Concealment nonsense

[umpaumpaX]

Hi Guys,

 

is someone able to explain to me the issue: conqueror - 15.66 km,  hindenburg - 16.02 km. Both have turtleback, C. 4x3 419 mm, main belt 406 mm, H. 4x3 203 mm, main belt 110 mm.

What from depends the concealment?. Should i belive that ship needed gigantic displacement to cary afloting this thousends tons of steel (C.) will have the same size as Hindy!!!??

Turet 3x419 is lightest than 3x203!!!! 406 mm belt than 110mm. It is idiocy!!! Who had decided abot it?. Die he ever heard about sometthing like physics?

What was the background for brits. BB will have best concealment? One of the most important factor how quick the ship will be spotted is its height (due to earth's curvature) and
the brits. BB are floating WTC towers!.

Only explanation I can finde for this is that C. has cutting edge stm. turbin and H. need hude space for 5 millions hamster with theris wheels!

 

There should be hard cap - the lowest BB concealment is 20% bigger than bigest CA concealment of the same tier.

(Battlecruisers ofcource shouldnt be included in this calculation).

 

German T9/10 BBs and CAs designe in general - these ship are big only to be big!! By such sizes they should have much better armor or be much smaller.

GK (is bigger tha yami) should have 100 mm deck armor on bow and stern and 150 mm above citadel. Otherwhise should be smaller.

Or needs space for 10 millions hamsters??

Hindenburg - what for is this space (similar on Neptune) between turet B and conning tower? Probably only the dive bomber pilots have

exelent spot to aim on to put a bomb direct to amunition chamber / boilers rooms!!! If you need bigger hull for more displacement you make

bigger bow and stern where is no vital equipment.

Ooo I forgot the 5 millions hamsters and running wheels of course.

 

Being deeper and deeper in this game I start agree with someone who said that it is arcade contest of luck and the only one
connection to reality are names of some ships.

 

Pity.

 

PS.

Sorry for my English, Im not native.

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

It's an arcade game with good mechanics. Not a simulation. Concealmeant is just a parameter for game balancing and play style. If you would start to make this game realistic, it would be totally different, a battleship would be possible to sink 3 dds at the same time with all the guns

[wilkatis_LV]

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Both have turtleback

Conq has never had a turtleback, that citadel is as flat as they come

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

What from depends the concealment?

Ships overall size, mainly its max height + the fact that it's a game (for example Moskva, while being a "cruiser", is outspotted by EVERY SINGLE BB in her MM range)

 

As for the ranting further on - why would weight have any impact on ships detectability?

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

the brits. BB are floating WTC towers!.

Actually RN BBs are rather small if you com[are them to others. Conq is THE smallest t10 BB, wouldn't be surprised if Moskva's larger than it

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Battlecruisers ofcource shouldnt be included in this calculation

Conq pretty much is more of a BC than a BB

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

By such sizes they should have much better armor or be much smaller.

Those 2 things are completely irrelevant of each other, you know

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

GK (is bigger tha yami) should have 100 mm deck armor on bow and stern and 150 mm above citadel. Otherwhise should be smaller.

This is the point where I went to check you acc - and a surprise to noone you're a useless potato. Git gud m8, you have no idea what you're even talking about

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Hindenburg - what for is this space (similar on Neptune) between turet B and conning tower?

Extra technical spaces, I presume. Radio & radar rooms, stuff like that. While in WoWS citadels are single peace, thus it's down there, IRL that would probably be "free" space for something else between magazines and boiler rooms

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Being deeper and deeper in this game

Sorry to shatter your dreams, but you've only stepped in ankle-deep right now. That's like 1 foot away from the shore. The average kid is swimming at least 5m ahead of you

 

2 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

PS.

Sorry for my English, Im not native.

This is EU, almost noones native language is English. It's readable = it's good enough

[ollonborre]

I do sort of agree with the overall topic, BB concealment is pretty bonkers if you spec into it (as most do). And it is not just on the higher tiers, certian low tier BB's can also get insane concealment like the König that falls pretty close to the Omaha just to name one example.

[wilkatis_LV]

1 hour ago, ollonborre said:

BB concealment is pretty bonkers if you spec into it (as most at least decent BBs do)

ftfy

and decent / smart BBs are pretty damn rare to see

 

1 hour ago, ollonborre said:

And it is not just on the higher tiers, certian low tier BB's can also get insane concealment like the König that falls pretty close to the Omaha just to name one example.

