karsun

0.5.1.0 AP Damage Model Clarification

174 posts in this topic

Thank you for the lengthy explanation. I don't quite get how you guys figured this wouldn't have drastic consequences but I guess it can happen. What I care about most is that we now know what was wrong. Thank you.

 

Could this also explain the HE change on super structure with low caliber guns like Mogami's? Where the reasoning is the same: where an HE shell that shouldn't penetrate the armor to deal damage was considered as penetrating it at times and thus HE damage was very high? And now since it's been fixed the HE shells with poor penetration can't do it well vs armored targets and are suffering. Is it the same reason?

 

Also the most important question: were those images drawn in MS Paint?

Edited by Aerroon

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the most important question: were those images drawn in MS Paint?

 

 Probably the most irrelevant and funniest question i read for some time...Kudos to you:teethhappy:

 

Also thanks Karsun for the heads up.:honoring:

 

Is there even the faintest idea about the ETA of the Hotfix? I know the "WG immediately" very well....

 

And as von_ Chom said below me there are things that need urgent addressing...

 

Edited by Mister_Greek

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

First of all, thanks for the explanation of what was precisely changed in the game mechanics. However, am I the only one that who has a hard time hitting the Citadel on CL/CA if you are sitting in a BB? If no, than there is something else sort of fishy. At least I have no explanation for the fact, that if you hit a T8 CA with a T8 BB at a distance of ~5km with 6 confrmed hits in the citadel area, that you end of with somewhat like 6k dmg :sceptic:

 

The Mogami is completely different story and absolutely weird to play since 0.5.0.1...

 

a) The damage output with HE feels/is a lot lower now. You are destroying lots of AA modules without doing any damage. This problem is also addressed here: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/36098-i-dont-know-what-you-did-to-the-mogami-but-shes-horrible-now/page__st__15#topmost

b) Turrets are now knocked out on a frequent basis like on an Atlanta. The last couple of matches with my Mogami I ended up with 1 or 2 turrets alive. However, my Mogami stats are now representative, but I have the feeling that a lot more people experienced the same thing.

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

 

+1 on the list.

I am wondering if someone managed to mingle around with the graphic settings / drivers to get the smoke from the smokestacks back.

As some people don´t experience this problem, we as users should be able to find a workaround.... unfortunately the time when i was able to do this myself has passed away silently.


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

 

 

+1


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

questions to WG:

  •  there were at least public tests.  How that this was not handled there?
  •  how the hell you were not presetning this HUGE change in game model in patch notes ( I really dont take that one line as explenation)
  •  you really thought that when you fix that citadel 'bug' that were here several patches ago and ship were ballanced according it, that it wont affect whole gameplay?
  •  how is this related to changed HE performace of some ships (e.g. Mogami)?
  •  why some low calliber APs now do more dmg to BB's - like cleveland's APs to 5-8 km tier 8 BBs - angled.
  •  do you really think you can keet that citadel 'FIX' and just change all the other ships/shell mechanics/armors/... and make game ballanced?  Good luck! 
  • and one last Q:  what about the premium time, you've broken the gameplay, now you accepted it,  will be premium time returned (from date of 0.5.1 patch release to time of a new fix - at least 5 days)?
Edited by celeb2k

10 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

 

This is really good explanation of the problem but I completely agree with von_choms post! There are also other issues which will need attention after this critical one is fixed.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) The damage output with HE feels/is a lot lower now. You are destroying lots of AA modules without doing any damage.

 

I've also experienced this. Plus 17 AP hits in just two salvos by my New Mexico vs another New Mexico and no damage at all. In the same battle I citadelled a Kongo for 20k plus damage.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a pro player, but a good avg. player. But this changes with the AP or citadel,are not that what this game need. I am a BB driver and what my Yamato do after the patch is a big Joke. 4-6 hits (range 10km) on a cruiser with 2400dmg. You have the stats sites where you can look what you done to the BB drives with this patch.

