Public Test 0.5.10

[Admiral_noodle]

 

Sorry about your thunder

 

Yeah the Tachibana does seem odd at 68 but i believe the dev in charge of it forgot the decimal point and it was mean to be 6.8( this is what i heard about it ) and i hope they dont change the auto-ricochet for the pepsi as due to her weak sides she needs a little extra to help her

 

I agree. We shall see. Hopefully. Want to put on the new values too? Then I don't have to

[cpt_gandy]

I think it's the normalization of 68, he's referring to. ..whatever that means.

 

it means angling will not work and you will get penitrated regardless of the angle you use to protect your ship from the Tachibana shooting at you

[Shagulon]

would someone explain what this figures mean, or link me to a good explanation please?

[Admiral_noodle]

would someone explain what this figures mean, or link me to a good explanation please?

 

Shells don't always got at 90 degrees to the surface they are hitting. The further the angle from 90 the more chance there is of the shell simply bouncing off.

 

Auto ricochet. If a shell strikes at an angle higher than this number it will bounce. 

 

Normalisation. When a shell hits a surface it "turns in" a little to the surface it's hitting. This is the normalisation number. 

 

So to decide if the shell will penetrate or bounce. Take the angle it's striking at Plus the normalisation. If the total is more than the auto ricochet the shell will penetrate. If it's less it bounces off. 

 

I think that's the right way round anyway. The next bit is true though. 

 

Higher normalisation is good, as more turning of the shell means more penetrating at angled targets. 

 

If if the auto ricochet number is higher, it also is better as the target ship had to angle more to bounce shells. 

 

I need pictures...

[Tyrendian89]

 

Shells don't always got at 90 degrees to the surface they are hitting. The further the angle from 90 the more chance there is of the shell simply bouncing off.

 

Auto ricochet. If a shell strikes at an angle higher than this number it will bounce. 

 

Normalisation. When a shell hits a surface it "turns in" a little to the surface it's hitting. This is the normalisation number. 

 

So to decide if the shell will penetrate or bounce. Take the angle it's striking at Plus the normalisation. If the total is more than the auto ricochet the shell will penetrate. If it's less it bounces off. 

 

I think that's the right way round anyway. The next bit is true though. 

 

Higher normalisation is good, as more turning of the shell means more penetrating at angled targets. 

 

If if the auto ricochet number is higher, it also is better as the target ship had to angle more to bounce shells. 

 

I need pictures...

 

you're confusing auto-riccochet with simple non-penetrations here (or at least I think you are). Here's the order of questions the game asks to determine whether a shell penetrates:

1) Does the shell overmatch the target armour section, i.e. is the shell caliber greater than [something like, don't remember the exact value] 16 times the armour thickness? If yes, autopen (which is exactly what makes the Yamato so strong by the way: It overmatches most BB nose armour!). If no, then

2) Is the angle of impact shallower than the auto-riccochet threshold? If yes, shell goes off into nowhere. If no, then

3) How thick is the armour the shell has to go through, taking into account both plate thickness and impact angle? How much penetrative power does the shell have, based on its speed at impact point, weight and Krupp? If effective pen > effective armour, then you do damage. If not, your shell bounces/doesn't penetrate.

Now, I'm not sure at which point normalization (which you explained perfectly: it's the shell "turning into" the armour). comes in here - before or after Step 2? I think it's after, because auto-riccochet means the shell can't "bite into" the armour to even start turning in, but someone might correct me here which I would greatly appreciate!

 

[Admiral_noodle]

I think your right with these three mechanics. I just don't know what order they come in. I would have thought that:

- auto ricochet comes first. I've seen Yamato shells bounce I'm sure.
- normalisation should come before angle against ricochet is tested
- arnour thickness ought to then be calculated from the angle post normalisation.
- penetration is decided.

Of course I might well be wrong.

However in any case, more normalisation means less apparent armour thickness to get through even if auto ricochet is tested first...

If overmatch was tested first then all Yamato shells would always penetrate and never bounce. Which would seem odd at very very shallow angles.

 

so it might be:

 

- does it ricochet?

- if no how much does it turn in?

- now what's the thickness of armour to get through?

- do I penetrate? 

[Admiral_Noif]

So ... Are Germans BBs available in PT server 0.5.10?

[Hanszeehock]

So ... Are Germans BBs available in PT server 0.5.10?

 

Almost certainly, no. They were actually introduced for testing purposes in 0.5.9. In addition, they are still being tested and under NDA at the moment. 

[anonym_EFwxJOPWzlER]

 

Colour blind Mode

We have added a mode that supports adaptation of the colour palette for players with the corresponding colour-vision deficiencies. To enable this mode, select the suitable option via the Settings screen. The intensity of the corresponding effect can be customised.

                       ..............................................................................................................................

Sometimes i criticise WG for various reasons, but when you see them doing something like this; you think wow, this is outstanding for those who are colour blind.

 

It makes me rethink if WG are as bad as they sometimes seem to me.

 

I have to give WG 10/10 for this, i am not colour blind but those that are will be thrilled with this

 

WG; i you

 

[Tyrendian89]

 

If overmatch was tested first then all Yamato shells would always penetrate and never bounce. Which would seem odd at very very shallow angles.

 

 

no, because Yamato shells don't overmatch ALL the armour on a ship. They just overmatch Montana (to take the most classic and sad example) bow armour regardless of angle (which is the entire point of Overmatching), meaning a Yamato can and will shoot straight through the nose of a Montana and onwards into the front magazines (whose own armour will then be almost at a right angle and thus easily penetrated) and get citadels. What you saw bouncing at extreme angles were shots that dispersed so much they made contact with other sections of armour further back on the ship, which were then strong enough to not get overmatched and let auto-riccochet kick in.