 

Izumo's not in there, she can outspot Moskva now. Pretty sure everything else in there is still up to date

[VC381]

Concealment in game is nonsense. It's just a mechanic to balance different ships and create a variety of playstyles.

 

I think a long time ago it used to be based on how tall the main superstructure elements of the ship were, but I'm sure that's no longer the case. It's just a "flavour" now.

 

The way I justify it is trying to include some big strategy elements into an arcade game. Obviously in real life ships that are within 15km of each-other would all be able to see everyone just fine (daytime good weather). But before that fleets would spend days covering hundreds of miles trying to find each-other. To me concealment is a way of compressing that strategy into our 20 minute games. The nations and lines that have good concealment can be thought of as those that had a reputation for being sneaky or otherwise well prepared on a strategic level IRL. It doesn't always make sense but it's just my way of rationalizing it. 

[ollonborre]

1 hour ago, VC381 said:

Concealment in game is nonsense. It's just a mechanic to balance different ships and create a variety of playstyles.

 

I think a long time ago it used to be based on how tall the main superstructure elements of the ship were, but I'm sure that's no longer the case. It's just a "flavour" now.

This pretty much. Back in the beta days the height thing made more sense and with the old skill tree it was much harder to justify CE on every ship as there were other more powerful skills for fewer points.

 

Nowadays it is as you say, concealment is just another balancing factor and have little to do with ship sizes. Which if you ask me should have been the deciding factor from the beginning and not this whole semirealistic approach that is bound to backfire.

[umpaumpaX]

#wilkatis_LV

You don't understand what I wanted to say. I will not explain every paragraph. General I would say that higher tier "paper" shpis ignore first the laws of physics and as results we got such "gem" like conqueror. Ship which (by her main armaments and armor) have to have displacement similar or little bigger
than yami so she have to have similar dimension (it is physics and there is wonder or cheats) but in this game she has size little bigger than CA.

Second, they ignore "war experience" - this space between turret B and conning tower (see how it is on "real build ships"). It is as small as possible. It is to have something above vulnerable citadel. Something in which a bomb or shell hit first. It alway lower kinstic energie, change direction or may ingiter the fuse. At the end it increase possibilty that projectal explodes outside not inside citadel

Third they ingore "combat effectiveness". Example for it could be Roon A-XY turrets setup. How many "real build ships" has such configration?

Other configuration are more effective so no one do it this way.

 

Much better is with "paper ship" but based on existing blueprints. Ssomeone has calculated ship's size for wanted armament and armor or what
armament and armor could be carried by ship with set/wanted dimension. Of course there are differences between calculation and reality but at least
we dont get "gem" like conqueror. This is a difference between ships designed by engineer and IT guys.

 

As you wrote I have max 8 tier ship (I had Roon but i sold it) and I mostly fight at tier 5-7. It is because the struggle with such "gems" like conqueror and others take away from me all pleasure from this game.

 

[wilkatis_LV]

9 minutes ago, umpaumpaX said:

Ship which (by her main armaments and armor) have to have displacement similar or little bigger than yami

So you're still going on about things you have literally negative clue about? (Negative as in below 0)

 

And no, no it doesn't have to have the same displacement as Yamato, not even close to that

 

10 minutes ago, umpaumpaX said:

she has size little bigger than CA.

Size of a ship doesn't instantly select their class. A cruiser can be bigger than a BB and still be a cruiser. Just look at the French t4 CA as a perfect example.

 

12 minutes ago, umpaumpaX said:

this space between turret B and conning tower (see how it is on "real build ships")

1) You having no idea why that space is there doesn't mean that it's there for no reason. It just means you have no clue why it's there

 

2) While Hindy is a "what if" continuation-design based on Hipper, your other example with this "feature" - Neptune - is an actual RN "design Y of the 1944 Cruiser Design / Neptune class", which was developed between 1944 and 1946 just to be cancelled in favor of Minotaur class. Areyou really claiming that Royal Navy had no clue what heir warships need at the end / after WW2?

 

3) In both cases - Hindy and Neptune - this space is taken up by extra AA mounts

 

3 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

It is as small as possible. It is to have something above vulnerable citadel.

