Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
loppantorkel

DD armour change

51 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles

So, they might reduce the armour of dds to lower the impact of bb AP?

 

So, it's kind of a buff to cruiser vs dds and a small nerf to bbs vs dds. Fine, but does it mean more or less dds will melt when trying to kite from RN cruisers..? Now you can get away from a mino, dodging and bouncing shells, I think. How will this change affect RN AP vs dds?

 

 

edit. Copied from @wilkatis_LV

 

BoweDcT.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGBRD]
Players
231 posts
9,026 battles

Cruisers allready pen DDs (with the exeption of Khaba) and lowering the armor will let Mino pen angled DDs... but as you wish 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
3,074 posts
11,057 battles

I'd say that the sAP will be melting DDs like ice cream in the sun. Just imagine every round going through a DD no matter the angle.

 

I doubt the change will go through, maybe it will reach ST and then get dropped. Otherwise DD gameplay will just die, save for the Asashio.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,103 posts

While the BB AP pen problem is a major pain in the backside as a DD this change would NOT be the right answer, they're trying to overcome what they've accepted is a bug by a global nerf, bad idea.

DD's are already fragile this would make them ludicrously squishy to DD and Cruiser shots of all ammo types.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,577 posts
7,342 battles
21 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

So, they might reduce the armour of dds to lower the impact of bb AP?

 

So, it's kind of a buff to cruiser vs dds and a small nerf to bbs vs dds. Fine, but does it mean more or less dds will melt when trying to kite from RN cruisers..? Now you can get away from a mino, dodging and bouncing shells, I think. How will this change affect RN AP vs dds?

Minotaur can overmatch at best 10mm plating. DDs will get 13mm. So only heavy cruisers you should be afraid.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,231 posts
6,782 battles

In case someone doesn't know what this is about:

 

BoweDcT.png

 

Why this won't work:

  • Pens doing 4k dmg is not the problem, overpens doing 6k is. This increases the amount of overpens, connect those 2 on your own
  • CA (186mm and larger guns) AP now lolpens DDs, and in case someone didn't notice - CAs tend to have much higher RoF / DPM and accuracy than BBs do (need at least 272mm gun currently)
  • Specific protection traits = Gearings 21mm sides = Gearing still getting pen'd just as it was before
  • 13mm = Akizuki (100mm guns) can pen it without IFHE (16mm HE pen)
  • DD AP vs another DD produces almost nothing but overpens:
    • 100mm need to pass through 17mm armour to fuze (at least 40° away from perpendicular)
    • 127mm need to pass through 21mm armour to fuze (at least 52° away from perpendicular)
    • 128 & 130mm need to pass through 22mm armour to fuze (at least 54° away from perpendicular)
      • Those angles are needed after normalization (so +8° to all those values to see pre-normalization angles?)
      • Remember that at 45° you start bouncing and at 60° you autobounce
  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles
13 minutes ago, OTECa1 said:

Cruisers allready pen DDs (with the exeption of Khaba) and lowering the armor will let Mino pen angled DDs... but as you wish 

As I wish..? I'm asking questions. Mino penning angled dds would be an issue imo,

5 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

I'd say that the sAP will be melting DDs like ice cream in the sun. Just imagine every round going through a DD no matter the angle.

 

I doubt the change will go through, maybe it will reach ST and then get dropped. Otherwise DD gameplay will just die, save for the Asashio.

This is what I kind of feared.

1 minute ago, BeauNidl3 said:

While the BB AP pen problem is a major pain in the backside as a DD this change would NOT be the right answer, they're trying to overcome what they've accepted is a bug by a global nerf, bad idea.

DD's are already fragile this would make them ludicrously squishy to DD and Cruiser shots of all ammo types.

I don't think they're very squishy at the moment.. you can angle and dodge a good deal...but AP spamming minos would mess things up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
264 posts
6,966 battles

This entire issue is also discussed on a forum thread "WG fix [edited] BB AP against DDs already".

 

I think the issue here is much more complicated than simply that BB AP is too OP against DDs, as you guys recognise. 

I proposed there that a potential answer to the problem might lay in better torpedo handling, which could restore the way destroyers were originally meant to play: guns for scaring mostly, bit of fires, while torpedos do the damage. 
Now I feel it's nearly the other way around, so i think reworking torpedos would be much better than reworking DD armour. 

