Battleship Dispersion - Interesting facts!

[VonVolks]

HI I have seen a number of threads complaining about Battleship big gun dispersion and also the "nerfed" range of Battleship big guns.

 

I am reading a really interesting book at the moment which I highly recommend:

"Empire of the Deep" about the British Navy over the centuries. by Ben Wilson.

 

I just read a piece about the Battle of the Falkland Islands,(1914) between some RN Battle-cruisers and German armoured cruisers. It was a crushing victory for the RN.

 

The RN Battlecrusiers outgunned the German Armoured cruisers and the running engagement took place at ranges between 9 Km and 14 Km

 

The RN ships fired 1,174 shells in the engagement. only 74 hit!!!

The German armoured cruisers failed to inflict any damage of note at all, 

 

We all know (hopefully) the game is based on real life, but is massively changed for game play reasons, but I thought this would be very interesting for people to read.

 

It really WAS hard to hit moving ships with Battleships, even at fairly "low" long ranges, let alone 20km +

 

Obviously fire control mechanisms got better as the years passed, but a lot of WOWs earlier tier BBs have their roots in this period. (e.g. Myogi, Kongo, etc)

 

 

 

 

[Colossamite]

HI I have seen a number of threads complaining about Battleship big gun dispersion and also the "nerfed" range of Battleship big guns.

 

I am reading a really interesting book at the moment which I highly recommend:

"Empire of the Deep" about the British Navy over the centuries. by Ben Wilson.

 

I just read a piece about the Battle of the Falkland Islands,(1914) between some RN Battle-cruisers and German armoured cruisers. It was a crushing victory for the RN.

 

The RN Battlecrusiers outgunned the German Armoured cruisers and the running engagement took place at ranges between 9 Km and 14 Km

 

The RN ships fired 1,174 shells in the engagement. only 74 hit!!!

The German armoured cruisers failed to inflict any damage of note at all, 

 

We all know (hopefully) the game is based on real life, but is massively changed for game play reasons, but I thought this would be very interesting for people to read.

 

It really WAS hard to hit moving ships with Battleships, even at fairly "low" long ranges, let alone 20km +

 

Obviously fire control mechanisms got better as the years passed, but a lot of WOWs earlier tier BBs have their roots in this period. (e.g. Myogi, Kongo, etc)

 

 

 

 

 

 then you should read the Battle of the Denmark Strait on wikipedia between HMS Hood and Prince of Wales against Bismarck and Prinz Eugen. 

because the germans really devastated them with precise shooting ( i believe they used ship radar as range finder and not only detection?) if im not mistaken that battle was around 26 Km apart and it ended in like 10 minutes.

 

Source Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Denmark_Strait

 

[Kirasa]

 

 then you should read the Battle of the Denmark Strait on wikipedia between HMS Hood and Prince of Wales against Bismarck and Prinz Eugen. 

because the germans really devastated them with precise shooting ( i believe they used ship radar as range finder and not only detection?) if im not mistaken that battle was around 26 Km apart and it ended in like 10 minutes.

 

Source Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Denmark_Strait

 

 

You can't take lucky shots as normal....

[VonVolks]

yes, lucky shots, is one thing, but as I mentioned that is WWII era. Things had improved a lot by then.

 

WOWs "takes place" from around 1905 to 1949, (in my estimation) so you run the full gamut....

[C04L]

isn't it obvious?

 The RN ships fired 1,174 shells in the engagement. only 74 hit!!!

The German armoured cruisers failed to inflict any damage of note at all, 

 

The RN were played by the supertesters/alphatesters and the Germans were unfortunate enough to employ the OBT's ?

 

/giggles

 

sorry meant as a joke. incase i get raged on

 

OP its always good to get recommended good reads... thanks bud

 

[_Maou_]

 

 then you should read the Battle of the Denmark Strait on wikipedia between HMS Hood and Prince of Wales against Bismarck and Prinz Eugen. 

because the germans really devastated them with precise shooting ( i believe they used ship radar as range finder and not only detection?) if im not mistaken that battle was around 26 Km apart and it ended in like 10 minutes.

 

Source Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Denmark_Strait

 

 

Seriously,just no maybe other example but striking somebody's ammo rack is lucky no matter who shots(at least by my opinion),but as an alpha tester i would say that dispersion of shells hasn't changed...at least that noticeably much(well maybe on certain ship) but it's alright if you get used to it although some ships could get better dispersion .But hey if you're praising Bismarck Praise POW also because her guns were jamming and she couldn't fire and with a few salvos with which she fired she damaged Bismarck..but hey just saying.

