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

[IJN 100mm guns] IFHE firechance not adequate anymore

95 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles

The reduced 1% firechance-penalty for IFHE on IJN 100mm guns is not adequate anymore.

 

It was introduced especially for these 100mm, because they previously needed IFHE to penetrate even 19mm armor.

 

Now they have the 1/4 rule and the same penetration as 150mm guns. Being that powerful, they should receive the same -3% nerf on their firechance, for the ability to penetrate even 32mm armor.

 

(Personally, I would not mind a flat -3% on IFHE again. Other DDs don't need the skill anyway, and Atlanta/Flint worked before.)

  • Cool 10
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
555 posts
21,150 battles

The problem isn't the fire chance. They shouldn't have 1/4 penetration in the first place.

Would have been good, if WG would have tried 1/5 penetration instead before releasing them.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
1 minute ago, _DemonGuard_ said:

The problem isn't the fire chance. They shouldn't have 1/4 penetration in the first place.

Would have been good, if WG would have tried 1/5 penetration instead before releasing them.

 

That would be another question, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
13,036 battles

WG would have to implement a special exception for the IFHE skill though.

 

Probably easier to plain adjust the base firechance on the respectable ships/guns themselves rather than toy with the captain skill.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
4 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

WG would have to implement a special exception for the IFHE skill though.

 

Do Atlanta/Flint really need the -1% ?

 

Because no other DD below 139mm will actually take IFHE.

 

So I wouldn't mind a flat -3% again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,673 posts
11,797 battles
18 minutes ago, changenam324255 said:

The reduced 1% firechance-penalty for IFHE on IJN 100mm guns is not adequate anymore.

 

It was introduced especially for these 100mm, because they previously needed IFHE to penetrate even 19mm armor.

 

Now they have the 1/4 rule and the same penetration as 150mm guns. Being that powerful, they should receive the same -3% nerf on their firechance, for the ability to penetrate even 32mm armor.

1. I have my own thoughts about whether it was a good idea to give these 100mm guns a 1/4 HE pen that leaves them with light cruiser grade penetration

2. This is, however, completely irrelevant. Low caliber guns get reduced firestarting chance on IFHE not because the guns aren't powerful enough but because the base fire chance of these guns is so low. The same reason why firechance improving flags give only 0,5% to low calibers and 1% to bigger ones.

 

Let me put it this way:

100mm IJN gun has a base fire chance of 5%. With 3% penalty that would be only 2%, less than half of the normal chance.

Worcester's 152mm guns have a base fire chance of 12%. With 3% penalty she ends up with 9% fire chance - that's a reduction by 1/4. And the bigger the base firechance, the less relevant the penalty becomes.

 

If anything, the skill (and flags, and DE for that matter) should probably be changed to scale directly from ship's fire chance (so that it's always a reduction by 1/4 or 1/5) but since it's not done this way then differentiation by caliber is the next best thing.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
1 minute ago, eliastion said:

This is, however, completely irrelevant. Low caliber guns get reduced firestarting chance on IFHE not because the guns aren't powerful enough but because the base fire chance of these guns is so low. The same reason why firechance improving flags give only 0,5% to low calibers and 1% to bigger ones.

 

While that would make sense logically, 100mm where the only guns needing that IFHE buff back in the day.

So they can just reverse it from my point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
8,460 posts
13,036 battles

Why are you attempting to balance around a secondary vector (captain skills) rather than the actual source (gun base fire chance) in the first place?

 

Just reduce the base fire chance and violá. The ships that needed tweaking got tweaked and done. There's literally no point in going for the captain skill which will effect more ships in some way or another (upcoming RN DDs with 114mm guns will need IFHE to damage DD hulls at hightiers too). That's just adding complexity for literally no benefit over the direct route.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,673 posts
11,797 battles
8 minutes ago, changenam324255 said:

 

While that would make sense logically, 100mm where the only guns needing that IFHE buff back in the day.

So they can just reverse it from my point of view.

Of course they CAN. But they shouldn't. Also, it seems like the upcoming British DDs will be IFHE-dependent much like the old Akizuki - so it's not only IJN low caliber gun problem anymore as you imply.

 

What SHOULD happen is tying all these firechance bonuses and penalties to the base fire chance in the first place. Smaller guns tend to have low firechance and high RPM, making all the bonuses and penalties much more pronounced than for, say, Zao (not to mention Conqueror and stuff).

So that, say, IFHE would just give a flat -1/5 firechance penalty, the DE would help you with +1/5 bonus and and the flags were at a +1/10 firechance improvement (numbers are placeholders, of course, it would need to be fine-tuned and possibly accompany a general firechance rebalance for really big and really small guns). This way all these bonuses and penalties would be relevant regardless of whether you're sailing an Akizuki or a Conqueror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
10 minutes ago, eliastion said:

Of course they CAN. But they shouldn't. Also, it seems like the upcoming British DDs will be IFHE-dependent much like the old Akizuki - so it's not only IJN low caliber gun problem anymore as you imply.

 

These 114mm guns will have a base firechance of 8% though.

Still a valid point to consider, yes.

