Are ships scaled correctly?

[Takeda92]

I got an interesting shot in one of the matches:

Looking up the lengths of Cleveland an Fubuki, Fubuki is 65% the length of Cleveland, with a difference of about 65m.

 

I know in this pic, Fubuki is closer to the view which would slightly affect the perception,but does it really look like Fubuki is 65% of a Cleveland?

I read that in WoWS, ships are not their historical sizes, they are scaled to be a lot bigger in the game. This makes me question if WG scaled some ships relative to each other correctly. 

Does any of you have such screenshots?

[Comrad_StaIin]

maybe cus the japanese ships are longer :/

[SBS]

The ships are not their historical sizes. basicly nothing is scaled to what it really should be. No idea why, personally I would love if it was accurate.

I believe someone also found that if you looked at distance traveled it was also completely off. Same when you press alt so see the distance to target, that also looks a bit off.

[playarci]

Apparently nothing is real. We are playing on a computer after all.

[Nex_Gen]

No they are not.

In your example the fubuki should be just over 61% of the Cleavlands length.

Even accounting for the depth deformation in the picture the the fubuki would be just under 76%of a cleavlands length

To put this into numbers.

A cleavland is ~180m,

The fubuki shoud be ~111m yet from the picture it comes to about 130-138m

That means the ingame model of the FUB is 20-25% biger than it should be, or the cleavland is that much smaler.

 

Hope it helped.

[Takeda92]

No they are not.

In your example the fubuki should be just over 61% of the Cleavlands length.

Even accounting for the depth deformation in the picture the the fubuki would be just under 76%of a cleavlands length

To put this into numbers.

A cleavland is ~180m,

The fubuki shoud be ~111m yet from the picture it comes to about 130-138m

That means the ingame model of the FUB is 20-25% biger than it should be, or the cleavland is that much smaler.

 

Hope it helped.

 

My point exactly. We have a tier 8 destroyer who is as big as a tier 6 cruiser. No wonder I can't seem to evade shots since ever I got in tier 7 Hatsuharu.. because I'm as big as a cruiser! 

[Unintentional_submarine]

I mentioned something similar some time ago. That some cruisers appear to be too big relative to some BBs. Omaha vs Wyoming provided a rather surprising result for me. But I didn't really bother to create a series of training room tests. But apparently the DD vs cruiser comparison is even worse.

[Xandier59]

I guess WG devs cannot read the Japanese scale or math right....  

>__________> 

[Nex_Gen]

I guess WG devs cannot read the Japanese scale or math right....  

>__________> 

 

U say WOT m8????

 

 

But ye i wholeheartedly agree.

 

[Trados]

yes distance traveled is total BS no need to even go there >_>

last time i checked that i traveled 40+km in 20 mins that means my BB difted around at 120km/h on average

[zappori]

distance traveled is inaccurate because time compression as well.

[Grimdorf]

distance traveled is inaccurate because time compression as well.

 

This makes sense, as we don't really want "real time" speed and distances...it would be a bit boring!

 

However I can not really see why ships are mis-scaled compared to each other.

That just reeks of nonsense, or incompetence when they make they ship models.

Either way I'd really like WG to at least make an effort to keep the ship scale constant.

 

[AgarwaenME]

Relative sizes are a large part of the difficulty in hitting targets. Seems more or less just be a way to make hitting ships more or less easy depending on the size the ship would have been IRL. If ships had varied even more in size, then you could end up with BBs nearly being guaranteed to get hit or the smallest ships nigh impossible to hit.

[JapLance]

I have checked some WoWs models lengths with a 3D program, and while they're not 100% exact in their relative measures, they are more or less equivalent:

 

Katori

WoWs length=8.46

Real Length=129.77m

Scale 6.51%

 

Gremyaschy

WoWs=7.49

RL=112.8m

Scale 6.64%

 

Murmansk

WoWs=11.30

RL=169.32m

Scale 6.67%

 

Yubari

WoWs=9.25

RL=138.90m

Scale 6.65%

 

Warspite

WoWs=13.10

RL=194.89m

Scale 6.72%

 

Bismarck

WoWs=16.76

RL=251m

Scale 6.67%

 

Cleveland

WoWs=12.38

RL=185.42m

Scale 6.67%

 

Fubuki

WoWs=7.92

RL=118.41m

Scale 6.68%

 

I could make the same measurements with some more ships, but the export system is a bit cumbersome with my tools, and it takes some time to do it, as every ship is divided into four parts that you then have to put together to get the full length of the hull.

 

EDIT: Added Cleveland and Fubuki measurements

[Keulz]

yes distance traveled is total BS no need to even go there >_>

last time i checked that i traveled 40+km in 20 mins that means my BB difted around at 120km/h on average

 

Yes, they changed the distances and speed so that ballistic is right but the rest is speed up.

