Roma - Tier VIII Premium Italian BB suggestion

[phoenix_jz]

Aetreus from the NA forums is saying that the penetration given by SEA is likely incorrect.

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/25247-fan-made-italian-tech-tree/?do=findComment&comment=3422601

 

Quote

The pen on Roma is not really as good as I was hoping for or I think can be historically substantiated, HOWEVER, sea-group's 675/575/489 is wrong, and the real values are 711/610/520, given the actual stats seem to be Krupp=2434, 850m/s rather than whatever 840 m/s they have. On par with some of the best 16" and past all of the 15" guns, but I really think that the gun penetration should be more along the lines of 781/656/552, better than all 16" guns by a significant margin, remembering that the 1934 put up similar pen figures against tougher Italian plate. At the moment the guns are worse than the OTO reported values at long range but equivalent to the 0-range value, so *shrug*. Still this is the best penetration of Tier VIII excepting an Amagi/Kii at close range.

 

In case anyone is wondering, the sea-group figures would require a fairly bad drag value of ~0.32 to get, and that would be very unreasonable as you could never reach the gun's actual firing ranges at elevations with such a bad drag and 840m/s velocities.

 

 

Considering the point-blank pen of these guns (0 meters) is 825mm with the stats it has in-game, this is a lot more likely to be correct. A jump from 825 to 711 over 5 km makes a lot more sense than 825 to 675, especially given the way the penetration falls away after that - the latter option seems far to steep.

 

In other related news, Roma's TDS is to be raised from 25% to 38%. Cesare from 19% to 30%.

 

*Pugliese intensifies* 

[Historynerd]

10 minutes ago, phoenix_jz said:

Aetreus from the NA forums is saying that the penetration given by SEA is likely incorrect.

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/25247-fan-made-italian-tech-tree/?do=findComment&comment=3422601

 

 

 

Considering the point-blank pen of these guns (0 meters) is 825mm with the stats it has in-game, this is a lot more likely to be correct. A jump from 825 to 711 over 5 km makes a lot more sense than 825 to 675, especially given the way the penetration falls away after that - the latter option seems far to steep.

 

In other related news, Roma's TDS is to be raised from 25% to 38%. Cesare from 19% to 30%.

 

*Pugliese intensifies* 

Whoa... nice!

I'd guess that Roma's gameplay will become something like this:

 

As for the TDS buff, we'll see how it goes. There's some who don't like how it's now higher than the Richelieu's value, in terms of "history"... I guess if I were to say "balance" all heck would break loose.

[Exocet6951]

1 hour ago, Historynerd said:

Whoa... nice!

I'd guess that Roma's gameplay will become something like this:

 

As for the TDS buff, we'll see how it goes. There's some who don't like how it's now higher than the Richelieu's value, in terms of "history"... I guess if I were to say "balance" all heck would break loose.

 

Because "best" is rather meaningless when you don't substantiate the claim.
Have I little doubt that the ebonite mousse protection would be superior at taking multiple hits, but WG tends not to look into mechanical faults, so the Pugliese's instrisinc inability to take multiple hits without severely reducing its effectiveness is not really modeled.

So in my opinion, it's not even balance, just WG's game design philosophy.
The same that gave the Roma's 90mm such decent DPS

Any discontent (from my PoV) on the TDS front is either the person not understanding WG's position, or just national bias.


I for one welcome the Roma, I'm pleasantly surprised to see historically...debated ... equipment seen the "what if it all worked as planned" angle.
Here's to hoping it dispels some of the "it's WWII era Italian so it's crap" atmosphere that still run rampant.

[Battleship_Richelieu]

Roma deserves the better TDS for a very simple reason: She is going to be a medium-range brawler with bad HE and mediocre AA.

 

Looking at Sea Group and GM3D, current stats indicate a stealthy "AP executor" kind of gameplay with very accurate and asolutely demolishing AP, with enough armor (48mm deck) against IFHE, a tough belt with decent TDS and fast ruddershift to make it possible to sneak in, strike and fall back without taking to much punishment.

 

She will struggle in long range duels, against angled targets, CVs (especially AP bombs) or when caught completely off-guard (high citadel).

