Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'overmatch'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 6 results

  1. Minotaur is an excelent ship for spotting if Radar is used, like I do in rankend, and already highly situational since it can shoot only AP and cant really play on open water if there are BBs ore CAs that have crossfires. The problem however is the Stalingrad (Alaska and Kronshtadt as well but not that hard). The Stalingrad is able to overmatch the Minotaurs 16mm armour and is able to citadel it from every angle. In the current saison of ranked games I am already facing a matchmaking with an average of 3 BBs per team and now there is also a Stalingrad in quite a lot of games which makes 4 BBs from the view of a Minotaur player. But the Stalingrad is even worse than BBs since it has a 11,7km radar (10km Minotaur torps are unlikely to hit if Stalingrad does not push), far better dispersion of shells (compared to BBs) and a much better shell velocity (also compared to BBs). In conclusion: The Stalingrad is there on TOP of the whole lot of BBs, gets low damage by Minotaur AP-guns if angled a little, can get hardly hitten by torps and can outright delete the Minotaur from every direction. In my opinion the Minotaur is not longer a good ship for ranked or competitive in general with Stalingrad around. So i would like an armour upgrade to 22mm (edited). That way BBs can still do the same DMG to Minotaur and only the new 300mm gun-CAs can´t devastate an angled Minotaur. Maybe i am missing something, so pls tell me your opinions regarding this matter!
  2. Salve a tutti, sono andato nel forum inglese è ho letto un po' di informazioni al riguardo (strano che questa meccanica non venga menzionata in nessuna parte del gioco pur essendo così importante) ,ma in soldoni se il calibro dei miei cannoni supera di 14,3 volte lo spessore della corazza nemica, l'angolo di penetrazione del proiettile non conta e quindi non avrò mai rimbalzo? Grazie in anticipo a tutti
  3. I have a proper thread going, about carriers. Again. Look at the Graf Zeppelin videos if you want a hint of what triggered me this time. For now though, a quick suggestion. Anyways. Currently, battleships can to catastrophic damage to destroyers even without loading the 'correct' shell type, which has continued to contribute to them flooding the servers like the persistent locusts that they are (biased? I have no idea what you're on about). This is presumably undesirable, so I have a suggestion. Currently, full penetration damage done to destroyers, baring the Khabarovsk, is usually done through over-matching of shells. In the game right now, there is a certain threshold behind which shells simply do not arm, but over-matching appears to automatically arm all shells. My suggestion is therefore as follows: below a certain armor thickness, 4 mm below the maximum over-match penetration for example, shells should not arm when over-matching an armor plate. A battleship AP shell being launched at the bow of anything but a Kebab will therefore simply over-penetrate, which will help improve destroyer survivability against battleships.
  4. Ian_MacAllan

    Overmatch mechanics revisited

    The main problem I have with cruisers is that I am getting far too many citadels from battleships (and most games have 5 BBs per side). I am not talking about citadels that I get when showing my broadside – these are my fault. I am talking about citadels I get while I am angled at auto-bounce angles (e.g., during an attempt to dodge/minimize damage). I think that a change in the AP overmatch mechanics could be a good balancing measure. Right now it works like this (correct me if I am wrong): Check if the gun overmatches the armor (yes: go to D, no: go to B) Check if the shell ricochets (yes: no damage caused, no: go to C) Check if the shell penetrates the armor (yes: go to D, no: no damage caused) Deal damage: citadel hit, penetration or over-penetration (depending on where the shell hit, etc.) This could be changed to: Check if the shell ricochets (yes: go to 2, no: go to 3) Check if the gun overmatches the armor (yes: go to 5, no: no damage caused) Check if the shell penetrates the armor (yes: go to 4, no: no damage caused) Deal damage: citadel hit, penetration or over-penetration (depending on where the shell hit, etc.) Deal damage: only penetration or over-penetration are possible (even if the citadel area is hit) The key point here is (5): shells that would normally ricochet and do damage only because of overmatch cannot cause citadels! Alternatively, such an overmatching hit on a citadel area could cause 50% or even 66% of shell damage (“regular” citadel: 100%, penetration: 33%). This might not be logical or physically correct – but after all, this is a game and as such it must be fun and should be balanced. To cite a friend of mine on an old board game: “We are playing Battletech, not Logitech!” Changing overmatch mechanics like this could also fix some balancing issues among battleships …
  5. Hi, Made this for myself but I thought I would share it - probably not going to interest a lot of people, but if even one person finds it useful / interesting then it was worth the effort. Basically, I have mapped out in chart form for most of the gun calibres I could reference within 5 minutes; How much armour is required to arm the shell, The thickest armour the shell can overmatch i.e. not ricochet from, How much armour the shell goes through at a steep angle when you shoot at this overmatch thickness (i.e. ship is bow on to you), The 'optimal' angle against this overmatch thickness. I haven't paused a replay and held a protractor to the screen to check this all works as I say it does, but it seems to be correct in-game so I'll stand by it for now If you want to add some custom values then feel free - everything works from formulae so just change the values as you see fit. I haven't included everything - shell speed, Krupp value and other factors play a role and iChase can best explain them it in his Also check out this excellent thread on the NA server about overmatch - with diagrams! Disclaimer: this excel book is virus free as far as I know. That being said if you download it please scan it before use - I uploaded it to OneDrive so it's not getting a regular check on my own system anymore. WoWs Shell arming and overmatch.xlsx 13.07K WoWs Shell arming and overmatch.xlsx