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

Shikishima dispersion

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
350 posts
5,465 battles

The dispersion is deceptive at times but overall I like this ship . I think it will be supercool if you buff her dispersion to get some consistency in hitting perfectly bow in targets at least during close range encounters you aim for bow but rng sends 2 shells to port side and 1 shells to starboard side or vice versa and this is really not good.

 

Many thanks ...

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
2,995 posts
12,780 battles

From  better than supercruiser dispersion to what? Cruiser dispersion? Why not destroyer dispersion?

 

250m dispersion at 26km is better than any supercruiser or battleship besides Slava.

2.1 sigma is also the best battleship sigma.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
350 posts
5,465 battles
1 hour ago, gopher31 said:

From  better than supercruiser dispersion to what? Cruiser dispersion? Why not destroyer dispersion?

 

250m dispersion at 26km is better than any supercruiser or battleship besides Slava.

2.1 sigma is also the best battleship sigma.

I appreciate your opinion but if you read properly my argument is clearly not about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,114 posts
12,656 battles
3 hours ago, gopher31 said:

From  better than supercruiser dispersion to what? Cruiser dispersion? Why not destroyer dispersion?

 

250m dispersion at 26km is better than any supercruiser or battleship besides Slava.

2.1 sigma is also the best battleship sigma.

well, its not better than supercruiser dispersion, it is typical japanese BB dispersion but then slighty buffed. 

Also, while the 2.1 sigma is indeed the best battleship sigma, this is a 6 barrel battleship, meaning that the significance of the 2.1 sigma is much lower than the same 2.1 in a 9 barrel in a Yamato. 
Essentially, for any salvo a Shikishima does you can expect the Yamato to have 3 shells landing in pretty much the inner 5% of your aiming ellipse. 

Shikishima is in fact a bit wonky, it could do with a higher sigma to really highlight its power but thatd probably break it a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
2,995 posts
12,780 battles
2 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

well, its not better than supercruiser dispersion, it is typical japanese BB dispersion but then slighty buffed. 

Also, while the 2.1 sigma is indeed the best battleship sigma, this is a 6 barrel battleship, meaning that the significance of the 2.1 sigma is much lower than the same 2.1 in a 9 barrel in a Yamato. 
Essentially, for any salvo a Shikishima does you can expect the Yamato to have 3 shells landing in pretty much the inner 5% of your aiming ellipse. 

Shikishima is in fact a bit wonky, it could do with a higher sigma to really highlight its power but thatd probably break it a bit

Check out. The dispersion numbers .

 

Champagne uses the super cruiser dispersion formula. It has 259mm dispersion at 25km

Shikishima has 250m dispersion at 26.6km

 

Unfortunately, having few guns is always a problem but I cannot see how to fix it without making the Shikishima a beast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,258 posts
245 battles
5 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Check out. The dispersion numbers .

 

Champagne uses the super cruiser dispersion formula. It has 259mm dispersion at 25km

Shikishima has 250m dispersion at 26.6km

 

Unfortunately, having few guns is always a problem but I cannot see how to fix it without making the Shikishima a beast!

I thought shikishima got enhanced BB dispersion or used Battlecruiser dispersion like georgia. Either way there were alternate gun layouts for 510mm's the typical 3x3 one and two quad turrets like republique.

Could make the quad turret one maker 25% longer and 10% wider than the shikishima and also a more modernish AA and secondary turret layout and some thicker armour, but with some trade offs and you could have a unique ship (gib 12.3km sec am gud barneh).

 

Either way im pretty sure we will see moar fat gun ships soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MUMMY]
Players
570 posts
10,110 battles

Shika seems fine.

I dont personally own one but have been on the receiving end a few times in BBs/CAs.  Shika shells hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CKBK]
Players
298 posts
12,964 battles

Shiki has similar dispersion pattern to Slava but has the Yamato trait of shells going everywhere below 10km range. Keep that in mind when playing both ships. The reason why its more apparent on shiki is the number of barrels. But she is fine, doesnt need any buffs or nerfs. Maybe a price nerf to 30k steel :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
1 hour ago, gopher31 said:

Check out. The dispersion numbers .