[DtXpwnz]

yeah, I posted somehwere around here statistics from battle of Jutland with total hit ratios from 2,5 to 3,5%

 

edit: found it

Germany
1st Scout Group - 1,670 shots, 65 hits (3.89% hit rate),
HSF Battleships - 1,900 shots, 45 hits (2.37% hit rate),
Total - 3,570 shots fired, 110 hits (3.08% hit rate).
(excludes shots fired at HMS Black Prince)

 

Great Britain
1st & 2nd BCS - 1,469 shots, 21 hits (1.43% hit rate),
3rd BCS - 373 shots, 16 hits (4.29% hit rate),
5th BS - 1,099 shots, 29 hits (2.64% hit rate),
Rest of GF - 1,593 shots, 57 hits (3.58% hit rate),
Total - 4,534 shots fired, 123 hits (2.71% hit rate).

[salty_semun]

HI I have seen a number of threads complaining about Battleship big gun dispersion and also the "nerfed" range of Battleship big guns.

 

I am reading a really interesting book at the moment which I highly recommend:

"Empire of the Deep" about the British Navy over the centuries. by Ben Wilson.

 

I just read a piece about the Battle of the Falkland Islands,(1914) between some RN Battle-cruisers and German armoured cruisers. It was a crushing victory for the RN.

 

The RN Battlecrusiers outgunned the German Armoured cruisers and the running engagement took place at ranges between 9 Km and 14 Km

 

The RN ships fired 1,174 shells in the engagement. only 74 hit!!!

The German armoured cruisers failed to inflict any damage of note at all, 

 

We all know (hopefully) the game is based on real life, but is massively changed for game play reasons, but I thought this would be very interesting for people to read.

 

It really WAS hard to hit moving ships with Battleships, even at fairly "low" long ranges, let alone 20km +

 

Obviously fire control mechanisms got better as the years passed, but a lot of WOWs earlier tier BBs have their roots in this period. (e.g. Myogi, Kongo, etc)

 

 

 

 

 

Well that is all well and good in real life , but i will bet you cruisers didn't spam HE and constantly set Battleships on fire doing tons of damage either. So your point is ?

[Fi_8_8_8_8]

 

Well that is all well and good in real life , but i will bet you cruisers didn't spam HE and constantly set Battleships on fire doing tons of damage either. So your point is ?

 

Can't agree more!

[VonVolks]

err there wasn't a point "in game". It was just for some historical perspective for people who thought shooting on the sea at 20km was easy "in real life".

 

plus recommending a good book.... I am just getting to Jutland now...

[Userext]

 

Well that is all well and good in real life , but i will bet you cruisers didn't spam HE and constantly set Battleships on fire doing tons of damage either. So your point is ?

 

Cruiser captains back then was smart enough to try plunging shots. Others did spam HE but you cant add the effect of HE shells' damage to upper part of ship. CAs at this close fight to a BB was able to blow the upper part of ship. HE and torpedo works the same way. If you throw enough ---- to the wall some of them will penetrate.

[m4inbrain]

 

You can't take lucky shots as normal....

 

Was it also lucky that the Bismarck after obliterating the Hood hit the Prince of Wales with her first salvo?

 

Not gonna argue that hitrate obviously is massively inflated in this game (not just for BBs, but for carriers as well, as the yamato clearly shows, which was attacked by 400 planes and only hit by 12 bombs and 12 torps or something like that). But the accuracy of the Bismarck wasn't down to luck. The "ammorack" was, obviously - but not that the shells hit in the first place. 

 

On topic: game wouldn't be fun if one out of 100 shells hit though, so i don't exactly understand the point you're trying to make.

[DtXpwnz]

 

Was it also lucky that the Bismarck after obliterating the Hood hit the Prince of Wales with her first salvo?

 

Not gonna argue that hitrate obviously is massively inflated in this game (not just for BBs, but for carriers as well, as the yamato clearly shows, which was attacked by 400 planes and only hit by 12 bombs and 12 torps or something like that). But the accuracy of the Bismarck wasn't down to luck. The "ammorack" was, obviously - but not that the shells hit in the first place. 

 

On topic: game wouldn't be fun if one out of 100 shells hit though, so i don't exactly understand the point you're trying to make.

