Jump to content
YabbaCoe

0.9.2 PTS - IFHE and Armor Plating Changes

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG]
WG Staff
4,163 posts
4,342 battles

In Update 0.9.2, the thickness values of cruiser and battleship plating have been updated and the Inertia Fuse for HE Shells skill has been modified.

 

Changes to the penetration mechanics

  • The armor-penetration capacity of HE shells of Tier VIII–X cruisers carrying 152–155 mm guns, which was previously calculated in accordance with the 1/6-caliber rule, will now be calculated following the 1/5-caliber rule.
  • The rules for calculating armor-penetration capacity have been changed for all HE and SAP shells: now the new rule "a shell penetrates armor if the armor-thickness value is less than or equal to the shell-penetration value" will be applied instead of the rule "a shell penetrates armor if the armor-thickness value is strictly less than the shell-penetration value." For example, 152 mm shells fired from Helena will be able to penetrate armor plating with a thickness of up to 25 mm, as opposed to the 24 mm it used to be.

These changes will allow cruisers to penetrate the armor of most same-tier ships without using the Inertia Fuse for HE Shells skill.

 

Changes to cruiser and battleship armor protection

The changes to cruiser plating will make these ships more resistant to battleship salvos if they are positioned wisely: AP shells of certain calibers will ricochet off the plating of the central part of a cruiser if they impact at a sharp angle. At the same time, the central part of the hull and deck of cruisers carrying guns with a caliber of 190 mm or more now has thicker armor, while cruisers with guns of a smaller caliber have thicker armor only for the central part of their decks. These changes result in a greater distinction between light and heavy cruisers.

The armor thickness of Tier VI–VII battleships has been changed to preserve their ability to withstand shells fired from cruisers, taking into account the above-mentioned changes to the HE shell penetration rules.

 

Changes to the Inertia Fuse for HE Shells skill

  • The bonus applied to the armor-penetration capacity of HE shells now depends on the ship’s tier.
  • The skill will now reduce the chances of causing fire by half, instead of subtracting 1% or 3% from them, depending on the caliber.
    • It's only the standard chances of a fire being caused by HE shells which are reduced by half. Other bonuses to the chances of causing fire will function as before, such as the bonuses provided by the Victor Lima signal or the Demolition Expert skill.
  • This skill previously provided a significant advantage with minimum penalty, which made it too ultimate. The updated version of the skill brings it more in line with the efficiency of other skills. This will result in players exploring a wider variety of skill options for their cruiser and destroyer Commanders.

 

Table of changes to the penetration mechanics

Spojler
Caliber of main and secondary battery guns Penetration capacity prior to the change Penetration capacity after the change
(armor thickness that the shells can penetrate without the Inertia Fuse for HE Shells skill)
180 mm 29 mm 30 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier cruisers)
152 and 155 mm (Tier VIII–X ships) 24 mm (unable to penetrate the fore and aft ends of same-tier cruisers) and 25 mm 30 mm and 31 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier cruisers)
150 and 152 mm (Tier I–VII ships) 24 mm 25 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier cruisers)
150 mm (German ships) 37 mm 38 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier battleships)
128 mm (German ships) 31 mm 32 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier battleships)
113 mm 18 mm (unable to penetrate the plating of same-tier destroyers) 19 mm (can penetrate the plating of same-tier destroyers)
100 mm (Japanese Tier VIII–X ships) 24 mm (unable to penetrate the fore and aft ends of same-tier cruisers) 25 mm (can penetrate the fore and aft ends of same-tier cruisers)

 