 

Champagne uses the super cruiser dispersion formula. It has 259mm dispersion at 25km

Shikishima has 250m dispersion at 26.6km

 

Unfortunately, having few guns is always a problem but I cannot see how to fix it without making the Shikishima a beast!

Shikishima only surpasses supercruisers at 17 km though. Close up it is much worse. While at range, it is only marginally better. So, calling it better is like calling French dispersion better than Russian dispersion, because at 20 km the French have the better numbers.

1 hour ago, CptBarney said:

I thought shikishima got enhanced BB dispersion or used Battlecruiser dispersion like georgia. Either way there were alternate gun layouts for 510mm's the typical 3x3 one and two quad turrets like republique.

Could make the quad turret one maker 25% longer and 10% wider than the shikishima and also a more modernish AA and secondary turret layout and some thicker armour, but with some trade offs and you could have a unique ship (gib 12.3km sec am gud barneh).

 

Either way im pretty sure we will see moar fat gun ships soon.

Shikishima uses Yamato dispersion with 1 less metre increase of horizontal dispersion per km of range.

16 minutes ago, Miki12345 said:

Shiki has similar dispersion pattern to Slava but has the Yamato trait of shells going everywhere below 10km range. Keep that in mind when playing both ships. The reason why its more apparent on shiki is the number of barrels. But she is fine, doesnt need any buffs or nerfs. Maybe a price nerf to 30k steel :P

Slava has an even more extreme horizontal dispersion model than Shikishima, but also extremely narrow vertical dispersion, which Shikishima has not.

 

Overall Shikishima accuracy is fine though. Its inconsistency is more linked to shell count and the reason Yamato as a main battery platform still is the better choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,114 posts
12,656 battles

I've found the following through Reddit: 

Dispersion changed. Not to standard IJN BB formula (7.2R+84) but to a better one (6.2R+84)

Meaning it certainly is not battlecruiser dispersion, but quite the contrary and indeed what i mentioned: improved IJN BB dispersion. 

The IJN BB dispersion trait is that they start off with high dispersion, but remain relatively accurate even at very long range. The Shikishima has this even more pronounced, with an equal base value of 84m dispersion to other IJN BBs, but an increase of 6.2m/km instead of 7.2 for other IJN BBs. 

Battlecruisers on the other hand have a dispersion that starts off low (when compared to IJN BBs) and then increase faster at range, which would essentially be better at anything below maximum range though. 

All in all it is quite clear from the dispersion formulas that the Shikishima is meant to be used as a sniper, though its not nearly as good at it as for instance the Slava. 


The reddit post does however also provide the one thing that could use some love: the AP shell fuse threshold. 
It is the standard 1/6th of the shell caliber, so 85mm, but thats actually far too high and this is the reason that the Shikishima shoots so many overpens. This should be reduced IMO to make the ship more effective, these large shells should be an advantage more than a disadvantage. Reduce it to the level of the Yamatos 460mms (treshold 76 or 77 i think) and it will help a lot. 

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_and_Aiming

 

 

 

22 hours ago, gopher31 said:

Check out. The dispersion numbers .

 

Champagne uses the super cruiser dispersion formula. It has 259mm dispersion at 25km

Shikishima has 250m dispersion at 26.6km

 

Unfortunately, having few guns is always a problem but I cannot see how to fix it without making the Shikishima a beast!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
2,995 posts
12,780 battles
11 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

I've found the following through Reddit: 

Dispersion changed. Not to standard IJN BB formula (7.2R+84) but to a better one (6.2R+84)

Meaning it certainly is not battlecruiser dispersion, but quite the contrary and indeed what i mentioned: improved IJN BB dispersion. 