[Historynerd]

25 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

Because "best" is rather meaningless when you don't substantiate the claim.
Have I little doubt that the ebonite mousse protection would be superior at taking multiple hits, but WG tends not to look into mechanical faults, so the Pugliese's instrisinc inability to take multiple hits without severely reducing its effectiveness is not really modeled.

So in my opinion, it's not even balance, just WG's game design philosophy.
The same that gave the Roma's 90mm such decent DPS

Any discontent (from my PoV) on the TDS front is either the person not understanding WG's position, or just national bias.


I for one welcome the Roma, I'm pleasantly surprised to see historically...debated ... equipment seen the "what if it all worked as planned" angle.

Well, if I had to be fair, quite a bit of Italian equipment developed till the mid-1930s shows a certain optimism regarding conditions. Only later a more... realistic approach was taken.

 

But it's a tough reality that the game has to deviate from reality.

I'd guess that IRL, a ship that takes one or more torpedoes in the bow, and then it is struck there again (postulating it didn't broke off), wouldn't merely make the HP drop to zero, but would cause further damage to the bow or even cause its collapse and separation from the rest of the vessel. But that would be rather difficult to model in a game.

 

Quote

Here's to hoping it dispels some of the "it's WWII era Italian so it's crap" atmosphere that still run rampant.

I'll drink to that.

Spoiler

As long as people are willing to discuss facts with proper sources, I am willing to de-learn everything I learned, if proven wrong or misguided.

[SparvieroVV]

No TDS is able to take multiple hits in the same spot. 

[Supersubway]

On 13/7/2017 at 9:10 AM, Deamon93 said:

The main problems of the Littorio-class are the inconsistent accuracy(historically) and how WG will depict the armour scheme. While the former shouldn't be a massive problem(seeing how the 152/53 M1929 with M1926 shells performs ingame, most likely would have a reload time on the high side to compensate its sheer force) the latter is a mistery. The whole scheme relies on having the decapping plate work as intended, if not it's a problem

That's incorrect.

318/50 had infact better precision than British and French competitors at that time till 20-22Km, and became worse just after that range. (Littorio Class, Bagnasco-Del Toro) At least, this was emerged from Regia Marina test and then compared later on with RN and MN results.

381 had instead problems related to the quick deteriorating gun, that was to be changed after much less shots compared to british or french guns.

[SparvieroVV]

56 minutes ago, Supersubway said:

That's incorrect.

318/50 had infact better precision than British and French competitors at that time till 20-22Km, and became worse just after that range. (Littorio Class, Bagnasco-Del Toro) At least, this was emerged from Regia Marina test and then compared later on with RN and MN results.

381 had instead problems related to the quick deteriorating gun, that was to be changed after much less shots compared to british or french guns.

 

Without referencing I believe Bagnasco was referring to the British 16" mk1 in that statement. The French rifle seems to always be given a pass for post war delay coils. Others have noted, although I have no way of verifying, that Italian gunnery records look worse because the trials did not discard wild shots as was practice for the USN and maybe others. I'm happy with the summary that WG has taken in going with short range and accurate. It will be interesting to see how Roma does with a spotter plane if the German dispersion model is maintained. Cesare is already a troll when firing at range, I can only imagine the frustration of the 18km+ shots with Roma.

[phoenix_jz]

Yeah, and Cesare only has 16.4 km max range with no spotter... meanwhile, Roma should be able to hit nearly 22 km with the spotter.

 

Also, for anyone else who own's Bagnosco's book... can you check something for me? I've been working on a post for Gorizia (used to have one for her on NA, but it got eaten by the forum :/ ), and I was using the account of the First Battle of Sirte given in the book when I saw...

 

well... 

 

 

I don't know about you, but think something's up with Cesare... 

 

As far as the performance of the 90mm gun... I'm assuming that's a scenario of the RPC and quadraxial stabilization working perfectly. If WG wants Duilio or Doria to appear, they could easily use the wetness & RPC issues to lower the dps. Either way, the low range (4 km!) really hurts. I'd kill for an extra half kilometer of base range.

[Supersubway]

Sorry, what do you want me to check?

[SparvieroVV]

Range the ships fired at, number of rounds fired and time fire stopped all look weird. Which book is this supposed to be?

