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

How about lowering the arming threshold for heavy cruisers?

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
80 posts
5,221 battles

A cruiser or lightly armored battleship shows you broadside and you want to punish it with AP. But your shells only overpenetrate. Everybody experiences it. So why now lower the arming threshold of heavy cruiser AP to something like caliber/7 or caliber/8 instead of caliber/6?

 

Of course you have to be careful of it not getting out of hand because of the way that armor is being balanced.

 

MfG boom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles

I've asked for this or similar changes a long time. I'm guessing they're are trying SAP for a similar reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,117 posts
11,884 battles
36 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

I've asked for this or similar changes a long time. I'm guessing they're are trying SAP for a similar reason.

Except SAP is fireless HE that can ricochet, so it doesn't exactly solve overpen issue. I mean, it can't overpen, but also can't deal citadel damage due to basically HE+IFHE level of pen.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles
15 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Except SAP is fireless HE that can ricochet, so it doesn't exactly solve overpen issue. I mean, it can't overpen, but also can't deal citadel damage due to basically HE+IFHE level of pen.

I figured since you can citadel lightly/no armoured cruisers with HE, at times, it would be easier and more reliant with SAP. I haven't tested this though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,117 posts
11,884 battles
11 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

I figured since you can citadel lightly/no armoured cruisers with HE, at times, it would be easier and more reliant with SAP. I haven't tested this though.

Emerald and other lowtier Brit CLs used to be obvious "HE citadel" magnet due to 25mm citadel roof acting as deck, but that got buffed to 40mm precisely to remove HE cits. Otherwise, you need 76mm+ pen AND no torpedo belts to interfere with shells to hope for citadel hits, which means BB calibers anyway. And should WG improve CA sized SAP rounds penetration to enable cruiser citadel penetration, it would render regular AP obsolete unless dealing with those few cruisers with torpedo belts or layered armor, while being go-to round against BBs decks at mid range due to 60-85 ricochet angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles

Hmm, i dont see a viable reason for that. T8+ Cruisers have atleast 25mm armor, or even 30mm. So even a slight angle is enough to arm the shell. And if a CL is flat broadside, you want Citadels - not pens. Citadel armor is always thick enough to arm CA shells. The only thing, which can let you overpen the citadel is, that the shell doesnt detonate in time (Kronshtadt says hello)

Overpenetrating a BB in a CA is most likely due to hitting the superstructure (i dont think they need to get pens there all the time) or you shoot the bow and most likely shell detonates outside of the ship.

Now if we go below T8, do CAs really need it there? Imo no. While BBs are also thinly armored (T6/7), i dont see a reason to punish CLs even more. CAs have the power to overmatch some of them anyway. AP on broadside BB works, but so does HE because you dont get much shatters.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles
8 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Emerald and other lowtier Brit CLs used to be obvious "HE citadel" magnet due to 25mm citadel roof acting as deck, but that got buffed to 40mm precisely to remove HE cits. Otherwise, you need 76mm+ pen AND no torpedo belts to interfere with shells to hope for citadel hits, which means BB calibers anyway. And should WG improve CA sized SAP rounds penetration to enable cruiser citadel penetration, it would render regular AP obsolete unless dealing with those few cruisers with torpedo belts or layered armor, while being go-to round against BBs decks at mid range due to 60-85 ricochet angles.

It's those close quarter scenarios when you encounter a broadside light cruiser and AP only overpens. SAP might work better here, in theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,117 posts
11,884 battles
1 minute ago, loppantorkel said:

It's those close quarter scenarios when you encounter a broadside light cruiser and AP only overpens. SAP might work better here, in theory.

Provided it has enough pen to go through armor it meets.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
5,221 battles
52 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Hmm, i dont see a viable reason for that. T8+ Cruisers have atleast 25mm armor, or even 30mm. So even a slight angle is enough to arm the shell. And if a CL is flat broadside, you want Citadels - not pens. Citadel armor is always thick enough to arm CA shells. The only thing, which can let you overpen the citadel is, that the shell doesnt detonate in time (Kronshtadt says hello)

Overpenetrating a BB in a CA is most likely due to hitting the superstructure (i dont think they need to get pens there all the time) or you shoot the bow and most likely shell detonates outside of the ship.