 

Quote

What SHOULD happen is tying all these firechance bonuses and penalties to the base fire chance in the first place. Smaller guns tend to have low firechance and high RPM, making all the bonuses and penalties much more pronounced than for, say, Zao (not to mention Conqueror and stuff).

So that, say, IFHE would just give a flat -1/5 firechance penalty, the DE would help you with +1/5 bonus and and the flags were at a +1/10 firechance improvement (numbers are placeholders, of course, it would need to be fine-tuned and possibly accompany a general firechance rebalance for really big and really small guns). This way all these bonuses and penalties would be relevant regardless of whether you're sailing an Akizuki or a Conqueror.

 

A percentual nerf/buff in firechance for IFHE and DE could be a solution, I guess.

(With different percentages for each class ofc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,932 posts
8,397 battles
48 minutes ago, changenam324255 said:

(Personally, I would not mind a flat -3% on IFHE again. Other DDs don't need the skill anyway, and Atlanta/Flint worked before.)

Pls no my IFHE GK would suffer heavily 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,673 posts
11,797 battles
2 minutes ago, changenam324255 said:

 

Because DE cannot provide something like +40% on a Zao, but +15% on a DD is a bit lacking. 

I disagree with your assertion.

If a DD can get +1/5 of fire chance then why wouldn't a cruiser. If a cruiser needs to get by with smaller increase - why couldn't a DD that gets her fire-setting capabiluty form RPM rather than from good fire chance? If there's lack of balance there then perhaps DDs should get better base fire chance rather than beneficial DE treatment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,932 posts
8,397 battles
8 minutes ago, changenam324255 said:

 

Because DE cannot provide something like +40% on a Zao, but +15% on a DD is a bit lacking. 

Reliable firestarting on range is a very different thing from the close range HE spamming on Haru or USN CLs. I wouldnt compare the two, very different factors into play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,420 posts
8,391 battles
1 hour ago, changenam324255 said:

Now they have the 1/4 rule and the same penetration as 150mm guns.

When and where that was announced??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
5 minutes ago, Affeks said:

I wouldnt compare the two, very different factors into play.

 

Which is why I said, that they would need different percentages, if DE was a buffing firechance percentage wise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOBS3]
Beta Tester
501 posts
17,080 battles
1 hour ago, changenam324255 said:

 

Do Atlanta/Flint really need the -1% ?

 

Because no other DD below 139mm will actually take IFHE.

 

So I wouldn't mind a flat -3% again.

Gallant

Loyang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,932 posts
8,397 battles
1 minute ago, changenam324255 said:

 

Which is why I said, that they would need different percentages, if DE was a buffing firechance percentage wise. 

Thats not what I meant. I was talking about playstyle and what risk reward are involved with actually firing the guns, effective ranges and hit chance with regards to shell performance. 

 

A buff to DE usefullness for Zao or CQ for that matter is not a direction I want the game to take, at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,673 posts
11,797 battles
11 minutes ago, Sargento_YO said:

When and where that was announced??

It's already in effect. Since last patch, to be precise.

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/game-updates/update-077-go-navy/

Quote

Balance Changes

100 mm HE shell

  • The armor penetration capacity of Japanese 100 mm HE shells was increased from 17 mm to 25 mm.

This shell is used by the main guns of Akizuki and Harekaze, and by the secondary battery guns of Ibuki, Zao, Kii, Taiho, and Hakuryu.

This change will make it possible for HE shells to penetrate the armor of all destroyers except the main armor belt of Khabarovsk. And if your Commander helming these ships has mastered the Inertia Fuse for HE Shells skill, your shells will be able to penetrate armor that is up to 32 mm thick, creating an extra advantage for the Japanese destroyers.

 

Japanese destroyer Akizuki

Considering the significant improvements for the 100 mm HE shells, the following parameters of Tier VIII destroyer Akizuki will change:

  • Detectability range by sea was increased from 7.56 to 7.76 km;
  • Detectability range after firing main guns in smoke was increased from 2.39 to 2.48 km;
  • Rudder shift time for Hull (B) was increased from 4.6 to 5.6 sec;
  • Rudder shift time for Hull (A) was increased from 6.5 to 7.8 sec.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JUNK]
[JUNK]
Beta Tester
1,932 posts
8,397 battles
20 minutes ago, deadly_if_swallowed said:

Not exactly a 1/4 pen rule but a hard set to 25mm base and 32mm with IFHE. Have fun melting dem BBs :)

afaik you cant pen 25mm with the 100mms and the 32.5mm pen with IFHE is rounded up. So it is basically just a 1/4 pen rule, no reason to confuse anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,293 posts
14,195 battles
2 hours ago, changenam324255 said:

Other DDs don't need the skill anyway

 

1 hour ago, PassTheSalt said:

Gallant

Loyang

 

No.

Sorry mate, but an IFHE build on these two is just awful.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
2,191 posts

I wish that on my Akizuki it set fires at the rate you are worried about. I have IFHE on my skipper and play it most days getting a few hundred shell hits each game, yet it's rare for me to get more than 3-4 fires. I get more than that in just about any of the other HE slingers I play with a lot less hits.

I guess my RNG sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×