Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Eddy209

IFHR related armor adjustments and its implication for AP

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[BFLAG]
[BFLAG]
Players
72 posts
8,443 battles

Im a bit surprised there is little discussion about the plating adjustments because of the upcomming IFHE change. 

 

  • Plating of the central part for tier VI - VII cruisers is brought to the value of 25 mm. This will cause the ricochet of shells with a calibre up to 357 mm. If existing plating or armour belt is thicker than 25 mm, it won't be changed.
  • Plating of central part for tiers VIII - IX cruisers is brought to the value of 27 mm. This will cause the ricochet of shells with a calibre up to 386 mm. But battleships will still be able to penetrate ships' bow and aft ends, because only the plating of the central part is changed. If the existing plating or armour belt was thicker, it won't be changed.
  • Plating of central part for tier X cruisers is brought to the value of 30 mm.
  • Plating of bow and aft ends of cruisers with a calibre of main guns lower than 200 mm is made thinner than before: 13 mm for tiers VI - VII, 16 mm for tiers VIII - X.
  • This will cause the ricochet of shells with calibre up to 429 mm. Armour belts thicker than 30 mm will not be changedChanges to plating will make tiers VI - IX cruisers a bit more resistant to the battleships fire when angled properly and will encourage good positioning, similarly to tier X cruisers.

 

I know they said they are testing the concept. But if taken at face value.

-208mm guns will be able to pen up to tier VII light cruisers : so those light cruisers are not only vulnerable to BB AP but to 283mm and 208mm cruiser guns. Good for scharnhorst and CAs but imho but arent those CLs vulnrable enough ?

-356 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of T-VI to T-VII cruisers: Im all for making cruisers a bit more resiliant but  most TV to some TVII BBs will uptier even worse. Introduce the age of the bowtanking CA to lower tiers. All in all imho not great - makes the gameplay at mid tier as static as in higher tiers

-381 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of T-VIII to T-IX cruisers : Again - it adds some resiliance to some cruisers - some T8 cruisers will benefit from it wich imho is good. Making 381mm guns wich are commen at this spread even less usefull is a bad idea on the other hand. They dont uptier well and reinforced static bowtanking 

-406 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of X cruisers. This is imho very bad. TX cruisers in general are hard to hit, often have troll armor and a heal plus they can dish out way more damage over time than most BBs. At TX they simply dont need that buff. Especialy considering how commen 406er are at this Tier.

Republique, Conquerer, Kremlin, Yamato and especialy Musashi are therefore indirectly buffed compared to their smaller gunned brethren. This is not in proportion.

 

What do you guys think? 

Imho they should just have made firechance inderectly proportional to the gun caliber when using ifhe. None to the 152s , half down to 132mm, quarter for anything below.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,034 posts
11,833 battles
3 minutes ago, Eddy209 said:

Im a bit surprised there is little discussion about the plating adjustments because of the upcomming IFHE change. 

 

  • Plating of the central part for tier VI - VII cruisers is brought to the value of 25 mm. This will cause the ricochet of shells with a calibre up to 357 mm. If existing plating or armour belt is thicker than 25 mm, it won't be changed.
  • Plating of central part for tiers VIII - IX cruisers is brought to the value of 27 mm. This will cause the ricochet of shells with a calibre up to 386 mm. But battleships will still be able to penetrate ships' bow and aft ends, because only the plating of the central part is changed. If the existing plating or armour belt was thicker, it won't be changed.
  • Plating of central part for tier X cruisers is brought to the value of 30 mm.
  • Plating of bow and aft ends of cruisers with a calibre of main guns lower than 200 mm is made thinner than before: 13 mm for tiers VI - VII, 16 mm for tiers VIII - X.
  • This will cause the ricochet of shells with calibre up to 429 mm. Armour belts thicker than 30 mm will not be changedChanges to plating will make tiers VI - IX cruisers a bit more resistant to the battleships fire when angled properly and will encourage good positioning, similarly to tier X cruisers.