 

In regards to firing at range. Italian ships have the German dispersion and I just wouldn't suggest it unless that is the only way to get damage in a map. My experience in Cesare is very historically accurate bracketing of enemy ships. 

[Historynerd]

On 24/11/2017 at 10:39 PM, phoenix_jz said:

I don't know about you, but think something's up with Cesare... 

About it, I'd be interested in seeing what was up with the Duilio and Doria's guns... NavWeaps says that they were mentioned as having a maximum elevation of 30°, compared to the 27° of the Cesare and the Cavour, however, it also mentions postwar documents that cite a maximum 27° inclination for the newer rebuild as well.

 

Anyway, the typo's nice, but if the Cesare did not even open fire, how can he mention times for opening and ceasing fire? 

[the_dude33]

Hmm, regarding the book scan about the first battle of Sirte in 1941, some things DO look sloppy/dodgy.

Saying this, the strange time ("18.97") might be decimal time, where an hour is divided into 100 subunits.

[SmartassNoob]

Or what if it's metric time? As in 10 hours instead of 12.

[phoenix_jz]

Oops, sorry for not clarifying! It's The Littorio Class: Italy's Last and Largest Battleships 1937-1948

 

I just thought it was kind of funny, and was curious if it was just an error with the version I had or if it was found elsewhere as well.

[Historynerd]

1 hour ago, SparvieroVV said:

Range the ships fired at, number of rounds fired and time fire stopped all look weird. Which book is this supposed to be?

 

In regards to firing at range. Italian ships have the German dispersion and I just wouldn't suggest it unless that is the only way to get damage in a map. My experience in Cesare is very historically accurate bracketing of enemy ships. 

Yes, the vertical dispersion has its frustrating moments. Without them, even a scrub like me would be having 80K games one after another.

 

1 minute ago, phoenix_jz said:

Oops, sorry for not clarifying! It's The Littorio Class: Italy's Last and Largest Battleships 1937-1948

 

I just thought it was kind of funny, and was curious if it was just an error with the version I had or if it was found elsewhere as well.

Nah, must be a typo for 18:07.

Must be the time when the Cesare brandished its gun towards an enemy unit, held its fire because it was out of range, then when it disappeared the guns were returned to their normal position.

[SparvieroVV]

Well we are talking artillery where precision is in a little more demand so decimal time may very well be in use. The online English version from google play has the same table. As my understanding is that it was updated from the Italian text first printed this would be an odd mistake to retain. Given the vast differences telemetered between British and Italian capital ships at Punta Stilo for range maybe some faith had been lost in the older range finders of the first rebuild after this battle.

 

Might want to ask the question on Betasom?

[Supersubway]

1 hour ago, SparvieroVV said:

Well we are talking artillery where precision is in a little more demand so decimal time may very well be in use. The online English version from google play has the same table. As my understanding is that it was updated from the Italian text first printed this would be an odd mistake to retain. Given the vast differences telemetered between British and Italian capital ships at Punta Stilo for range maybe some faith had been lost in the older range finders of the first rebuild after this battle.

 

Might want to ask the question on Betasom?

You from Betasom? Open a discussion there, I will join.

[SparvieroVV]

I just lurk and while I haven't checked in a while anything that touches gunnery is sort of a hot topic right now, no?

[Historynerd]

I'm eagerly waiting for live testing opinions. Anybody knows when we're going to get the .14 update?

[SparvieroVV]

11 minutes ago, Historynerd said:

I'm eagerly waiting for live testing opinions. Anybody knows when we're going to get the .14 update?

 

Tomorrow for NA. So we should see twitch streaming “soon”. 

[SmartassNoob]

1 hour ago, SparvieroVV said:

 

Tomorrow for NA. So we should see twitch streaming “soon”. 

Soon™.

[SparvieroVV]

Link the streams so I can watch after work. 

[Historynerd]

I know I shouldn't go off lurking on the NA forum to see if there are things I can steal, but I'm way too excited.

 

Spoiler

 

[SparvieroVV]

You are always welcome. Just reach behind the counter for the real cheese. We leave the rubber stuff out for those that don’t know the difference.