German BBs+ tier 6 premium French BB Dunkerque stats in 0.5.9

[Comrad_StaIin]

Armour viewer is coming...

Compared to Bismarck/Tirpitz, FdG has thinner turtleback armour.

GK does not have turtleback armour

 

 

what wtf no turtlback??

there is no reason to get another Montana clone 

I will stop at tier 9

[Widar_Thule]

 

Many interesting things...

 

The data you provide in this topic is most interesting, thanks a lot for sharing that.

 

I wonder, is there any piece of WOWS data which actually lists the percentage chance to hit for the main guns of the WOWS ships?

 

I have done quite lengthy and extensive 1 versus 1 testing in the WOWS training room between Tier 8 Tirpitz versus all Tier 6-10 battleships at ~15.6 km under a ~50 degree angle of impact and the hit percentages and damage per minute data in these tests is remarkably consistent, all tests done with the same test parameters yielded about the same chance to hit (accuracy) and damage per minute/round results within a +/-2-3% standard deviation for all ships tested. In some cases up to four tests in a row gave the exact same result both in rounds and salvo's needed to sink a target, hit percentage for the main guns and actual damage inflicted per minute/round. All possible Tirpitz versus Tier 6-10 battleship combinations were tested under the exact same conditions (range, angle of impact etc.).

 

Tests between moving battleships - with both battleships holding the same course, range and speed - were also done and on average the chance to hit figure (accuracy) versus a particular moving battleship is about 50 percent of the chance to hit figure of that particular battleship when it is stationary. So for example if the chance to hit against a particular battleship is 50 percent when that particular battleship is stationary, then the chance to hit is about 25 percent when that particular battleship is moving at the same course, speed and range. Again with a +/-2-3% standard deviation for all ships tested when they are moving as described.

 

The test results lead me to conclude that the effects of the Random Number Generator are actually much less important than they are rumored to be.

 

My question due to all of this: To your knowledge, is there a database figure where WOWS stores the actual chance to hit for the main guns?

 

[fnord_disc]

 

The data you provide in this topic is most interesting, thanks a lot for sharing that.

 

I wonder, is there any piece of WOWS data which actually lists the percentage chance to hit for the main guns of the WOWS ships?

 

I have done quite lengthy and extensive 1 versus 1 testing in the WOWS training room between Tier 8 Tirpitz versus all Tier 6-10 battleships at ~15.6 km under a ~50 degree angle of impact and the hit percentages and damage per minute data in these tests is remarkably consistent, all tests done with the same test parameters yielded about the same chance to hit (accuracy) and damage per minute/round results within a +/-2-3% standard deviation for all ships tested. In some cases up to four tests in a row gave the exact same result both in rounds and salvo's needed to sink a target, hit percentage for the main guns and actual damage inflicted per minute/round. All possible Tirpitz versus Tier 6-10 battleship combinations were tested under the exact same conditions (range, angle of impact etc.).

 

Tests between moving battleships - with both battleships holding the same course, range and speed - were also done and on average the chance to hit figure (accuracy) versus a particular moving battleship is about 50 percent of the chance to hit figure of that particular battleship when it is stationary. So for example if the chance to hit against a particular battleship is 50 percent when that particular battleship is stationary, then the chance to hit is about 25 percent when that particular battleship is moving at the same course, speed and range. Again with a +/-2-3% standard deviation for all ships tested when they are moving as described.

 

The test results lead me to conclude that the effects of the Random Number Generator are actually much less important than they are rumored to be.

 

My question due to all of this: To your knowledge, is there a database figure where WOWS stores the actual chance to hit for the main guns?

 

I'll be honest with you, these kinds of tests are completely useless. Just recording a large number of shell hits from long range tells you... what exactly? There is no randomization in the damage calculation. Getting the same damage several times in a row is normal.

 

 database figure where WOWS stores the actual chance to hit for the main guns?

 

"the actual chance to hit with the main guns"...?

 

What does this mean? Do you think the game rolls a dice and says, welp, it's a 1 so the salvo goes into the bushes?

 

Every shell receives a physical trajectory that will take it into some dispersion ellipsis and then the shell trajectory is checked for collision with hitboxes and armor plates. For me to answer this question, I would have to know:

 

• The range
• The length and width of the target
• Both accuracy parameters for the main guns

 

Then you can overlay the target hitbox into the dispersion ellipsis and calculate ship_size/ellipsis_area, although you would have to also:

 

• Weigh ellipsis_area by the normal distribution curve
• Consider angle of impact - the non-zero height of the target causes it to cast a hitbox "shadow" with everything that sticks out above the water

 

All this can be calculated and it isn't even very difficult in my opinion, but you have strange notions how this game works.

[Unintentional_submarine]

Armour viewer is coming...

Compared to Bismarck/Tirpitz, FdG has thinner turtleback armour.

GK does not have turtleback armour

 

 

Uh... What?

