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

Armor schemes on mid-tier American and Jap BBs

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[CATCH]
Players
80 posts
3,896 battles

Can these get updated?

 

The armor on the New Mexico, Colorado and Nagato is all 26mm plating.

The problem with this is that it gets overmatched by 380mm guns and up, which is prevalent in same tier matching for these ships nevermind when you get uptiered.

When going through these lines, this forces you to stay at long range for most of the match, and otherwise doesn't reward good play. I just citadeled a Colorado in my Nagato through the nose, while I had non pens shooting at his broadside earlier.

Seems like an easy fix to just add 30-35mm plating to the deck and upper belt on these three ships, exactly which value is a debate in itself in terms of if it should get HE penned by CAs or same tier CLs with IFHE.

Didn't mention RN BBs because I haven't played them myself, and one of their supposed weaknesses are thin armor, while e.g the Jap BB line varies massively going from Kongo to the Izumo.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles

I dont think NM and Colorado need it, because they have a good citadel protection and a slightly better heal than normal.

I wouldnt argue against Nagato getting a bit better plating, seeing how she also takes citadels so easily, especially compared to Sinop, which has extra armor everywhere while only getting citadelled when showing broadside. So basicly both get citadelled when broadside, but Nagato cant angle ontop of that and gets also citadelled through the bow.

 

But in general, BBs overmatching one another is better for the game, as bowtanking BBs make for stale bowtanking meta, because they can just lay anchor since they wont take too much alpha damage.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,361 posts
12,044 battles
57 minutes ago, Gnolfus said:

Can these get updated?

 

The armor on the New Mexico, Colorado and Nagato is all 26mm plating.

The problem with this is that it gets overmatched by 380mm guns and up, which is prevalent in same tier matching for these ships nevermind when you get uptiered.

When going through these lines, this forces you to stay at long range for most of the match, and otherwise doesn't reward good play. I just citadeled a Colorado in my Nagato through the nose, while I had non pens shooting at his broadside earlier.

Seems like an easy fix to just add 30-35mm plating to the deck and upper belt on these three ships, exactly which value is a debate in itself in terms of if it should get HE penned by CAs or same tier CLs with IFHE.

Didn't mention RN BBs because I haven't played them myself, and one of their supposed weaknesses are thin armor, while e.g the Jap BB line varies massively going from Kongo to the Izumo.

US, UK and Nagato battleships having all-or-nothing armor historically accurate and WG conveniently came up with game mechanics such as overmatch to... incentivize... players to spend money to skip them, so they don't have too much fun playing midtiers.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
30,129 posts
15,452 battles
2 hours ago, Gnolfus said:

Can these get updated?

 

The armor on the New Mexico, Colorado and Nagato is all 26mm plating.

The problem with this is that it gets overmatched by 380mm guns and up, which is prevalent in same tier matching for these ships nevermind when you get uptiered.

When going through these lines, this forces you to stay at long range for most of the match, and otherwise doesn't reward good play. I just citadeled a Colorado in my Nagato through the nose, while I had non pens shooting at his broadside earlier.

Seems like an easy fix to just add 30-35mm plating to the deck and upper belt on these three ships, exactly which value is a debate in itself in terms of if it should get HE penned by CAs or same tier CLs with IFHE.

Didn't mention RN BBs because I haven't played them myself, and one of their supposed weaknesses are thin armor, while e.g the Jap BB line varies massively going from Kongo to the Izumo.

You are not forced to stay at long range.

Overmatching is not a huge problem when angling properly.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
919 posts
6,026 battles

new mex needs some help, new york/texas have been power crepped to hell

 

fuso can bully a king george v from under 10 km. dispersion is too extreme beyond that.

kongo *can*  fight rn and usn bb from t6/7, but you are at the mercy of rng with mid tier dispersion. so you will lose a lot

french bb normandy and lyon are surprisingly annoying to try and deal with for kongo/fuso.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles
49 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Overmatching is not a huge problem when angling properly. 

 

giphy.gif

 

Thats a nice brainfart i suppose? Since overmatch removes the option of angling...

 

31 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

fuso can bully a king george v from under 10 km. dispersion is too extreme beyond that.

kongo *can*  fight rn and usn bb from t6/7, but you are at the mercy of rng with mid tier dispersion. so you will lose a lot

french bb normandy and lyon are surprisingly annoying to try and deal with for kongo/fuso. 