DD armour rework = end of DDs as we known them

BTW: my mino already melts away DDs, having only pens just would take out all of the fun :S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGBRD]
Players
231 posts
9,026 battles
5 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

This entire issue is also discussed on a forum thread "WG fix [edited] BB AP against DDs already".

 

I think the issue here is much more complicated than simply that BB AP is too OP against DDs, as you guys recognise. 

I proposed there that a potential answer to the problem might lay in better torpedo handling, which could restore the way destroyers were originally meant to play: guns for scaring mostly, bit of fires, while torpedos do the damage. 
Now I feel it's nearly the other way around, so i think reworking torpedos would be much better than reworking DD armour. 

DD armour rework = end of DDs as we known them

BTW: my mino already melts away DDs, having only pens just would take out all of the fun :S

In those days there ware only IJN and USN DDs... You feel that it's the other way around becous now there are less shimas (pure torp boats) and more competitive gearings/yueyangs/Z-52s (hybrid DDs). The game evolved much, so the one-trick-ponys dont do so well as before.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester
2,835 posts
4,190 battles

My list of most feared BBs when I'm in a DD: Lyon, Alsace, Montana. What do they have in common? Lots of guns!

 

I don't care about random full penetrations in a DD. You take it and you keep going, a bit like random citadels in high tier cruisers (%HP lost is probably about the same). What I do care about is being hit by 6+ shells at once. Even if they're all overpens that's way worse than one random full pen. And now you're telling me I get more of this regardless of angle? Oh yay!:fish_palm:

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,892 posts
5,016 battles
26 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Why this won't work:

  • Pens doing 4k dmg is not the problem, overpens doing 6k is. This increases the amount of overpens, connect those 2 on your own
  • CA (186mm and larger guns) AP now lolpens DDs, and in case someone didn't notice - CAs tend to have much higher RoF / DPM and accuracy than BBs do (need at least 272mm gun currently)
  • Specific protection traits = Gearings 21mm sides = Gearing still getting pen'd just as it was before
  • 13mm = Akizuki (100mm guns) can pen it without IFHE (16mm HE pen)
  • DD AP vs another DD produces almost nothing but overpens:
    • 100mm need to pass through 17mm armour to fuze (at least 40° away from perpendicular)
    • 127mm need to pass through 21mm armour to fuze (at least 52° away from perpendicular)
    • 128 & 130mm need to pass through 22mm armour to fuze (at least 54° away from perpendicular)
      • Those angles are needed after normalization (so +8° to all those values to see pre-normalization angles?)
      • Remember that at 45° you start bouncing and at 60° you autobounce

Worth adding that apart from non-IHE Akizuki, the 100 mm secondaries on the Kii (if secondary specced, but rare) and the 105 mm German secondaries (where secondary spec is quite common) can absolutely shred DDs now.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
28 posts
3,869 battles
Quote

128 & 130mm need to pass through 22mm armour to fuze (at least 54° away from perpendicular)

So.
German AP rounds from DDs have a 6° impact angle where they can pen. Lower than that and it is an overpen, larger than that is an autobounce.
Combined with anemic HE damage and Grozovoi getting radar and the introduction of US CL's...

What again is the job of a game dev? They really do not seem to consider these pretty basic arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,422 posts
13,052 battles

Wonder if this is going to fix the bugs though WG. 

Like 3 overpens from my Montana on a Shima... For 10k dmg. 

shot-18_06.05_21_33.22-0641.thumb.jpg.8e1aed34550b020a05e138ec7c9f79a4.jpg

 

Or these 3 overpens for 8k from my Missouri on a Gearing. 

 

shot-18_06.04_15_57.25-0955.jpg.5b1c87017863181d98eb3d951eebe045.jpg

 

Sounds to me like they just wanna push the problem under the carpet and say " hey, we fixed it". 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
264 posts
6,966 battles
25 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

Worth adding that apart from non-IHE Akizuki, the 100 mm secondaries on the Kii (if secondary specced, but rare) and the 105 mm German secondaries (where secondary spec is quite common) can absolutely shred DDs now.