 

So what is GK's strength again? I presume when you say no turtleback deck that it also encompasses no other elaborate internal protection schemes, and the ship is essentially just protected by the belt and perhaps some thinner bulkheads behind that. Right?

So if I understand this right, GK's claim to fame will be that Yamato can't lol-pen her from every angle, or frontally citadel her due to the 45mm plating. That's hardly a very impressive resume as far as I'm concerned. There has to be more to it than this.

 

Well, this sort of does explain the weird citadel iChase got on a GK in his stream. Or rather, I hope not.

 

The weird thing is, as far as I know the H designs all encompassed turtleback decks, and the bigger they got the more armour above it as well. None of them really went the same route as the British, Americans or Japanese with all-or-nothing. This departure from that requires a fair bit of explaining I think. And combined with the triple turrets it makes GK seems terribly weak for my suspence of disbelief.

[Comrad_StaIin]

in other words the Tier 10 is going to be an weaker Montana

[Darth_Glorious]

 

Uh... What?

 

So what is GK's strength again? I presume when you say no turtleback deck that it also encompasses no other elaborate internal protection schemes, and the ship is essentially just protected by the belt and perhaps some thinner bulkheads behind that. Right?

So if I understand this right, GK's claim to fame will be that Yamato can't lol-pen her from every angle, or frontally citadel her due to the 45mm plating. That's hardly a very impressive resume as far as I'm concerned. There has to be more to it than this.

 

Well, this sort of does explain the weird citadel iChase got on a GK in his stream. Or rather, I hope not.

 

The weird thing is, as far as I know the H designs all encompassed turtleback decks, and the bigger they got the more armour above it as well. None of them really went the same route as the British, Americans or Japanese with all-or-nothing. This departure from that requires a fair bit of explaining I think. And combined with the triple turrets it makes GK seems terribly weak for my suspence of disbelief.

 

Only belt and citadel armour, no turtleback armour....

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

in other words the Tier 10 is going to be an weaker Montana

 

I watched a brief video somewhere yesterday, with the T10 german BB having a go at a yamato. It handled itself pretty well. Got some really good hits/damage. Although it was a relatively close engagement, cant remember the distance though.

[SmartassNoob]

 

Every shell receives a physical trajectory that will take it into some dispersion ellipsis and then the shell trajectory is checked for collision with hitboxes and armor plates. For me to answer this question, I would have to know:

 

• The range
• The length and width of the target
• Both accuracy parameters for the main guns

 

Then you can overlay the target hitbox into the dispersion ellipsis and calculate ship_size/ellipsis_area, although you would have to also:

 

• Weigh ellipsis_area by the normal distribution curve
• Consider angle of impact - the non-zero height of the target causes it to cast a hitbox "shadow" with everything that sticks out above the water

 

All this can be calculated and it isn't even very difficult in my opinion, but you have strange notions how this game works.

In my experience it looks like no matter how well one aims there's something that makes sure only a limited % of hits can be citadel penetrations. If you have 6 guns and all hit the target, you'll at best get 1 citadel penetration against a BB and maybe 3 against a cruiser. And there's probably another hidden limit for how often this can happen per battle. Otherwise this should happen at least twice every time you get 6 hits on the citadel area (assuming that the enemy ship isn't turning, or something at the time, which would change the armor angle for different hits). This is especially easy to see in tier 1 battles where its easier to see how you can hit the enemy many times into the same area in a short amount of time but only a X% of hits are citadel penetrations.

[fnord_disc]

In my experience it looks like no matter how well one aims there's something that makes sure only a limited % of hits can be citadel penetrations. If you have 6 guns and all hit the target, you'll at best get 1 citadel penetration against a BB and maybe 3 against a cruiser. And there's probably another hidden limit for how often this can happen per battle. Otherwise this should happen at least twice every time you get 6 hits on the citadel area (assuming that the enemy ship isn't turning, or something at the time, which would change the armor angle for different hits). This is especially easy to see in tier 1 battles where its easier to see how you can hit the enemy many times into the same area in a short amount of time but only a X% of hits are citadel penetrations.

 

There is no limit and if you aim well, you will get 100% citadel penetrations. I advise you to check where the citadel hitbox actually is.

[Sovereign11]

Why couldn't Wg have gone with a T10 BB that has turtleback armor twin turrets and torps??? What's the point of having another Montana that won't be citadeled from the front but presumably from the side and through the deck, still has less secondaries as the Yamato, less armor and hp from its competitors and less AA than any off the T9-T10 BBs and a superstructure that screams for fire and easily able to provide 10k AP dmg salvos to anyone who can hit it.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

Why couldn't Wg have gone with a T10 BB that has turtleback armor twin turrets and torps??? What's the point of having another Montana that won't be citadeled from the front but presumably from the side and through the deck, still has less secondaries as the Yamato, less armor and hp from its competitors and less AA than any off the T9-T10 BBs and a superstructure that screams for fire and easily able to provide 10k AP dmg salvos to anyone who can hit it.