 

And thank god, otherwise that would have been so boring...

[Thlurp]

the fun part:

fubuki class destroyer was 118m long, cleveland is 0.3km away from you

you should be able to fit approximately 3 fubukis between you and the cleveland 

 

edit: cleveland class cruiser was 185m long

[Keulz]

the fun part:

fubuki class destroyer was 118m long, cleveland is 0.3km away from you

you should be able to fit approximately 3 fubukis between you and the cleveland 

 

edit: cleveland class cruiser was 185m long

 

=>

 

 

Yes, they changed the distances and speed so that ballistic is right but the rest is speed up.

 

And thank god, otherwise that would have been so boring...

 

[specialkha]

They made it that way to balance the whole thing out. IJN ships are longer and taller, but sails faster for instance.

[Shepbur]

They are scaled correctly, however perspective has a massive effect in the game... you can put 2 of the same ships next to each other at such a distance and the rear one will will a good 15-20ft shorter than the other. Get then right up next to each other, then take a screenshot from directly above and it should be clearer

 

[damo74]

Have you seen the Omaha?

 

It dwarfs most battleships

[Shepbur]

Here you go A much better picture in terms of scaling!

 

 

 

603pixels for the fubuki, 938 pixels for the cleveland = 1:1.555 scale =  391:608 ft, where the fubuki should be 388ft long... and judging for my inaccurate measuring of the lengths, i'd say it's pretty much spot on correct

 

And here's some further proof about just how much of an effect perspective has on the game... A yamato is just 1km from a Sampson, and the camera sitting ~ 0.4km from the Sampson, with both ships looking the same size!

[rigawe]

I have checked some WoWs models lengths with a 3D program, and while they're not 100% exact in their relative measures, they are more or less equivalent:

 

Katori

WoWs length=8.46

Real Length=129.77m

Scale 6.51%

 

I know it's stupid, but can you put a unit.

8.46 what? m? feet? pixels? apple...

[Unintentional_submarine]

I have checked some WoWs models lengths with a 3D program, and while they're not 100% exact in their relative measures, they are more or less equivalent:

 

Katori

WoWs length=8.46

Real Length=129.77m

Scale 6.51%

 

Gremyaschy

WoWs=7.49

RL=112.8m

Scale 6.64%

 

Murmansk

WoWs=11.30

RL=169.32m

Scale 6.67%

 

Yubari

WoWs=9.25

RL=138.90m

Scale 6.65%

 

Warspite

WoWs=13.10

RL=194.89m

Scale 6.72%

 

Bismarck

WoWs=16.76

RL=251m

Scale 6.67%

 

Cleveland

WoWs=12.38

RL=185.42m

Scale 6.67%

 

Fubuki

WoWs=7.92

RL=118.41m

Scale 6.68%

 

I could make the same measurements with some more ships, but the export system is a bit cumbersome with my tools, and it takes some time to do it, as every ship is divided into four parts that you then have to put together to get the full length of the hull.

 

EDIT: Added Cleveland and Fubuki measurements

 

Excellent work.

Could you perhaps do the Omaha? It seems a bit out of order. And maybe the Wyoming? I'm asking for those two as those two collided in a game I was playing and the Omaha looked utterly silly big.

[JapLance]

I know it's stupid, but can you put a unit.

8.46 what? m? feet? pixels? apple...

 

It's irrelevant, since all 3D models have been measured using the same unit. Take it as "CAD units".

 

I did a few ships for the Silent Hunter 4 game, and the scale in that game was 1 CAD unit is 10m in real life. That's all you needed to know to scale the 3D model. In WoWs seems like they have used one scale for ships and another for the rest of the world.

 

 

Excellent work.

Could you perhaps do the Omaha? It seems a bit out of order. And maybe the Wyoming? I'm asking for those two as those two collided in a game I was playing and the Omaha looked utterly silly big.

 

Give me some time. Murmansk was OK, so I don't think Omaha will be different. But I'll do it.

 

Omaha

WoWs=11.30

RL=169.32m

Scale 6.67%

 

Wyoming

WoWs=11.50

RL=171m

Scale 6.72%

 

Seems like it's quite accurate. Omahas were just as long as the Wyomings, according to Wikipedia measurements.

[Takeda92]

Here you go A much better picture in terms of scaling!

 

 

 

603pixels for the fubuki, 938 pixels for the cleveland = 1:1.555 scale =  391:608 ft, where the fubuki should be 388ft long... and judging for my inaccurate measuring of the lengths, i'd say it's pretty much spot on correct

 

And here's some further proof about just how much of an effect perspective has on the game... A yamato is just 1km from a Sampson, and the camera sitting ~ 0.4km from the Sampson, with both ships looking the same size!

 

I'm glad it's all correct then. Thanks for taking the time to test it out.