 

Why do you compare T5-6 BBs against T6-7 BBs?

The proper way of fighting an unfavourable engagement is to not fight on the enemies terms. Outplay him, or deal with him later.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATCH]
Players
80 posts
3,896 battles
57 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You are not forced to stay at long range.

Overmatching is not a huge problem when angling properly.

Is the sun down where you live? In traditional folklore, trolls implode if caught out in daylight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,361 posts
12,044 battles
14 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Thats a nice brainfart i suppose? Since overmatch removes the option of angling...

Technically, by sailing angled at +-50-60 degrees (rear turrets at the target or close to), overmatching shells should overpen, as 26mm plating doesn't get enough effective thickness to arm the fuse, while main belt might withstand shells just fine. Basically the same mechanic where you score overpens OR citadels on broadside-ish cruisers, but almost never penetrations.

 

Shells that enter the ship through deck or intricate shape of superstructure probably will arm though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles
3 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Technically, by sailing angled at +-50-60 degrees (rear turrets almost at the target), overmatching shells should overpen, as 26mm plating doesn't get enough effective thickness to arm the fuse, while main belt might withstand shells just fine. Basically the same mechanic where you score overpens OR citadels on broadside-ish cruisers, but almost never penetrations.

 

Shells that enter the ship through deck or intricate shape of superstructure probably will arm though.

 

Id still shoot a BB which i can hit + overmatch regardless of angle, than one which is angled and i cant overmatch or only overmatch at the bow.

The first scenario usually still yields 10+k or even a citadel (through bow into frontal citadel plating), and the latter might be 2 overpens into superstructure. Not to mention, a "properly" angled BB still generates quite a lot of area to hit, compared to a bow-on BB which could result in 1 hit or even nothing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,361 posts
12,044 battles
2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Id still shoot a BB which i can hit + overmatch regardless of angle, than one which is angled and i cant overmatch or only overmatch at the bow.

The first scenario usually still yields 10+k or even a citadel (through bow into frontal citadel plating), and the latter might be 2 overpens into superstructure. Not to mention, a "properly" angled BB still generates quite a lot of area to hit, compared to a bow-on BB which could result in 1 hit or even nothing at all.

I was talking about possible way of dealing with enemy BB when you're incapable of ricocheting enemy shells. Still, case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

Or don't be a cheapskate and buy yourself a Pommern :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
30,129 posts
15,452 battles
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

Thats a nice brainfart i suppose? Since overmatch removes the option of angling...

 

1 hour ago, Gnolfus said:

Is the sun down where you live? In traditional folklore, trolls implode if caught out in daylight.

I suggest a bit of thinking before you give unreflected answers.

 

  • look at the citadel area of a BB from the front and from the side, you will notice that the area from the front is MUCH smaller, making it harder to hit from the front, ESPECIALLY when you consider the form of the dispersion elipse, but when you still see it as a huge problem, feel free to show broadside...
  • more importantly, when not standing straight bow on to the shooter, but ANGLING PROPERLY, you can reduce the size of the front citadel area even further, reducing the chance of frontal citadels even more, that is basic trignometry...
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
743 posts
2,161 battles
15 minutes ago, Bindolaf_Werebane said:

That is why I free-xp'd Nagato and hate RN BBs and wish I had Thunderer's coal back. They are not real battleships.

Maybe you need the right Captain for Thunderer........

2101604999_WorldofWarships13_09_202016_20_02(2).png.df5aa1aca1e81b2fd3f7226c9d787903.png

 

:cap_cool:

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles
1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

I suggest a bit of thinking before you give unreflected answers.

 

I just dont think that statement is correct:

- Cruisers complain, rightfully so, about being overmatched by more and more BBs these days without much or any chance to reduce incoming shell damage. And Cruisers are more likely to get frontal citadelled than BBs.

- In a BB vs BB fight, only one being able to overmatch the other is a huge issue, unless the non-overmatchable BB is played by a complete retard.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H_FAN]
Players
2,751 posts
46,440 battles
1 hour ago, Bindolaf_Werebane said:

That is why I free-xp'd Nagato and hate RN BBs and wish I had Thunderer's coal back. They are not real battleships.

Well this is a problem for all tiers below T10 that they have some handicap when uptiered , but I have no issues with playing Nagato or other Mid tier BBs, I rather have fewer good guns than massive number of smaller guns f.e. Nagato vs Lyon.