Already told you, IRL there quite likely would be no "citadel", in game we simply have it single-piece.

 

Look at Perth - IRL she had her machinery and propulsion systems separated in 2 separate units (forwards & aft) which allowed her to continue operating even if one of those would be knocked out. Basically a better protected citadel than the "normal" Leander class. What does it mean in-game? her citadel is bigger, thus more vulnerable.

 

3 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Third they ingore "combat effectiveness". Example for it could be Roon A-XY turrets setup. How many "real build ships" has such configration? Other configuration are more effective so no one do it this way.

The 2 I can immediately name are Japanese BC Amagi class (cancelled / converted into CVs during construction) and BB Kii class (cancelled before construction started).

 

But then we arrive at "why is it a problem if noone else did that?" RNs Nelson class. MNs Dunkerque and Richellieu classes. Some of IJNs projects for Yamato, including the one we have as Izumo in game. Noone else did that "all turrets forwards" - must be complete bs! Right?

 

And then to make you even more wrong - Konigsberg class. Nurnberg class. By the time you get to Roon you should have seen those 2 German cruisers. Check mate potato

 

3 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

Much better is with "paper ship" but based on existing blueprints. Ssomeone has calculated ship's size for wanted armament and armor or what
armament and armor could be carried by ship with set/wanted dimension. Of course there are differences between calculation and reality but at least
we dont get "gem" like conqueror. This is a difference between ships designed by engineer and IT guys.

We'll come back to this when you learn what physics means, as right now trying to explain something to you is more pointless than checking if the depth of Mariana trench has changed after you spit in the ocean

 

3 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

As you wrote I have max 8 tier ship (I had Roon but i sold it) and I mostly fight at tier 5-7. It is because the struggle with such "gems" like conqueror and others take away from me all pleasure from this game.

Bcuz here are no "fantasy" ships at tiers 5 - 7

[Gnirf]

18 hours ago, umpaumpaX said:

#wilkatis_LV

You don't understand what I wanted to say. I will not explain every paragraph. General I would say that higher tier "paper" shpis ignore first the laws of physics and as results we got such "gem" like conqueror. Ship which (by her main armaments and armor) have to have displacement similar or little bigger
than yami so she have to have similar dimension (it is physics and there is wonder or cheats) but in this game she has size little bigger than CA.

Second, they ignore "war experience" - this space between turret B and conning tower (see how it is on "real build ships"). It is as small as possible. It is to have something above vulnerable citadel. Something in which a bomb or shell hit first. It alway lower kinstic energie, change direction or may ingiter the fuse. At the end it increase possibilty that projectal explodes outside not inside citadel

Third they ingore "combat effectiveness". Example for it could be Roon A-XY turrets setup. How many "real build ships" has such configration?

Other configuration are more effective so no one do it this way.

 

Much better is with "paper ship" but based on existing blueprints. Ssomeone has calculated ship's size for wanted armament and armor or what
armament and armor could be carried by ship with set/wanted dimension. Of course there are differences between calculation and reality but at least
we dont get "gem" like conqueror. This is a difference between ships designed by engineer and IT guys.

 

As you wrote I have max 8 tier ship (I had Roon but i sold it) and I mostly fight at tier 5-7. It is because the struggle with such "gems" like conqueror and others take away from me all pleasure from this game.

 

Size makes also less cramped living conditions for the crew, spaces for the ´crews on captured/sunk Allied merchant ships, work shops etc, perhaps less cramped machinery spaces etc..

 

A-XY config, Apart from the German Light cruisers you have a huge number of IJN DDs, French Le Hardi DD class, Swedish Tre Kronor class light cruisers. In the DD cases this was topweight reasons a lot.

 

For the German cruisers it means sense if you are chased by superior numbers, I think at least that was a factor in the German cruisers design. 

[umpaumpaX]

#Gnirf

I was talking about heavy cruisers. DDs and few light cruisers is totally other story.

 

#wilkatis_LV

1.

GK - 4x3 406 mm - is bigger than yami

C. 4x3 419 mm (bigger and heavier) is smaller than Hindy. It is all OK. according to you?.

 

2.

Battlecruisers yes but not CA.

 

3.