 

because the fn torps of those ships would've most likely been mounted BELOW THE WATERLINE... and those torpedo launchers ARE NOT INGAME... otherwise ships like the Stock Kongo would also have torps etc.

[Sovereign11]

 

because the fn torps of those ships would've most likely been mounted BELOW THE WATERLINE... and those torpedo launchers ARE NOT INGAME... otherwise ships like the Stock Kongo would also have torps etc.

 

Nagato and Kongo(not sure about Kongo) had torps above waterline and still those aren't in the game and that still doesn't answer the lack off turtleback armor, twin turrets and don't tell me they couldn't balance it.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

 

Nagato and Kongo(not sure about Kongo) had torps above waterline and still those aren't in the game and that still doesn't answer the lack off turtleback armor, twin turrets and don't tell me they couldn't balance it.

 

yes but the Torps are NOT in swivel Launchers on Deck like the Launchers on the DDs, Cruisers, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Tirpitz... they were rigidly mounted inside the ships hull... AND THOSE LAUNCHERS ARE NOT INGAME (only during that April fools thing with those toy ships were such torpedos ingame)

 

and i'm just as pissed about the missing turtleback

[fnord_disc]

 Nagato  had torps above waterline and still those aren't in the game

 

correct, but they were fixed and couldnt turn and no fixed torps are implemented on any ship in the game whatsoever.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

 

correct, but they were fixed and couldnt turn and no fixed torps are implemented on any ship in the game whatsoever.

 

[Darth_Glorious]

GK turret barbette armour is about the same level as Izumo's, so expect to lose some turrets if you get hit there.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

GK turret barbette armour is about the same level as Izumo's, so expect to lose some turrets if you get hit there.

 

slow but sure...

[Tyrendian89]

 

slow but sure...

 

how in the history of all that is funny did I run into this gem only now, and here of all places...

[Darth_Glorious]

GK 406 mm shell dispersion pattern at 20 km

 

 

GK 406 mm shell  dispersion pattern vs Montana 406 mm shell  dispersion pattern at 17 km

 

Review of GK

+ GK has good armour overall, very hard to get citadel hits

+ Its secondary guns are very accurate and can hit CAs and DDs very hard. (You will die very fast by its secondaries if you have low HP)

- The penetration power of the main gun shells is mediocre

- The accuracy of the main gun is poor

- The mobility is poor, it turns like a tug...

- The firing angle of rear turrets is problematic and reduces considerably its firepower in brawl.

- The front turret armour and the barbette armour are weak so GK can lose easily its turrets in brawl. (Preventive Maintenance perk is recommended)

- It burns like other BBs, don't expect a magic here.

[Mucker]

Any news regarding König Albert? And was Scharnhorst hit hard by the AP alpha nerf? Are there any preliminary opinions on Dunkerque's overall performance?

BTW, thanks for keeping us posted! 

[Carnivore81]

GK 406 mm shell dispersion pattern at 20 km

 

 

GK 406 mm shell  dispersion pattern vs Montana 406 mm shell  dispersion pattern at 17 km

 

Review of GK

+ GK has good armour overall, very hard to get citadel hits

+ Its secondary guns are very accurate and can hit CAs and DDs very hard. (You will die very fast by its secondaries if you have low HP)

- The penetration power of the main gun shells is mediocre

- The accuracy of the main gun is poor

- The mobility is poor, it turns like a tug...

- The firing angle of rear turrets is problematic and reduces considerably its firepower in brawl.

- The front turret armour and the barbette armour are weak so GK can lose easily its turrets in brawl. (Preventive Maintenance perk is recommanded)

- It burns like other BBs, don't expect a magic here.

Yay Good secondarys . They can Put it somewhere the Sun Not shining. Idont want to rely on an automatic system. I can play C&C when i want this. So only a HP pinata for the Other BB . NO THX. 

[Darth_Glorious]

Review of FdG :

- Its stock hull is terrible. I can say that it is a joke....Other BBs won't give a crap about it.....

- The firing angle of rear turrets is much better than GK so it can brawl better.

- The turret front armour and the barbette armour are terrible, so we have the same problem of losing turret like GK but in a larger scale....

 

[painless]

Ty glorious for delivering news, and updates  .. I'm so hyped for dunkirk and scharnhorst, hope they get released next week when ranked are over..

[Darth_Glorious]

Ty glorious for delivering news, and updates  .. I'm so hyped for dunkirk and scharnhorst, hope they get released next week when ranked are over..

 

Scharnhorst is better armoured than TIrpitz but its guns are true RNG machines, at least its torpedoes are more reliable than its guns so you can brawl with it and get nice damage.

Dunkerque is Sharnhorst in the opposite direction : it has laser guns but poorly armoured.

[painless]

torpedos on a BB are neat addition i still collect so many salty tears with Torpitz from people that forget about torps on it, or just do not pay attention.. Dunkie seems like BB Molotov to me so far, cant wait to get them both..