Nagatos 16 inch guns means at you least you are better prepared for high tier play.

 

You can not just think about BB vs BB you must think through the whole ship assortment, that f.e. you can not be immune against cruisers. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
30,129 posts
15,452 battles
53 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

- In a BB vs BB fight, only one being able to overmatch the other is a huge issue, unless the non-overmatchable BB is played by a complete retard.

26mm is standard for Tier VI and VII BB. New Mex and Nagato are not at a disadvantage here.

New Mex has 343mm of frontal citadel armor. Angling that helps a lot. Even Nagato has 289mm at the frontal citadel.

 

Just do not point your bow at the BB with overmatching guns shooting you.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
919 posts
6,026 battles
5 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Why do you compare T5-6 BBs against T6-7 BBs?

The proper way of fighting an unfavourable engagement is to not fight on the enemies terms. Outplay him, or deal with him later.

because the mid tier usn ships are now that weak that cross tier comparison is more fair. t6 is my favourite tier, and im almost always bottom tier, making cross tier comparisons more familiar to me. 

 

usn, mid tiers can not deal with being uptiered the way every other bb line can. even the RN bb line beats them for defence performance. 

 

when they are angled enough for the belt to work, they they take salvos of plunging fire long range  or bow/aft pens under the turrets close in.

many of the new t6/7 cruisers in the game can put down new york/mex with ap more easily than other nations, due to the usn mid tier bb having atrocious armour schemes. colo gets off a easier due to its barbettes and belt layout to the point where KGV beats it to eating the most damage but thats not really the prise you want.

 

also, colo can be detonated by the right angle of fire going into its front barbette sides

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles
46 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

because the mid tier usn ships are now that weak that cross tier comparison is more fair. t6 is my favourite tier, and im almost always bottom tier, making cross tier comparisons more familiar to me. 

 

Gotta be honest, the logic behind this escapes me. Yes, T6 isnt in a good spot MM wise, never was,maybe its even worse these days. But both teams still have T6 ships. Comparing yourself to hightier ships would only make sense, if you would get matched against them, f.e. you play NM and the enemies get a KGV instead.

 

49 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

usn, mid tiers can not deal with being uptiered the way every other bb line can. even the RN bb line beats them for defence performance.  

 

Dont agree with that. Well, on T5 probably, because Iron duke is quite tanky and NY not so much. But QE vs NM? Both 26mm all around, QE citadel is harder to reach yes (maybe even impossible?), but NM isnt known for being easily citadelled. Both slow af.

KGV is much more squishy than Colo, having an actual citadel these days, while Colorado isnt citadelled easily. Colo also has atleast decent caliber, while KGV is stuck with small caliber AP, which cant overmatch anything except T5 BBs. And none of the midtier RN BB has that good heal, while US BBs do have the improved 0,66%/sec repair party.

 

54 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

also, colo can be detonated by the right angle of fire going into its front barbette sides 

 

Not sure how that makes sense, seeing how rarely BBs detonate. And most of them detonate to torps, atleast from what ive seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
919 posts
6,026 battles
5 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Comparing yourself to hightier ships would only make sense, if you would get matched against them, f.e. you play NM and the enemies get a KGV instead.

if its what im trading shots with, then the comparison is valid. and of all the bb lines at mid tier, usn is the weakest, france and japan the strangest

 

7 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Dont agree with that.

if you are not going agree, its best not go go into detail supporting what im saying.:Smile-_tongue:

8 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Not sure how that makes sense, seeing how rarely BBs detonate. And most of them detonate to torps, atleast from what ive seen.

true, but still happens. from what i experienced shells coming down in front of the main belt at 30 to 40 degrees, beside of the front turret are the ones that do it. though iv no idea what layers of rng go into it, or what calibre or fusing distances are involved.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,440 posts
9,841 battles
13 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

if its what im trading shots with, then the comparison is valid. and of all the bb lines at mid tier, usn is the weakest, france and japan the strangest

 

I dont think it is. See, if you compare T6 to T8 ships, its normal that the T6 ships should be weaker. If you want to buff T6 ships based on their performance against T8, you have to also buff T5 ships since now you made them weaker against T6 ships. And in the end, you have to buff everything down the road.

Also T5-6 French BBs are considered to be pretty weak. Lyon is good yep, mostly due to the sheer volume of crap you throw out tho.