Tell me the name of real build CA/CL with this "space"

 

4.

I don't know what Perth's 2 rooms cit has common with this "space". It was "hidden" beneath superstructure and Perth didn't have this space.

 

5.

If you don't see difference between most of/all armaments on bow or stern so ....

Roon has most of its cannos on stern (never real build CA with such configuration) and all ships you mentiond have them on bow (many real build CL/CA/BB). But bow and stern are to different ends of ship. IJN Tone class has even 4 turret but on BOW!

 

Yes i noticed K/N and even played them and there is also Tre Kronor mentioned by Gnirf. But they are CL not CA.

 

Sorry that I wrote this way but I don't know how to make this "frames".

[wilkatis_LV]

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

1.

GK - 4x3 406 mm - is bigger than yami

C. 4x3 419 mm (bigger and heavier) is smaller than Hindy. It is all OK. according to you?.

Those are completely irrelevant of each other Also GK doesn't become bigger if you pick 4x3 420s on it

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

2.

Battlecruisers yes but not CA.

Learn to use quotes I have literally no idea what you are referring to . Ship sizes? RN ability to build them? Turret configurations? Something else?

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

3.

Tell me the name of real build CA/CL with this "space"

As already said in the previous comment - "design Y of the 1944 Cruiser Design / Neptune class"

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

4.

I don't know what Perth's 2 rooms cit has common with this "space". It was "hidden" beneath superstructure and Perth didn't have this space.

Learn to read, then you will maybe understand. Everything is explained in the previous comment

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

5.

If you don't see difference between most of/all armaments on bow or stern so ....

Roon has most of its cannos on stern (never real build CA with such configuration) and all ships you mentiond have them on bow (many real build CL/CA/BB). But bow and stern are to different ends of ship. IJN Tone class has even 4 turret but on BOW!

Since this has been already answered and your inability to read is the only reason why I have to re-specify this again, I'll just quote myself and Gnirf:

 

On 7/28/2018 at 1:30 AM, wilkatis_LV said:

The 2 I can immediately name are Japanese BC Amagi class (cancelled / converted into CVs during construction) and BB Kii class (cancelled before construction started).

On 7/28/2018 at 1:30 AM, wilkatis_LV said:

And then to make you even more wrong - Konigsberg class. Nurnberg class. By the time you get to Roon you should have seen those 2 German cruisers. Check mate potato

On 7/28/2018 at 4:06 PM, Gnirf said:

A-XY config, Apart from the German Light cruisers you have a huge number of IJN DDs, French Le Hardi DD class, Swedish Tre Kronor class light cruisers.

Also if you can go "bow heavy" turret builds, why wouldn't you do the exact same thing in reverse?

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

Yes i noticed K/N and even played them and there is also Tre Kronor mentioned by Gnirf. But they are CL not CA.

So? Smaller main gun caliber (152mm vs 203mm), that's it, that is the difference between them in classification.

 

As shown by the IJN Amagi & Kii classes (410mm guns) gun caliber is irrelevant in this case

 

1 hour ago, umpaumpaX said:

Sorry that I wrote this way but I don't know how to make this "frames".

There is "Quote" button below the comment to quote all. If you highlight something with your mouse you get a "Quote this" button to quote only what you have highlighted

[creamgravy]

Hindy is the same size as Shinnyhorse and bigger than BBs like Alabama.

 

Also, Hindy obliterates Conq 1v1 at all ranges (assuming equal player skill)

[VC381]

"bigger"? "same size"?

 

Do you guys understand how displacement works? All that weight is supported by the amount of hull under the water. Doesn't matter how big the bit above looks, how long etc. Yamato is shorter than Iowa but a good 30% heavier. Baltimore is 15m longer than Colorado but Colorado is twice the displacement. Most cruisers have really shallow and fine hull shapes, so for the same length+beam they have much, much less displacement than a BB. Your visual comparisons make no sense guys...

 

Also, even if you were right, actual size has absolutely zero correlation to concealment in game. None at all. So you're arguing an irrelevant point anyway.

[lafeel]

Time to pull out some info from my copy of "naval terms 4 dummies"

 

Displacement: A figure that is found out through the following equation: (waterline)length X width of the ship X how far underwater she goes X the percentage of how much the ship would fill if you made  a box out of the three previous figures