 

P.S: Sry for my bad English, i hope you can understand my post (what i mean)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks

but thats not the only issue, the list is quite long

 

1) mentioned citadel stuff

2) missing smoke from funnels

3) shell landing bug

4) Dogfighting perk bug

5) garage issues with skills and modules dont showing theirs change to basic ships characteristics

6) some CV have issues with landing

7) gun towers are getting knocked out offen

8) possible increase in dispersion

9) chat server issues

10) low calliber HE doing nothing

 

what you mentioned is just the tip of 0.5.1. iceberg

 

+1

 

also the original speed of Amagi is 30.4 knots, and the HE of Mogami

 

Edited by Koutsuki_Haruna

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since almost everyone seen this post in russian version from 3 days ago:

 

Questions to WG:

Will this stuff also get fixed?

- way longer loading times with patch 0.5.1,

- Accuracy max range gunfire mod not working at all when looking at stats (doesnt affect max dispersion if its on or off),

- Will you return BB's disperion to pre 0.5.1 value? as currently on AP thread you have a movie that iowa FARTS (AS ITS NOT SHOOTING) a shells with 150m dispersion on 5k range - what wasnt happening before,

- Will the doghfight commander ability get fixed?,

- will you guys give current stats on what ships had their shells slowed-draft changed?,

- whats up with the new absurd number of XP for capping? a DD with 40k dmg done (mutsuki) and capped ALONE 1 point gets 1,5k base XP on a losing team (yes i did it) and its an abusrd value - considering that BB's would need over 130k dmg to get even close to that value on this tier.

- some of cruisers HE's are overperforming, while some do 0 dmg,

- some cruiser AP's guns seem to overperform (i've seen pepsi citadeling nagatos daily recently where earlier it was rare), while other guns (seem to suffer the fate of BB's (probably ty to angling rule with new armor calculation system),

- so considering you guys didnt made new improved logic of bouncing but made new idiotic one that with current rules makes yamato shells bounce off at 32mm armor and 30,01 deg angling while anything under 30deg is bounced off automaticly what is probably the reason why battleships (exept for the dispersion nerfs) have such lackluster performance as a DD can now bounce off a BB shell. Will you guys improve the rule of when shell is bounced from armor or make the BB's way more accurate, or increase dmg on overpens (or fix the overpenning value to lower?

 

- Also why are we not returning for next 1-2 months to old system while you guys would actually be able to test out the new one on test server and balance it out, instead you took the game to PRE ALPHA BALANCE SETUP with only 1-2 classes viable to play, while 3rd is bugged and 4th is unplayable? - where is the logic behind this? Because its quite shure that you wont even decently balance things out in 1-2 months.

 

On a side not - nope you cant make the matter worse for now, as then you would have to shut down 3 classes of ships and leave only 1 what wont rather happen.

Edited by t0ffik1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the massive amounts of overpenetration BBs get against close, broadside cruisers wanted?

 

I think those were already there before the patch, but the occasional citadel masked the issue. I'm definitely not seeing the detonation in the casemate which is sketched above.

 

This may be the origin of this whole mess - even without the false-citadel bug the pre 0.5.1 armor model wasn't working correctly (i.e. too many overpens), but the occasional false citadel masked this lack of damage. Maybe this is why the devs thought it would not have a big influence - because they still counted for the pens to happen, only they didn't and maybe never did.

 

I definitely remember close shots at cruisers pre 0.5.1 with only overpens, but usually the next or the volley after would squeeze a citadel then.

 

Just a theory, what do you guys think...?


2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

Gnevny vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 13 citadel hits, 22 seconds to kill target

 

Omaha vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 6 citadel hits, 22 seconds to kill target

 

Fuso vs Furutaka @ 4km, firing AP: 0 citadel hits, 61 seconds to kill target

 

.....

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

Edited by Trigger_Happy_Dad

19 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the massive amounts of overpenetration BBs get against close, broadside cruisers wanted?

 

I think those were already there before the patch, but the occasional citadel masked the issue. I'm definitely not seeing the detonation in the casemate which is sketched above.

