance), but it is less effective in showing the pure gameplay as it happened.

Does the HP bars still conflict with mods like Trap Sense?

Flamu, like most youtubers, record the battles directly with third party recording software. The benefits are obvious, no compatibility issues, all actions shown and the game simply looks like what we see when we play ourselves, making the impression stronger for the viewer.

That's because they changed the HE penetration value for the German BB guns (including their HE secondaries). It is 1/4 rather than 1/6. So Bayern gets 95mm of penetration (or if my own previous tests and musings apply, 94mm), and that's way more than enough to penetrate the Omaha's 76mm belt. And since Omaha doesn't have any internal armour, if her belt is penetrated, she gets citadelled. While I'm sure you could possibly get some HE citadels, the low HE damage probably means it isn't worth it against cruisers, and since you can't get them against battleships which appear more resistant to the AP, HE isn't worth it there either. In effect it probably isn't something worth fiddling around with. But maybe it is worth running a few tests... hmmm...

Yup, and that was the change they did about a year ago. They removed all the various bonuses, except Premium.

Unfortunately the bots play more aggressively than is good for them at times. The Tirpitzes would win easily as the Bismarcks would push into the torpedo range and not really maneuver to avoid them. Better secondaries would not save them, besides the bots don't use captains or modifications, so no glorious 10km secondaries for Bismarck.

Yeah, based on the comments at least some people played her before the buffs... It is amusing to read that she has 'slow' turrets when she has barely slower turrets than Pensacola and much faster than Myoko, letting her maneuver and shoot at the same time. In fact that was something I noticed with her. With Myoko you look for that good target, then you shoot and probably land a good salvo, the next will be worse as the enemy gets shocked and maneuvers to avoid, and the third is probably even less as by then you have to maneuver too. With Yorck the alpha is less, but you can keep up the barrage, taking advantage of the superior turret arcs and the faster turrets as you maneuver to avoid the enemy's incoming fire.

Guys... Yorck doesn't have slow turrets any longer. They traverse at 5.2 (5.9 with EM) degrees a second. Compared to 6 (6.7) with Pensacola and 4 (4.7) with Myoko. That's ~30 seconds with EM, which is well within the workable speed, and much faster than Myoko.

Heh... yeah it certainly does offer them a get-out-jail card. Cleveland can't get her arcs buffed, but these ships can. It should be noted that I hold that they should have the 805m/s MV not for power or balance. Those things are as yet not easy to estimate well.

Correct, however according to Navyweaps the propellant charge was initially powerful enough for 805m/s, but it was reduced to get better plunging fire. In this game plunging fire is effectively non-existent in terms of practical usage. It find it highly unlikely that the British, in a world like WoWs would have gone down that path and changed their weapon to fit something that simply doesn't happen. They really should have the 805m/s MV, as the reduced charge is such a logical disconnect for the game.