Hihihi imagine that you'll soon have KM BBs sailing with IFHE just to shred DDs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MDF]
Beta Tester
152 posts
9,437 battles
2 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Hihihi imagine that you'll soon have KM BBs sailing with IFHE just to shred DDs

you misunderstood something. BB secs will pen DDs now WITHOUT IFHE. German IFHE sec builds sail around already and can pen DDs. you can spec something else soon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,892 posts
5,016 battles
1 minute ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Hihihi imagine that you'll soon have KM BBs sailing with IFHE just to shred DDs

Currently, you'd need IFHE for 105s to damage DDs (these are on Bismarck/Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Friedrich der Große). With the armour nerf, IFHE won't be needed. Typically, none of these ships would pick IFHE though, because it's too little gain for the investment (compared to IFHE on Kurfürst/Gneisenau, where 128 mm guns can pen 32 mm plating of BBs with it). So, given no Bismarck is likely to run IFHE, currently 105s are scary to look at, but no great threat. With the changes, they'll become absolute DD killers, because they make up the majority of Bismarck's secondaries and fire much faster than the 15 cvm guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,577 posts
7,342 battles
4 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Hihihi imagine that you'll soon have KM BBs sailing with IFHE just to shred DDs

IFHE is needed to make 105mm guns actually do something in first place. Assuming 13mm plating goes live, you might not want to get closer and more personal with Alsace, due to basically one and a half Akizuki per broadside

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,231 posts
6,782 battles
29 minutes ago, TheEntireGermanEmpire said:

So.
German AP rounds from DDs have a 6° impact angle where they can pen. Lower than that and it is an overpen, larger than that is an autobounce.
Combined with anemic HE damage and Grozovoi getting radar and the introduction of US CL's...

What again is the job of a game dev? They really do not seem to consider these pretty basic arguments.

And those 54° are after normalization. I wonder  - does autobounce happen before or after it?

If before - VMF and KM DDs go from "overpen" right into "autobounce" without anything in between

If after - then yes, you get your 6° of "you can try to pen this"

 

15 minutes ago, MortenTardo said:
Spoiler

 

Wonder if this is going to fix the bugs though WG. 

Like 3 overpens from my Montana on a Shima... For 10k dmg. 

shot-18_06.05_21_33.22-0641.thumb.jpg.8e1aed34550b020a05e138ec7c9f79a4.jpg

 

Or these 3 overpens for 8k from my Missouri on a Gearing. 

 

shot-18_06.04_15_57.25-0955.jpg.5b1c87017863181d98eb3d951eebe045.jpg

 

Sounds to me like they just wanna push the problem under the carpet and say " hey, we fixed it". 

 

 

That's the best part, it's "not a bug" and it's "working exactly as intended". That shell overpen'd multiple sections.

Overpen 3 sections = overpen does same dmg as a pen, overpen 4 = your overpen does more than a pen. Hence the "4.5k pen and 6k overpen".

But they've said multiple times they don't want to remove this "multi-hit" mechanic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,422 posts
13,052 battles
4 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

That's the best part, it's "not a bug" and it's "working exactly as intended". That shell overpen'd multiple sections.

Overpen 3 sections = overpen does same dmg as a pen, overpen 4 = your overpen does more than a pen. Hence the "4.5k pen and 6k overpen".

But they've said multiple times they don't want to remove this "multi-hit" mechanic

I know, but its stupid AF though. That shima i hit was full broadside and did not maneuver to any side. Going straight forward. Think he did that so he would not take any pens, but ovepens instead.

So that means the Shima was "fat" enough to get multiple ovepens/pens with the same shell. I mean, Shima is a skinny DD. Should not happen IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
264 posts
6,966 battles
9 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

And those 54° are after normalization. I wonder  - does autobounce happen before or after it?

If before - VMF and KM DDs go from "overpen" right into "autobounce" without anything in between

If after - then yes, you get your 6° of "you can try to pen this"

 

That's the best part, it's "not a bug" and it's "working exactly as intended". That shell overpen'd multiple sections.

Overpen 3 sections = overpen does same dmg as a pen, overpen 4 = your overpen does more than a pen. Hence the "4.5k pen and 6k overpen".

But they've said multiple times they don't want to remove this "multi-hit" mechanic

This multi hit mechanic is in my opinion a good mechanic, it just isnt when looking at specifically destroyers. 