 

Some interesting reading for you.... http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=59236&sid=80bf0f9afa379e298832358f4b1f24ab#p59236

[m4inbrain]

 

Some interesting reading for you.... http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=59236&sid=80bf0f9afa379e298832358f4b1f24ab#p59236

 

Don't really understand, what am i supposed to look at? That's not really interesting. 

[Userext]

 

Don't really understand, what am i supposed to look at? That's not really interesting. 

 

bismarck had at best %7 hit ratio fight starts at 23km and ends at 13km

[Scarebird]

He's not saying that it was lucky that Bismarck hit the Hood, just fortunate that the hit had the devastating effect that it did.

[N00b32]

We all know (hopefully) the game is based on real life, but is massively changed for game play reasons, but I thought this would be very interesting for people to read.

 

It is, However, ships in this game are scaled up by factor 5 I think. So hit chance should be (if viewed from a 2d perspective) 25 times as large. 

[m4inbrain]

 

bismarck had at best %7 hit ratio fight starts at 23km and ends at 13km

 

Actually it doesn't have "at best" 7%, but 7,5%. Over a battle with two ships. With a ship that never seen combat before. On ships that changed distance by 8km in 8 minutes. At 23km, 7% hitrate would actually be more than you can achieve in WoWs. 

 

Apart from that, the PoW/Hood were driving evasive, whereas the Bismarck drove straight battleline. Bismarcks third salvo hit the Hood that was sailing at an angle of roughly 40-45 degrees, still closing in at a range of 18,5km. Fifth salvo, at 15km, the hood was gone. The sixth salvo that actually is left out by people trying to do the math, actually was fired at the hood because nobody expected it to blow up like that, so it couldn't hit anything with that one. 8th salvo (second one on PoW, i stand corrected) hit the PoW at 14km, still changing angle and distance. Ninth salvo, hit PoW twice at 14km. Tenth salvo, another hit. This time PoW was sailing straight away from Bismarck, being the smallest possible target, at now again 15,5km. One more salvo was fired, that didn't hit anything. Again, with a ship and crew that never had seen combat before. 

 

5 Salvos on PoW, four hits. That's 10% hitrate. Which makes ingame BB hitrates actually not as inflated as many people argue.

[Userext]

 

Actually it doesn't have "at best" 7%, but 7,5%. Over a battle with two ships. With a ship that never seen combat before. On ships that changed distance by 8km in 8 minutes. At 23km, 7% hitrate would actually be more than you can achieve in WoWs. 

 

Apart from that, the PoW/Hood were driving evasive, whereas the Bismarck drove straight battleline. Bismarcks third salvo hit the Hood that was sailing at an angle of roughly 40-45 degrees, still closing in at a range of 18,5km. Fifth salvo, at 15km, the hood was gone. The sixth salvo that actually is left out by people trying to do the math, actually was fired at the hood because nobody expected it to blow up like that, so it couldn't hit anything with that one. 8th salvo (second one on PoW, i stand corrected) hit the PoW at 14km, still changing angle and distance. Ninth salvo, hit PoW twice at 14km. Tenth salvo, another hit. This time PoW was sailing straight away from Bismarck, being the smallest possible target, at now again 15,5km. One more salvo was fired, that didn't hit anything. Again, with a ship and crew that never had seen combat before. 

 

5 Salvos on PoW, four hits. That's 10% hitrate. Which makes ingame BB hitrates actually not as inflated as many people argue.

 

you count on salvos? seriously? get out of here.

[m4inbrain]

 

you count on salvos? seriously? get out of here.

 

What else would you count on? I could've said out of 40 grenades 4 hit, which still leaves a 10% hitrate. What now?

[Userext]

 

What else would you count on? I could've said out of 40 grenades 4 hit, which still leaves a 10% hitrate. What now?