Now if we go below T8, do CAs really need it there? Imo no. While BBs are also thinly armored (T6/7), i dont see a reason to punish CLs even more. CAs have the power to overmatch some of them anyway. AP on broadside BB works, but so does HE because you dont get much shatters.

A shell can arm two ways:

1) The shells caliber hits armor that is equal or greater to the arming threshold(caliber/6 rounded)

If the requirements of 1) are not met then

2) If the shell is still inside the ship by the time the arming time countdown(starts at time of the shell hit) runs out(standard is 0.01s for DD, 0.033s for everything else, RN ships have special values)

If the requirements of 1) and 2) are not met, the shell will overpenetrate doing only 10% damage.

 

The thing is that heavy cruisers(203mm guns) have an arming threshold of 34mm. That means that CAs will be overpenetrating most upper belts in the game with few exceptions. And since heavy cruisers are supposed to be effective against light cruisers, never mind shooting a battleship showing full broadside, i would ask if their arming threshold could be lowered.

 

I'm just asking since WG wants to change cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
Just now, Colonel_Boom said:

The thing is that heavy cruisers(203mm guns) have an arming threshold of 34mm. That means that CAs will be overpenetrating most upper belts in the game with few exceptions. And since heavy cruisers are supposed to be effective against light cruisers, never mind shooting a battleship showing full broadside, i would ask if their arming threshold could be lowered.

 

I'm just asking since WG wants to change cruisers.

 

Angling makes armor thicker, also you still have impact angle aswell, so a BB with 32mm armor will pretty much guaranteed penetrations as the threshold is so close to the armor needed to arm the shell (34mm).

Its a bit difference against CLs, as they tend to have 25mm armor. But as i said, if you have a CL flat broadside, you go for the Citadel. A CL cant withstand CA AP while broadside, unless you are a Omaha/Atlanta and you are 4km away... then your threshold doesnt do anynthing, as the shell doesnt arm in time. You need a lower fuse timer (f.e. 0,022 like Stalingrad) to make it work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
5,221 battles
11 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Angling makes armor thicker, also you still have impact angle aswell, so a BB with 32mm armor will pretty much guaranteed penetrations as the threshold is so close to the armor needed to arm the shell (34mm).

Its a bit difference against CLs, as they tend to have 25mm armor. But as i said, if you have a CL flat broadside, you go for the Citadel. A CL cant withstand CA AP while broadside, unless you are a Omaha/Atlanta and you are 4km away... then your threshold doesnt do anynthing, as the shell doesnt arm in time. You need a lower fuse timer (f.e. 0,022 like Stalingrad) to make it work.

I think that angles are no longer taken into account when calculating for overpenetrations. They are only important in the first set of calculations that determine if there will even be a penetration, or just a shatter/ricochet.

Making the damage of a CA to a CL only be dependent on citadels is kind of bad since BBs would be much better at it than CAs since they can also overmatch their armor which CAs can't do. I mean a Worcester can do much more damage to BBs, like the Republique, showing broadside with AP than CAs can.

 

Edit: Btw, WG rework cruisers by making CL bows and stern be overmatchable by heavy cruisers. But lowering armor thresholds for CAs may be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
4 minutes ago, Colonel_Boom said:

I think that angles are no longer taken into account when calculating for overpenetrations.

 

If you have, try Kronshtadt on a BB aiming for upper belt (32mm). You will get mostly overpens, as it needs 51mm of armor to arm the shell. When you are at an angle, where you start to get ricochets, you should also start seeing pens.

Armor thickness needs to be taken into account if it fuses the shell or not. If the armor thickness is not enough in the first place, shell wont detonate. If shell arms, then it depends on the fuse delay if it detonates inside the ship or not.

 

To your Wooster / repu example. Ofc, but thats because wooster has insane RoF. Give Hindenburg same reload, it would hurt more :Smile_coin: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles
37 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Its a bit difference against CLs, as they tend to have 25mm armor. But as i said, if you have a CL flat broadside, you go for the Citadel. A CL cant withstand CA AP while broadside, unless you are a Omaha/Atlanta and you are 4km away... then your threshold doesnt do anynthing, as the shell doesnt arm in time. You need a lower fuse timer (f.e. 0,022 like Stalingrad) to make it work.