 

This may be the origin of this whole mess - even without the false-citadel bug the pre 0.5.1 armor model wasn't working correctly (i.e. too many overpens), but the occasional false citadel masked this lack of damage. Maybe this is why the devs thought it would not have a big influence - because they still counted for the pens to happen, only they didn't and maybe never did.

 

I definitely remember close shots at cruisers pre 0.5.1 with only overpens, but usually the next or the volley after would squeeze a citadel then.

 

Just a theory, what do you guys think...?

 

Yes it could also be the reason, as mostly there were only overpens and then citadel, but considering the thin armor around the citadel on cruisers it could be also made for semi realism and to mask also the bouncing off everything 30deg rule since shells bounced/some overpenned and you got 1-2-3 citadels and enough dmg to be happy (where only highmed and high range bb shots get over 30deg :) ).

 

Either way they wont balance the crapout even remotly fast now

Edited by t0ffik1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

 

Just fixing the citatel roof doesnt explain this at all. Something else is definitely broken. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

That is easy, shell trajectory. For 130mm it is allmost half of its firing range, For Omaha it is 1/3 and for Fuso less than 1/5. So shell hit the citadel at different angles. 130mm at good angle, 6.inch at slightly worse angle. And Fuso shells hit the citadel roof at autobounce angle, or very close to it.

Edited by mariouus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they said, they fixed the "roof" but they saw something else is now broken. Those 3 videos are a clear example.


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thx for the explanation!

 

But I still don't understand this:

 

 

In each case I fire AP at a still standing Furutaka @ 4km.

 

I always aim at the same area.

 

130mm AP (33.5 kg) - Boom - 13 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

152mm AP (47.6 kg) - Boom - 6 citadel hits, target destroyed in 22 seconds.

 

356mm AP (673.5 kg) - ...... - 0 citadel hits,  target destroyed in 61 seconds.

 

Why do 130 / 152mm AP rounds still wreck the Furutakas citadel but 356mm AP does NOT?

 

 

 

 

Can you redo the test with Fuso shooting the Furutala closer to the waterline? Maybe the BB shells riccochet off the citadel roof as mariouus stated, so aiming lower should mean hitting the side of the citadel.

 

Another assumption is that BB shells simply overpenetrate cruisers citadels, though i don't know if this is possible.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update. As said in the RU post there are explicit rules (the 14 something rule) about BBs shells at high caliber. It's about auto-overmatch or something. So I guess this is the reason big guns are affected.

 

Suggest something involving these "big guns" is the problem.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Can you redo the test with Fuso shooting the Furutala closer to the waterline? Maybe the BB shells riccochet off the citadel roof as mariouus stated, so aiming lower should mean hitting the side of the citadel.

 

Another assumption is that BB shells simply overpenetrate cruisers citadels, though i don't know if this is possible.

No, tryed it, citadel of Furutaka is invulnerable against Fuso at 4km, hitting the waterline seems to be producing bounces. You will start to get some citadels at around 7-8 km. But 0-8km it seems to be rather invulnerable.


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is easy, shell trajectory. For 130mm it is allmost half of its firing range, For Omaha it is 1/3 and for Fuso less than 1/5. So shell hit the citadel at different angles. 130mm at good angle, 6.inch at slightly worse angle. And Fuso shells hit the citadel roof at autobounce angle.

 

Watch the videos again please, there is almost NO difference between the shell trajectories at that range.

 

DD and CL AP shells hit the Furutaka at a pretty FLAT angle too.

 

Furutaka - model (red area = citadel area)

furulds9z.jpg

 

From

 test: salvo 2 - big hole right above the waterline, where another shell from the first salvo struck the Furutaka.....

holexgq09.jpg

 

Following the shells in slow-motion:

 

At least some of those shells hit the Citadel from the SIDE and not on the citadel roof.......???

Edited by Trigger_Happy_Dad

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any module layout available, Red area might just be waterline belt and maybe citadel actually sits lower?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.