 

I know they said they are testing the concept. But if taken at face value.

-208mm guns will be able to pen up to tier VII light cruisers : so those light cruisers are not only vulnerable to BB AP but to 283mm and 208mm cruiser guns. Good for scharnhorst and CAs but imho but arent those CLs vulnrable enough ?

-356 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of T-VI to T-VII cruisers: Im all for making cruisers a bit more resiliant but  most TV to some TVII BBs will uptier even worse. Introduce the age of the bowtanking CA to lower tiers. All in all imho not great - makes the gameplay at mid tier as static as in higher tiers

-381 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of T-VIII to T-IX cruisers : Again - it adds some resiliance to some cruisers - some T8 cruisers will benefit from it wich imho is good. Making 381mm guns wich are commen at this spread even less usefull is a bad idea on the other hand. They dont uptier well and reinforced static bowtanking 

-406 mm guns will not be able to penetrate 25 mm upper belt of X cruisers. This is imho very bad. TX cruisers in general are hard to hit, often have troll armor and a heal plus they can dish out way more damage over time than most BBs. At TX they simply dont need that buff. Especialy considering how commen 406er are at this Tier.

Republique, Conquerer, Kremlin, Yamato and especialy Musashi are therefore indirectly buffed compared to their smaller gunned brethren. This is not in proportion.

 

What do you guys think? 

Imho they should just have made firechance inderectly proportional to the gun caliber when using ifhe. None to the 152s , half down to 132mm, quarter for anything below.

The purpose of these changes was to make CL more vulnerable. On other hand, reinforced amidship is there to enable some ricocheting with skill applied.

 

And pretty much every T10 cruiser except Minotaur and Wooster have 30mm plating already, so no big change there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,792 posts
14,383 battles
6 minutes ago, Eddy209 said:

Im a bit surprised there is little discussion about the plating adjustments because of the upcomming IFHE change.

Because it is discussed in the appropriate thread:

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BFLAG]
[BFLAG]
Players
72 posts
8,443 battles
Just now, ColonelPete said:

Because it is discussed in the appropriate thread:

 

Thank you ColonelPete - ill look there for answers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
559 posts
5,180 battles

i still think reduction in shell velocity in game is needed to allow cl better evasion chance.

they dont have the armour to take hits as is, and i agree it does look like their lives will get harder. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,920 posts
16,156 battles
39 minutes ago, Eddy209 said:

What do you guys think? 

Imho they should just have made firechance inderectly proportional to the gun caliber when using ifhe. None to the 152s , half down to 132mm, quarter for anything below.

It's piffle. It makes the life of destroyers much harder, they haven't considered Tier V cruisers at all, and it brings up the absurd situation where a Helena will have different penetration rules to a Cleveland, despite the fact they have the same guns and fire the same shells, purely because of their Tier position.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,133 posts
7,085 battles
3 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

it brings up the absurd situation where a Helena will have different penetration rules to a Cleveland, despite the fact they have the same guns and fire the same shells, purely because of their Tier position.

hmmm I don't understand what you mean, as the penetration depends on the tier of the targeted ship, not the tier of the ship that fires the shell !?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,169 posts
9,081 battles
4 hours ago, Panocek said:

And pretty much every T10 cruiser except Minotaur and Wooster have 30mm plating already, so no big change there.

Worcester has 30 mm deck. If you don't count that, why count Des Moines/Salem (where 30 mm also is limited to the deck)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,920 posts
16,156 battles
9 minutes ago, elblancogringo said:

hmmm I don't understand what you mean, as the penetration depends on the tier of the targeted ship, not the tier of the ship that fires the shell !?