 

By comparison, Bismarck, in a better position than Prince of Wales (using all her artillery all the time and without abrupt course changes in the main part of the battle), fired 93 shells out of 104 possible. The numbers of hits is not known, but somewhere between 5 and 7. Ratios were between: Lower estimate: 5 / 104 = 4.81% and 5 / 93 = 5.37 %; higher estimate: 7 / 104 = 6.7% and 7/ 93 = 7.52%

 

Shells dont hit ships as a couple. If you dont count seperately you will make mistake main battery accuracy % in game depends on how many shells hit not how many salvos hit

[m4inbrain]

 

By comparison, Bismarck, in a better position than Prince of Wales (using all her artillery all the time and without abrupt course changes in the main part of the battle), fired 93 shells out of 104 possible. The numbers of hits is not known, but somewhere between 5 and 7. Ratios were between: Lower estimate: 5 / 104 = 4.81% and 5 / 93 = 5.37 %; higher estimate: 7 / 104 = 6.7% and 7/ 93 = 7.52%

 

Shells dont hit ships as a couple. If you dont count seperately you will make mistake main battery accuracy % in game depends on how many shells hit not how many salvos hit

 

You don't seem to understand. I said, in 5 salvos, they managed four hits. That makes 10%. Those 10 percent ARE counted seperately, obviously. 5 full salvos, with 8 guns shooting, makes 40 grenades. Hitting four of them makes 10%. The quote of you btw is quite interesting, because it's wrong. Bismarck first of all wasn't in a better position. Then, "without abrupt course changes" - no, they didn't have them, but they still had to account for a ship that actually was dodging and changing distance. Hits on PoW are known, it's four. 

 

What you actually can't do is judge the hitrate over the entire battle, because there's a targetswitch in there. That's why i took the Prince of Wales by itself, since everything is known there. 5 salvos, 40 grenades, 4 hits. 10%. If you take an example: one ship against three. The single ship fires in total 10 salvos (out of ten guns). Now, two things could happen. First: all salvos against a single ship. First three salvos miss, next seven salvos have 6 hits. That's 6 hits out of 70 grenades, giving it roughly 8ish percent hitrate. Or: the ship can fire 3 salvos at the first two ships, and four on the last. Considering that the first two, three salvos are range and lead-finding, would you say they could achieve the same hitrate?

 

They can't. The same ship, the same accuracy, alot lower hitrate. That's, again, why i said take the PoW, because all parameters are known.

[DarthMurloc]

Good find OP, but it's not about BBs low hit chance due to spread. It's all about inequality.

 

In a BB (IV Myogi) I can shoot 6 shells once every 32s (lets round it down to 30 for better math), it means I am able to deliver 12 shells/min.

In a CA (IV Kuma) I can shoot 7 shells once every ~6s, it means 70 shells/min.

 

Accuracy in BB I have 1 hit per salvo. ~17%

Accuracy in CA I have usually 4-5 hits per salvo. Make it 4. ~57%

 

In a 5 minute engagement (how unrealistic it may sound):

BB shoots 60 shells and scores 10 hits

CA shoots 350 shells and scores 200 hits

 

Why I compare those two classes? By definition BB was a class that aimed at winning artillery battles and was supposed to sunk enemy ships of all classes. Its tremendous firepower supposed to provide that. Question is: how BB can achieve that when smaller CA can score more hits per minute than BB can shoot back (not to mention actually hitting?). Answer would be shell damage.

 

But shell damage still relies on hit chance. I had many duels in which I should win due to superior armor and fire power. It turned otherwise since fast CA quickly shortened the distance and was circling around, spraying me with his fast shooting guns and I couldn't even target him as my tower turn rate was slower than his circling. I got fire after fire with constant HP drop due to sheer shell damage. And I could just shoot my 6 shells once every half minute. Which didn't took 1/3 of his HP.

 

Here lies all inequality. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind BBs having bad aim as long as it's balanced. I can have bad aim all the time but when I hit I want to see enemy BB and CA loose at least 25%. Scoring 800 damage on a target that has 24k is a scratch. But if CA can eat 1/3 of my HP after 4 salvos...

[DtXpwnz]

In a 5 minute engagement (how unrealistic it may sound):

BB shoots 60 shells and scores 10 hits

CA shoots 350 shells and scores 200 hits

your math is wrong imo... 10 out of 60 is 16% hit ratio, most BB players have at least 25% hit ratios. I have up to 35% in Myogi. And each shell has a potential dmg of 10k+ dmg

 

and your hit ratios for CAs are also from another dimension, 200 out of 350 is over 55% hit ratio? Please show me CA player with these hit ratios... I think I am not doing bad in my HE spamming low tier CAs (Kuma, Yubari, Murmansk) and I have hit ratios of 31-35%. Not to mention that HE dmg is lower-ish and it will take you crapload of shots to take down BB (depends on repair control and setup of enemy BB)

[Retu81]

Now was that hit percentage the result of bad accuracy or bad precision?