Table of changes to armor protection

Spojler
Armor thickness prior to the change Protection prior to the change
(AP shell caliber, chance of a ricochet)
Armor thickness after the change Protection after the change
(AP shell caliber, chance of a ricochet)
Tier IV–V
Cruisers (except for British light cruisers) Central part—13 mm Up to 186 mm, off the central part Central part—16 mm Up to 229 mm, off the central part
Tier VI–VII
Cruisers carrying guns of a caliber exceeding 190 mm Central part—16 mm Up to 229 mm, off the central part Central part—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the central part
Cruisers carrying 149–190 mm guns (except for British light cruisers) Deck—16 mm Up to 229 mm, off the central deck Deck—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the central deck
Cruisers Devonshire and Surrey Broadside—19 mm Up to 272 mm, off the plating Broadside—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the plating
Tier VIII–IX
Cruisers carrying guns of a caliber exceeding 190 mm Central part—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the central part Central part—27 mm Up to 386 mm, off the central part
Cruisers carrying 149–190 mm guns (except for British light cruisers) Deck—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the central deck Deck—27 mm Up to 386 mm, off the central deck
Cruisers Cheshire, Albemarle, and Drake Broadside—25 mm Up to 357 mm, off the plating Broadside—27 mm Up to 386 mm, off the plating
Tier X
Cruisers Colbert and Smolensk Central part—30 mm Up to 429 mm, off the central part Central part—16 mm Up to 229 mm, off the central part
Cruisers Salem and Des Moines Central part—27 mm Up to 386 mm, off the central part Central part—30 mm Up to 429 mm, off the central part

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1FA]
Players
269 posts
16,445 battles

What will be the new value of USN T8 to T10 BBs midsection deck armor thickness to not relegate them to the RN & MN BBs' league of HE spam "resistence"?

 

What will be the new midsection hull armor thickness of USS Gearing to keep him immune to his own HE shells caliber?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AJX]
Beta Tester
16 posts

I just about give up with all of Wargamings titles now , these IFHE changes , previously the whole CV fiasco , in WOT , so much powercreep that renders older vehicles useless , in WOT Blitz , the mass removal of low tier vehicles , and most recently we have tanks from the mid to late 1940s having to fight American

light tanks from the late 1960s armed with missiles...trust me , it is not fun at all , and the nerfs that just happened here are just nowhere near enough.

 

just what the hell is wrong with Wargaming these days ? everything they touch turns to crap , and the dropping player count is all the proof needed as to what people think.

 

And as for the whole Puerto Rico fiasco.......

 

Come on people , WOWS was a great game , just stop buggering around with stuff just so you can make changes , you are killing it.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAS-X]
Players
385 posts
9,244 battles

So...

A cruiser that historically was slow and had low maneuverabilty, cause it had an heavy armor even if "only" armed with low caliber guns, now in the game will be still slow and had bad maneuverabilty, but will loose the advantage of having a good armor.

At the same time, the Mogami will magically increase the tickness of its armor on all the hull, when switching the guns from 155 to 203.

You should as well magically increase the armor of german destroyer, when they increase the caliber of their guns....

Seriously, the ifhe needed a rework cause of ships like the Smolensk. But what you doing is nerfing ALL the light cruisers in the game to balance few, broken one. Not to mention that you are nerfing them in a way that will make the game even less realistic...

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
48 posts
5,902 battles
7 ore fa, dunbine ha scritto:

So...

A cruiser that historically was slow and had low maneuverabilty, cause it had an heavy armor even if "only" armed with low caliber guns, now in the game will be still slow and had bad maneuverabilty, but will loose the advantage of having a good armor.

At the same time, the Mogami will magically increase the tickness of its armor on all the hull, when switching the guns from 155 to 203.

You should as well magically increase the armor of german destroyer, when they increase the caliber of their guns....

Seriously, the ifhe needed a rework cause of ships like the Smolensk. But what you doing is nerfing ALL the light cruisers in the game to balance few, broken one. Not to mention that you are nerfing them in a way that will make the game even less realistic...

