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

New Japanese AP bombs penetration testing (quick-and-dirty)

5 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[UNICS]
Beta Tester
17 posts
5,114 battles

Hey guys,

 

I just did a short penetration testing session with the CV rework 0.8.0 PT round 1 Hakuryu AP bombs on Tier X ships; raw data below; maybe someone finds it helpful.

(In fat are the ships I'd consider "vulnerable" after this test. Disclaimer: data are not extensive enough)

 

Ship Penetration Citadel Non-penetration Overpenetration
Yamato 26 8 1 0
Kurfürst 17 13 0 1
Republique 19 5 0 0
Montana 12 10 0 0
Conqueror 13 1 0 1
Moskva 6 6 0 0
Des Moines 6 6 0 0
Worcester 5 3 1 0
Henri IV 5 4 0 13
Hindenburg 6 6 0 3
Minotaur 7 4 0 3
Zao 5 5 0 0

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
980 posts
7,923 battles

So in other words. 

Nobody is immune anymore. (Though Conq looks like pens only for the most part.)

Well bollocks. (Edit: Wait, this isn't filtered!? HECK YES. I'mma paste every post with bollocks from now on.) 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[G-S-W]
Beta Tester
146 posts
7,433 battles

From the facebook development blog:

Quote

AP bombs. This mechanics was significantly reworked and it's much more complex and interesting now. They used to work similar to AP shells dropped from above at a 90 degree angle, and they basically ignored effective armor. Now they have advanced ballistics and their flight path and angle of impact depends on when you actually release them. They can even bounce against armor! When dive bombers start the run, you can release the payload earlier, at higher altitude with more chances of a deck hit. Or you can wait and release them very late when the planes basically stop the dive - and it will be more like a salvo to the broadside. That's like a separate AP shooting mechanic to learn and master!

 

So I dont know if you didnt performed your attack run always the exact same way (for example dropping with 3 sec left) that the results are somewhat reliable.

 

I could imagine that for some ships its better to drop from high, for others to drop from low (and from the side?)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,914 posts
7,006 battles

% of hits as citadels added would have helped to paint the picture :cap_tea:

 

From your numbers:

hMKPXJ8.png

 

But yeah, with average of 18.4 bombs per target that's a really small sample size, could have been purely a lucky / unlucky run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_LW_]
Players
161 posts
8,653 battles
4 hours ago, Seeigel said:

From the facebook development blog:

 

So I dont know if you didnt performed your attack run always the exact same way (for example dropping with 3 sec left) that the results are somewhat reliable.

 

I could imagine that for some ships its better to drop from high, for others to drop from low (and from the side?)

Indeed. This study requires bombing angles to be taken into consideration, otherwise it can not be reliable.

 

@PhysixGER, if you bomb a ship with a steep angle you can get citadels, but if you bomb with a shallow angle, you can get regular pens or ricochets.

 

You should look into this :

Take a look at the sketch in the " AP bombing with different impact angles. " part (hidden in spoiler).

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×