So; heres one that we could actually suggest to development: How about we introduce buffer zones for destroyers, such that you can keep the mechanism but make it less OP against DDs?

Bow> Buffer> mid section > Buffer > Aft

Each buffer having tiny length, but a bit of armour & no HP or something. Not sure on how to implement but i feel like this could work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CRU_]
Players
144 posts
5,626 battles

As a DD main, BB AP is not an issue for me, sure once every so often i get deleted by it, but crap happens, very very few BB mains are good enough to consistently hit a DD at medium range, and having those that can't aste their 30 sec salvo at me is a net plus for the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,892 posts
5,016 battles
5 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

This multi hit mechanic is in my opinion a good mechanic, it just isnt when looking at specifically destroyers. 

So; heres one that we could actually suggest to development: How about we introduce buffer zones for destroyers, such that you can keep the mechanism but make it less OP against DDs?

Bow> Buffer> mid section > Buffer > Aft

Each buffer having tiny length, but a bit of armour & no HP or something. Not sure on how to implement but i feel like this could work

Sadly, this mechanic really only affects DDs in any meaningful way. Most other ship classes posess enough armour and hp to not really care, if they ever even get overpenned in multiple sections.

 

And if you add a buffer with armour, congrats, you now eat an overpen and a pen, because you are back to having enough armour to arm the AP shell. Your AP shell by overpenetrating one section and penetrating a second will now do almost half the full damage, instead of like 20% from overpenetrating two sections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
264 posts
6,966 battles
3 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

Sadly, this mechanic really only affects DDs in any meaningful way. Most other ship classes posess enough armour and hp to not really care, if they ever even get overpenned in multiple sections.

 

And if you add a buffer with armour, congrats, you now eat an overpen and a pen, because you are back to having enough armour to arm the AP shell. Your AP shell by overpenetrating one section and penetrating a second will now do almost half the full damage, instead of like 20% from overpenetrating two sections.

Well but i already basically covered your problem, except i worded it poorly: the idea of this buffer is basically that it is not seen as proper part of the ship in terms of HP. So if the shell decides to arm there, fine, but it would do 0 damage since it is in the buffer zone. 
Kind of like how a langley has this huge open gap between the hull and the flight deck, with the possibility to let a shell fuse in between the flight deck and the hull. If it does that its not counted as a pen either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,892 posts
5,016 battles
14 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Well but i already basically covered your problem, except i worded it poorly: the idea of this buffer is basically that it is not seen as proper part of the ship in terms of HP. So if the shell decides to arm there, fine, but it would do 0 damage since it is in the buffer zone. 
Kind of like how a langley has this huge open gap between the hull and the flight deck, with the possibility to let a shell fuse in between the flight deck and the hull. If it does that its not counted as a pen either

It flies into the next zone before detonating, because of how small DDs are. Unless you buffer like half the ship, in which case, DDs will have a very fun time with half their ship being no-hp black holes that just soak up incoming shells from all classes, including other BBs and cruisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
264 posts
6,966 battles
7 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

It flies into the next zone before detonating, because of how small DDs are. Unless you buffer like half the ship, in which case, DDs will have a very fun time with half their ship being no-hp black holes that just soak up incoming shells from all classes, including other BBs and cruisers. 

Im really proposing a rework in the armour model of either all ships or at least destroyers here. 
This buffer zone would be a magical place with (near) 0 thickness, 0HP, but having an assigned armour thickness (either physically present or merely modelled). 

When a shell enters the buffer, based on the path it has taken before (considering armour, pen etc) it is determined whether or not a shell should proceed to the next section. If not, the shell simply ceases to exist- as currently already happens with the regular armour model, except you'd introduce an additional armour layer lengthwise in destroyers. 
If a buffers armour causes the shell to detonate, it will cause 0 damage to the buffer or the ship (thats what the buffer would be for). If it overpenetrates the buffer, it still causes 0 damage, but since the shell is not detonated, it can progress to the next section, where it is likely to detonate (although this might in some cases cause unwanted pens in the second section i guess). 

So it's more of a filter, where part of the shells that normally make a second overpen now are removed. 
But hey, it's merely a conceptual idea and i really wouldnt know if it's quite valid to implement the idea in this way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×