I have done some matches with Cleveland and Worcester, they seem a little more sturdy, Cleveland in particular seems a little more robust when you are in difficult situations in open waters (not so much but I can notice the difference, even more than Worcester in comparison, a paradox, but Worcester face more powerful enemies more often),  but so (sturdy I mean) are the enemies you face, and IFHE + DE are still mandatory for american CLs - even with the nerfed fire chance - otherwise you simply are very slow in doing damage, and however you start less fires overall than before and so you do less damage, the enemies are more difficult to kill with those ships but they are still more or less made of paper in comparison...
A little (very little) more survivability at the cost of less damage sounds like a nerf for american CLs, I can't imagine my poor Atlanta... :(
I don't think the problem were those ships in the balance of the game not as the Smolensk with more fast shells, more flat fire arcs (so more accurate in landing shots) and the smoke, and too high fire chance, a monster.
I have faced some Mogamis and you are right Dunbine they are more "tank" than before... XD
Overall the first impressions of this new patch are not so good... more like a "Meh" :/
Is it really this necessary to change so much of the mechanics of the game?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAILS]
Players
535 posts
19,676 battles

I think it is far too early to put such a drastic change that affects almost all ships already in the next patch. Like with the CV rework, the live server will essentially serve for testing. Then they'll try to balance over time. Obviously this has worked superbly with the CVs... Over a year and still not really balanced at all. Why not just adjust the IFHE skill itself or certain ships that may be over-/underperforming because of IFHE?

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
Players
139 posts
14,822 battles

Can someone tell me if I should or should not use IFHE on a Colbert ???? I thought I understood in the past now I have no idea what to do!!!!  Thxs WG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1FA]
Players
269 posts
16,445 battles
7 minutes ago, _BigRed__ said:

 

EDIT Nevermind, I mistook Colbert for Bayard.

Edited by Yamashiro42
Mistake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,034 posts
11,833 battles
11 minutes ago, Yamashiro42 said:

The Colbert has the 1/5 HE pen modifier since his introduction (as a testing), this value will just become the new standard for the other t8-t10 light cruisers.

Are you sure? 1/5 should be 152/155 thing and shouldn't apply to DD caliber guns.

 

Colbert/Smolensk with 1/5 HE pen would be absolute top kek, able to pen 32mm plating with IFHE.

Share this post


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

Great , but my question has not been answered.

 

You could use some of the elbow grease and determine yourself.

-what armor plating you're most likely to see

-what HE pen you have now

-what HE pen you will get with IFHE

-how important fire chance is for you

 

Now? No reason to use

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[Z3NIT]
Players
698 posts

I'm reporting complaints from some Clan members about the fact that Italian Cruisers that have 90mm secondary are not included in the changes, as we can see in the Table included with the related article on Developer Update 0.9.2 news.

 

Why that? Txs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[17AF]
Players
32 posts
3,191 battles

Hey.

 

Cruisers Colbert / Smolensk

 

Her main guns are 130mm which means they can only pen 22mm without IFHE and 28 with IFHE. I was thinking IFHE should be more a option for CL.

 

I think they best solution is to buff her HE to be 1/5 calculation which means without IFHE she will have 26mm (will pen most crusier bow/sterm) and with IFHE 34mm (Sure it will pen bow/sterm of BB but u lose half fire chance and u need to spent 4 points).

 

Look at Worcester with new update she will have like 30mm ofc she can take IFHE and spam BB but she will lose 6% of fire chance.

 

I know Worcester have like 344k DPM where Smolensk 384k and it is Radar vs Smoke. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,106 posts
9,536 battles

Well, apparently the IFHE changes have been thoroughly tested and ready to be implemented on the live server asap.

 

[/s] 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUSOS]
Players
325 posts
18,425 battles

Being this a game that isnt focused in reality, dont u guys think all this talk about parameters is way over the head of the majority of players? Most just dont even now what is alpha, thickness, angle, etc. They just point and shoot, and all they see is a BB which they know has big guns shooting a broadside smolensk and it gives 1080 hp dmg - and that's insane in most of their views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
1,619 posts
3,585 battles

Hmm what will happen to the Atlanta now ? Cv rework nuked the AA potential, IFHE and plating changes will nuke any damage potential ... are we all about fires now ? or do you expect me to start playing as a DD and try to torp things ?