I wouldnt call Kongo/Fuso strongest either.

Imo on midtiers, russians take easily the topspots with Pyotr and Sinop. Izmail is more balanced so to say, but still quite strong, atleast better than Fuso imo. I think, most T6 BBs are actually quite balanced amongst one another.

 

13 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

  if you are not going agree, its best not go go into detail supporting what im saying.:Smile-_tongue:

Well, i only agreed on T5 tho?

T6 QE aint better than NM in defensive capabilities.

KGV is just worse than Colo.

 

I think the problem is, that WG just kept releasing bigger caliber BBs with same or even better armor. Colo+Nagato vs Sinop comes to mind. All >400mm caliber, but the first 2 have rather weak armor and Sinop can just bowtank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
919 posts
6,026 battles
7 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

I dont think it is. See, if you compare T6 to T8 ships, its normal that the T6 ships should be weaker. If you want to buff T6 ships based on their performance against T8, you have to also buff T5 ships since now you made them weaker against T6 ships. And in the end, you have to buff everything down the road.

Also T5-6 French BBs are considered to be pretty weak. Lyon is good yep, mostly due to the sheer volume of crap you throw out tho.

I wouldnt call Kongo/Fuso strongest either.

Imo on midtiers, russians take easily the topspots with Pyotr and Sinop. Izmail is more balanced so to say, but still quite strong, atleast better than Fuso imo. I think, most T6 BBs are actually quite balanced amongst one another.

sure, t6 being weaker than tier 8 is expected. the fact remains that the comparison highlights that the usn ships are the weakest of the mid tier, since they do worse than others up-tiered.

mid tier french are quite bouncy and their turning ability makes them good at 10 to 13 km. even if they are considered squishy as you say, they still beat their RN and USN peers.

 

i agree the russin bb are capable, but for some reason, they need to get closer than the french and ijn in my experience, and they seem better at cruiser hunting that trading with bb. i wouldnt expect to win in a french or ijn against a russian at under 8km, but 12km+ i would be confident of trading better than they do. though the ijn do have a bit of an advantage in max gun range too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
257 posts
9,093 battles

image.thumb.png.5b48d48e9683672ec96c211e8cc9049d.png

 

I think Nagato needs some adjustments. Its performing quite bad, for already long time. It's sad to see all the japanese in this tier at the bottom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
5 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

KGV is much more squishy than Colo, having an actual citadel these days, while Colorado isnt citadelled easily. Colo also has atleast decent caliber, while KGV is stuck with small caliber AP, which cant overmatch anything except T5 BBs. And none of the midtier RN BB has that good heal, while US BBs do have the improved 0,66%/sec repair party.

KGV gets an improved repair like Monarch (and DoY). 0.6%/s, 60s reload and 75% of pen damage repairable. Not a superheal, but it beats the Warspite's repair and normal repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
919 posts
6,026 battles
1 hour ago, Furius_Marius said:

I think Nagato needs some adjustments. Its performing quite bad, for already long time. It's sad to see all the japanese in this tier at the bottom. 

to me, nagas inherent issues are that is its big, burns easily and has awful agility and has a great fat citadel like the kgv to drop plunging fire through but doesnt have the BC agility to do anything about it.

combine that agility with poor turret traverse, and its difficult to brawl with and easy to fire torps at, close in.

 

it also has to deal with tier 9 ships unlike fuso, so loses a some of the relative advantages, since its more likely to deal with accurate plunging fire.

it feels like a sidegrade rather than an upgrade to fuso in a lot of situations. same bad dispersion, fewer guns, more likely group its shots better on a broadsiding target though.

 

personally i hope nagato gets replaced with a tosa at some point. maybe when WG do a BB/BC line split.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
6 hours ago, SkollUlfr said:

it also has to deal with tier 9 ships unlike fuso, so loses a some of the relative advantages, since its more likely to deal with accurate plunging fire.

it feels like a sidegrade rather than an upgrade to fuso in a lot of situations. same bad dispersion, fewer guns, more likely group its shots better on a broadsiding target though.

Nagato is far more accurate and vs T9, it at least can deal with cruisers. Fuso vs T8, cruisers can angle and against cruisers with heal you have real issues. Something like an Albemarle with half a brain to not show broadside can just laugh in your face as it burns your ship down.

Share this post


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

×