Nope. According to these changes: "For tiers VIII - X cruisers with 152 - 155 mm main caliber guns, the penetration of HE shells is brought to the value of 1/5 of the caliber. This will allow them to penetrate same tier cruisers". What you need to think about is how that impacts Cruiser vs Battleship. Under these rules Cleveland will be able to penetrate the 32mm deck armour of a Tier VIII BB but Helena never will, even with IFHE, because 152/6 = 25.3, which IFHE (x1.2) brings only brings up to 30.4mm. Same guns, same shells, different penetration based on the Tier of the ship which is firing.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,133 posts
7,085 battles
2 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Nope. According to these changes: "For tiers VIII - X cruisers with 152 - 155 mm main caliber guns, the penetration of HE shells is brought to the value of 1/5 of the caliber. This will allow them to penetrate same tier cruisers". What you need to think about is how that impacts Cruiser vs Battleship. Under these rules Cleveland will be able to penetrate the 32mm deck armour of a Tier VIII BB but Helena never will, even with IFHE, because 152/6 = 25.3, which IFHE (x1.2) brings only brings up to 30.4mm. Same guns, same shells, different penetration based on the Tier of the ship which is firing.

 

Ok I now understand, thank you. I must say these changes are really complicated and I was a bit lost.

The 32 mm of pen for Cleveland are with IFHE right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,260 posts
20,648 battles
Vor 19 Stunden, Eddy209 sagte:

What do you guys think?

I think no developer at WG seems willing or capable of learning.

They all seem to obsess over spreadsheets too much and play the game too little.

Confessing I have been clamoring for a nerf to the ridiculous IJN HE-spamming gunboats with their magic shells. I stand by that, and this plan seems to achieve that... but why oh why do they feel the need to throw the whole mid / high tier balance out of whack?

It's gonna be the CV rework all over again, with months and possibly years of testing and balancing and rebalancing on the live server, and before they even manage to put the CV rework chaos to rest.

I can't make my nick longer again for yet another protest movement. And the hashtag would be a lot more awkward... Clan mates are having a hard enough time as it is. I'll just change it to "Lab rat" or something.

Edit: Throwing one more thing in there.

Every experimenter worth his salt knows that in any experiment, you should ideally keep every factor constant except one. Otherwise, you might not know which of the altered factors it was that changed the outcome. And if you let the alterations get away from you, in the end, it might not be you doing the experiment but the other way round.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,920 posts
16,156 battles
8 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

Ok I now understand, thank you. I must say these changes are really complicated and I was a bit lost.

The 32 mm of pen for Cleveland are with IFHE right?

Yes. Cleveland without IFHE - 152/5 = 30mm armour penetration, x1.2 with IFHE = 36.48mm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4 posts
6,765 battles

This is just ridiculous , first you pay a lot for your premium massachusetts  and now you going to nerf it, this is a rip off. And if this stay i will never buy a primium again. You pay 50$ dollar for something to stay that way not to se it get nerft ... 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
5,233 posts
24,134 battles
9 hours ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

I think no developer at WG seems willing or capable of learning.

They all seem to obsess over spreadsheets too much and play the game too little.

Confessing I have been clamoring for a nerf to the ridiculous IJN HE-spamming gunboats with their magic shells. I stand by that, and this plan seems to achieve that... but why oh why do they feel the need to throw the whole mid / high tier balance out of whack?

It's gonna be the CV rework all over again, with months and possibly years of testing and balancing and rebalancing on the live server, and before they even manage to put the CV rework chaos to rest.

I can't make my nick longer again for yet another protest movement. And the hashtag would be a lot more awkward... Clan mates are having a hard enough time as it is. I'll just change it to "Lab rat" or something.

Edit: Throwing one more thing in there.

Every experimenter worth his salt knows that in any experiment, you should ideally keep ever factor constant except one. Otherwise, you might not know which of the altered factors it was that changed the outcome. And if you let the alterations get away from you, in the end, it might not be you doing the experiment but the other way round.

Why are you wondering? They are the same who designed the CV rework... 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
1,293 posts
7,278 battles
10 hours ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

I think no developer at WG seems willing or capable of learning.