 

Anyway, the main IFHE reason is not in any way altered in the proposed changes. IFHE for CLs will still be mandatory to do damage to BBs. Same as was before.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG]
WG Staff
4,163 posts
4,342 battles
22 hours ago, Immanuel_Elbe said:

I think you forgot to add Hakuryu to the list.280060807_IJN100mmwith30mmpen.thumb.PNG.c33c3b492fdf903983f8d39b95f1c22c.PNG

You are correct. It wasn't mentioned in the article, but the changes were applied to Hakuryu too. You can check the values on Hakuryu ingame.

 

EDIT: The article was updated:

8884896907f42eaec025b5cd6b1040ce.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUSOS]
Players
325 posts
18,425 battles

Well, after testing the Smolensk in PTS, I'm glad the new changes made it less OP than before, as one can see on this prtscrn:
Usually, with 797 hits one would do a lot more fires and fire dmg, but now we have to sink ships with dmg hits instead.
unknown.png

unknown.png?width=1286&height=678

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,106 posts
9,536 battles

I believe Smolensk's unique upgrade should be anti-radar. 

 

Ask Boyarski what he thinks of the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PFFB]
Players
6 posts
9,215 battles

have u think that massachusetts and georgia without ifhe u cant pen nothing but dds? secondary build. 

i have both premium ships, buyed to play secondary build coz a love it. Now we cant play secondary build.

so... u will refund for these ships??

thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
11 posts
8,406 battles
On 2/20/2020 at 4:59 PM, bcadian said:

I just about give up with all of Wargamings titles now , these IFHE changes , previously the whole CV fiasco , in WOT , so much powercreep that renders older vehicles useless , in WOT Blitz , the mass removal of low tier vehicles , and most recently we have tanks from the mid to late 1940s having to fight American

light tanks from the late 1960s armed with missiles...trust me , it is not fun at all , and the nerfs that just happened here are just nowhere near enough.

 

just what the hell is wrong with Wargaming these days ? everything they touch turns to crap , and the dropping player count is all the proof needed as to what people think.

 

And as for the whole Puerto Rico fiasco.......

 

Come on people , WOWS was a great game , just stop buggering around with stuff just so you can make changes , you are killing it.

Wargaming got all the indications of a company in panic, usually driven by incompetent leaders.
They try to drag out as much money they can from players in every situation. Make impossible missions so players have to pay money in the end to finish missions, Payto Rico is just one example.
If you want good stats, pay. It´s so obvious the game is rigged since no matter what you do wargaming decides the outcome of battles. This is not matchmaking, its rigged, scam and fraud. You are allowed a few days where everything is easy and then a few days when everything is crap. some call it blow outs where either team just runs over the other team, both is boring doesnt matter if you win or loose. I rather loose a good battle than win a blow out. You know when wargaming controls the battle when e.g. you´re in a BB and have a ship 10km away broadside and you just cant hit it. If you after a few games realize that you are not allowed to play (everthing is crap) you should just stop playing and wait until the next day and see if you are allowed to play.
A game is something you should be able to learn how to play, and you can to a surtain extence but since wargaming makes changes to ships all the time you will never really learn the ships. 
OK, some ships needs to be changed e.g. Smolensk wich should not be in the game at all in its current state (even if its amazing to rip it apart in a Harugumo)  so OP ships is ok to change. Problem is wargaming wants every ship to be 50% wins etc. in the stats in seems. Leave the ships. When players learn the ships you will be good in some bad in some. Problem is if you love one ship and are good in it you will suddenly be crap in your favorite ship when wargaming changes is.

 

Wargaming most important i think, STOP CONTROLLING BATTLES. Thats why i stopped playing this game some months ago. There are som many other computer programs that are better because world of warships is not a game in its current status.

It´s a lottery program where you have higher win chance if you pay more (by more lottery tickets). The program is not the same everytime you log in to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×