The IJN BB dispersion trait is that they start off with high dispersion, but remain relatively accurate even at very long range. The Shikishima has this even more pronounced, with an equal base value of 84m dispersion to other IJN BBs, but an increase of 6.2m/km instead of 7.2 for other IJN BBs. 

Battlecruisers on the other hand have a dispersion that starts off low (when compared to IJN BBs) and then increase faster at range, which would essentially be better at anything below maximum range though. 

All in all it is quite clear from the dispersion formulas that the Shikishima is meant to be used as a sniper, though its not nearly as good at it as for instance the Slava. 


The reddit post does however also provide the one thing that could use some love: the AP shell fuse threshold. 
It is the standard 1/6th of the shell caliber, so 85mm, but thats actually far too high and this is the reason that the Shikishima shoots so many overpens. This should be reduced IMO to make the ship more effective, these large shells should be an advantage more than a disadvantage. Reduce it to the level of the Yamatos 460mms (treshold 76 or 77 i think) and it will help a lot. 

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_and_Aiming

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the information.

 

I am now eating my words.......

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
601 posts
3,451 battles

IIRC she suffers from a bad vertical dispersion pattern, even though her parameters like sigma and dispersion (the ellipse diameter in meters) say that she's accurate.
I found the same vertical dispersion thing to be annoying when playing the Nagato, where players were saying she's "super accurate" ("and if you miss you must be bad"), but I far too often "missed" a lot of shots with her that I shouldn't (even though they seemed to be dead on target before actual impact).


The problem with vertical dispersion is that shells (even though they are tightly grouped) can land short or far behind the target, which can be a problem when shooting at broadside targets especially as you are counting on them to hit the waterline/belt when in fact they just end up splashing in the water.
This value is also not shown by WG as far as I know, leading people to believe that sigma and dispersion ellipse diameters are all that matter.

I personally much prefer BBs with low vertical dispersion (and high horizontal dispersion) since you can more reliably hit the waterline/belt when it matters, even if the shells spread out on the belt horizontally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
2,995 posts
12,780 battles
18 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

IIRC she suffers from a bad vertical dispersion pattern, even though her parameters like sigma and dispersion (the ellipse diameter in meters) say that she's accurate.
I found the same vertical dispersion thing to be annoying when playing the Nagato, where players were saying she's "super accurate" ("and if you miss you must be bad"), but I far too often "missed" a lot of shots with her that I shouldn't (even though they seemed to be dead on target before actual impact).


The problem with vertical dispersion is that shells (even though they are tightly grouped) can land short or far behind the target, which can be a problem when shooting at broadside targets especially as you are counting on them to hit the waterline/belt when in fact they just end up splashing in the water.
This value is also not shown by WG as far as I know, leading people to believe that sigma and dispersion ellipse diameters are all that matter.

I personally much prefer BBs with low vertical dispersion (and high horizontal dispersion) since you can more reliably hit the waterline/belt when it matters, even if the shells spread out on the belt horizontally.

It looks like it.

 

Vertical dispersion is built on a vertical plane which means it's effect is most felt at short ranges .

IJN battleships have by far the worst vertical dispersion  which is part of the reason why they  feel accurate at long range but less accurate at short range.

I'm not sure Shikishima shares this trait but the experience of owners lead me to believe it does.

 

Soviet battleships have by far the best vertical dispersion giving them very accurate salvos at close range and 'poor long range dispersiontm'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
601 posts
3,451 battles
48 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Soviet battleships have by far the best vertical dispersion giving them very accurate salvos at close range and 'poor long range dispersiontm'.

Yeah, that factor makes the Soviet BB "balancing criteria" bull**** from WG, and shows why vertical dispersion is far more important than one would think.


Interestingly, I recently also saw a graph that modelled a curve of different nation's BB lines in regards to accuracy at different ranges.
The Soviet BB line was one of the absolutely best performing BBs accuracy wise at nearly all ranges, apart from the last 1 or 2 kms where they were becoming worse.
That hardly makes them "bad at fighting at long ranges", unless one considers absolute max range to be "at long ranges".

Share this post


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

×