You don't need to be as close as 4 km for AP on the broadside to be nearly useless. It's ofc difficult to know if it's the citadel that is overpenned or if the shells just pass through above. The result is the same - If 6km or closer you'd rather sit in the light cruiser. I think this is a bad mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
5,221 battles
12 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

If you have, try Kronshtadt on a BB aiming for upper belt (32mm). You will get mostly overpens, as it needs 51mm of armor to arm the shell. When you are at an angle, where you start to get ricochets, you should also start seeing pens.

Armor thickness needs to be taken into account if it fuses the shell or not. If the armor thickness is not enough in the first place, shell wont detonate. If shell arms, then it depends on the fuse delay if it detonates inside the ship or not.

 

To your Wooster / repu example. Ofc, but thats because wooster has insane RoF. Give Hindenburg same reload, it would hurt more :Smile_coin: 

The orthogonal armor gets taken into account, not the effective armor. The effective armor is only relevant to determine if there will even be a penetration.

If you hit armor above the threshold then the shell is guaranteed to fully penetrate. If not, then the fuse time will be taken into account.

 

I will try out if Hindenburg gets full pens or overpens against ships like conqueror or republique looking at angle and distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
1 minute ago, loppantorkel said:

You don't need to be as close as 4 km for AP on the broadside to be nearly useless. It's ofc difficult to know if it's the citadel that is overpenned or if the shells just pass through above. The result is the same - If 6km or closer you'd rather sit in the light cruiser. I think this is a bad mechanic.

 

But for that, you dont need a lower arming threshold. You need faster fuse delay. As CLs do have enough armor to arm the shell (usually 70mm+), but are too thin so shell just goes through without detonating. I dont disagree that its stupid (even in a BB vs Cruiser fight, not only CA vs CL btw), but you need to make the correct adjustements to get the result you want :Smile-_tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
25 minutes ago, Colonel_Boom said:

If you hit armor above the threshold then the shell is guaranteed to fully penetrate. If not, then the fuse time will be taken into account.

This is not correct.

 

Fuse time will only be taken into account, if the armor fuses the shell in the first place. F.e. i hit 25mm armor with Yamato shells, the armor is too thin to fuse the shell, so nothing will ever happen. If you hit 200mm of armor, then the fuse delay will start with 0.033 seconds.

AP shells need to fuse first, then they will detonate after the delay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
5,221 battles
2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

...

F.e. i hit 25mm armor with Yamato shells, the armor is too thin to fuse the shell, so nothing will ever happen.

...

This is not correct. As i already explained before, the game first compares caliber to armor threshold. If the armor is above the threshold you will get a full pen, otherwise the fuse time decides.

I know that it doesn't work like that in reality, but that's the way the game does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
Just now, Colonel_Boom said:

This is not correct. As i already explained before, the game first compares caliber to armor threshold. If the armor is above the threshold you will get a full pen, otherwise the fuse time decides.

I know that it doesn't work like that in reality, but that's the way the game does it.

 

Nope, thats actually how it works in Wows too.

Its quite easy to test, take a CA and go close to an Omaha. Has a large citadel as you know. If you are too close, you will overpenetrate the citadel, because the shell leaves the ship before it can detonate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

 

But for that, you dont need a lower arming threshold. You need faster fuse delay. As CLs do have enough armor to arm the shell (usually 70mm+), but are too thin so shell just goes through without detonating. I dont disagree that its stupid (even in a BB vs Cruiser fight, not only CA vs CL btw), but you need to make the correct adjustements to get the result you want :Smile-_tongue:

There are no adjustments that can be done. no counters if you dictate the situation in the light cruiser. If you got one - pls tell me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,364 posts
9,122 battles
1 hour ago, loppantorkel said:

There are no adjustments that can be done. no counters if you dictate the situation in the light cruiser. If you got one - pls tell me.

 

Nah, i meant adjustmens like lowering the fuse delay. You cant do anything youself right now :cap_haloween:

Share this post


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

×