They all seem to obsess over spreadsheets too much and play the game too little.

 but why oh why do they feel the need to throw the whole mid / high tier balance out of whack?

 

Mate I could not agree more. I see no reason Why they need to do this on such a large scale. Its taken me ages to learn the guns to armour ratio properly, who I can pen in what and who I cant pen Etc.

Now I've got to learn this all over again? Hel no. I've been considering about dropping this game recently...I really think this might push me over the edge and I just end up uninstalling....

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAMAR]
Players
376 posts

The changes to Harugumo and other HE spamming DD's are so welcome. :cap_like:

Plus the changes to He spamming light cruisers

This is definitely a BB buff.  

My Jean Bart likes this a lot. :Smile_glasses::Smile_glasses::Smile_bajan2::Smile_bajan2: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,792 posts
14,383 battles
Just now, GudmundurG said:

The changes to Harugumo and other HE spamming DD's are so welcome. :cap_like:

But that could be done differently. IF they were too strong...

image.thumb.png.7e77d767d6ef0c47aa7f42c0311410cc.png

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,260 posts
20,648 battles
Vor 6 Minuten, ColonelPete sagte:

But that could be done differently. IF they were too strong...

image.thumb.png.7e77d767d6ef0c47aa7f42c0311410cc.png

 

 

 

They are too strong.

You just don't see it in the spreadsheet because there is only so much you can see in a spreadsheet.

They are so strong that they seduce the wrong people into taking excessive risks, that's the only reason the stats aren't better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAMAR]
Players
376 posts

A Destroyer gunning down a Battleship in a short time is so stupid and far from the reality. 

Even in a game it's nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4 posts
6,765 battles
Just now, GudmundurG said:

A Destroyer gunning down a Battleship in a short time is so stupid and far from the reality. 

Even in a game it's nuts.

True but secondairy off a battleship can kill a dd is short time is reality , why nerf those then to

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
9,842 posts
8,985 battles
22 minutes ago, SeaWolf7 said:

Mate I could not agree more. I see no reason Why they need to do this on such a large scale. Its taken me ages to learn the guns to armour ratio properly, who I can pen in what and who I cant pen Etc.

Now I've got to learn this all over again? Hel no. I've been considering about dropping this game recently...I really think this might push me over the edge and I just end up uninstalling....

 

 

You basicly gave the reason why they do it. For me it feels like, they want that people have as little knowledge about the game as possible.

 

And still IFHE would need to reduce HE ALPHA damage in order to have a proper balance. It will always suck because fire chance is not measurable in a meaningful way. It just feels like getting screwed always (either you still receive a fire, or you dont get a fire at all, which is annoying game design)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,792 posts
14,383 battles
13 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

They are too strong.

You just don't see it in the spreadsheet because there is only so much you can see in a spreadsheet.

They are so strong that they seduce the wrong people into taking excessive risks, that's the only reason the stats aren't better.

Silver ships are silver ships.

After a certain time you have to assume that players playing one silver ship have similar skill to players of another silver ship.

 

When you have special information about the player behaviour of players of a certain ship, please bring us this information.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
1,293 posts
7,278 battles
6 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

You basicly gave the reason why they do it. For me it feels like, they want that people have as little knowledge about the game as possible.

 

11 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

 

 It just feels like getting screwed always (either you still receive a fire, or you dont get a fire at all, which is annoying game design)

I know right , 2 points that drive people AWAY or make the game less enjoyable. How does this benefit anyone in the long run ?

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
50 posts
4,619 battles
On 7/13/2019 at 2:42 PM, Stofke78 said:

True but secondairy off a battleship can kill a dd is short time is reality , why nerf those then to

For secundairy to be effective they need to get in range first. That isn't going to happen, unless its a GK or Republique. But even if you get close, you would have a hard time dodging the torps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×