 

And, yes, your list at the end is how I believe things work, but maybe Normalization is applied before the auto-riccochet calculations, which would make it significantly stronger.

[Admiral_noodle]

 

no, because Yamato shells don't overmatch ALL the armour on a ship. They just overmatch Montana (to take the most classic and sad example) bow armour regardless of angle (which is the entire point of Overmatching), meaning a Yamato can and will shoot straight through the nose of a Montana and onwards into the front magazines (whose own armour will then be almost at a right angle and thus easily penetrated) and get citadels. What you saw bouncing at extreme angles were shots that dispersed so much they made contact with other sections of armour further back on the ship, which were then strong enough to not get overmatched and let auto-riccochet kick in.

 

And, yes, your list at the end is how I believe things work, but maybe Normalization is applied before the auto-riccochet calculations, which would make it significantly stronger.

 

Makes sense. Sort of. I suppose weak armour is going to get smooshed whatever the angle. 

 

So it's probably:

-overnatch

-ricochet

-normalisation

-apparent thickness

-pen/no pen

 

hoping I can get it confirmed. Either way these SHOULD have minimal effects - but I suspect that's why a full PT is needed - to get stats WG can look at and see what the variance looks like on a large dataset. So we must all test!

[Babykim]

The point is:

 

*** There is absolutely nothing in the content of the forthcoming patch that warrants a public test ***

 

No changes concerning gameplay or interface, because all additional statistics offers more information, without any consequences to the gameplay. The German BBs cannot be tried. What is the point of public test?

[Slezman]

The point is:

 

*** There is absolutely nothing in the content of the forthcoming patch that warrants a public test ***

 

No changes concerning gameplay or interface, because all additional statistics offers more information, without any consequences to the gameplay. The German BBs cannot be tried. What is the point of public test?

 

wtf. On our czech version of the website it is writen:

"Public test of 0.5.10 will prepare you for the arrival of german BBs"

"August update is bringing german BBs into game, as well as tons of improvements demanded by community. It is a time to test"

[Babykim]

 

wtf. On our czech version of the website it is writen:

"Public test of 0.5.10 will prepare you for the arrival of german BBs"

"August update is bringing german BBs into game, as well as tons of improvements demanded by community. It is a time to test"

 

I might be wrong, but I believe that you will not be able to play German battleships on the test server.

[Tyrendian89]

The point is:

 

*** There is absolutely nothing in the content of the forthcoming patch that warrants a public test ***

 

No changes concerning gameplay or interface, because all additional statistics offers more information, without any consequences to the gameplay. The German BBs cannot be tried. What is the point of public test?

 

ummm.... so changes to pretty much every single AP shell in the entire game don't warrant a public test? I'm pretty sure you were, like every other sane(ish) person, on the barricades with us last time WG did that without testing and forked up BB AP vs. cruisers massively, sometime in November I believe.

[Babykim]

 

ummm.... so changes to pretty much every single AP shell in the entire game don't warrant a public test? I'm pretty sure you were, like every other sane(ish) person, on the barricades with us last time WG did that without testing and forked up BB AP vs. cruisers massively, sometime in November I believe.

 

where in the patch notes do you see changes to AP shells. Maybe I am missing something...

[cpt_gandy]

 

where in the patch notes do you see changes to AP shells. Maybe I am missing something...

 

The info was not put in the patch notes but was put in the public test section

[Hanszeehock]

 

where in the patch notes do you see changes to AP shells. Maybe I am missing something...

 

When I first saw that there was to be a PT I thought the same, what is the point. Then I saw the feedback thread for shell normalisation and I realised why. 

[cpt_gandy]

 

When I first saw that there was to be a PT I thought the same, what is the point. Then I saw the feedback thread for shell normalisation and I realised why. 

 

the only issue with the shell normalization changes is that some people wont really understand the change correctly and feel they are getting a major nerf to one or two of thier ships when in truth its a minor change that they might not even notice. I feel they did the right thing by not posting it in the patch notes as a few people wont be happy and will vent that in the patch note comments on the main website.

 

Has anyone found out if its going to effect premium ships or not as i want to know if my tirpitz is going to get a buff or not

[Carnivore81]

Mhhh But i have no Desire playing a Testserver without New Content. I tested all lines now. So why should i waste my time Testing Shells. Sounds Boring.  Even if testing this is important. And actually whats the reason for this Change?whats the Plan? 

[cpt_gandy]

Ive updated the list to see the winners and losers from the changes to shell Normalisation, they all have the new values on them as well

 

USN

Cruiser shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
5"/127mm	Mark 15	60.0	10 Buffed	Erie
5"/127mm	AP	60.0	10 Buffed	Chester
5"/127mm	Mark 38	60.0	10 Buffed	Atlanta
6"/152mm	Mark 28	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Erie
6"/152mm	AP, 105lbs	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Chester, Albany, St. Louis, Phoenix (stock)
6"/152mm	Mark 27, mod. 5	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Phoenix (top), Omaha, Marblehead
6"/152mm	Mark 35	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Cleveland
8"/203mm	AP, 260lbs	67.5	7 Buffed	Pensacola (stock)
8"/203mm	Mark 19	67.5	7 Buffed	Pensacola (top), Indianapolis, New Orleans, Baltimore (stock)
8"/203mm	Mark 21	67.5	7 Buffed	Baltimore (top), Des Moines, Buffalo

Battleship shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
12"/305mm	AP	60.0	6 Buffed	South Carolina
12"/305mm	AP, 870lbs	60.0	6 Buffed	Wyoming (stock), Arkansas Beta
12"/305mm	Mark 15	60.0	6 Buffed	Wyoming (top)
14"/356mm	AP, 1400lbs	60.0	6 Buffed	New York (stock), New Mexico (stock)
14"/356mm	Mark 16	60.0	6 Buffed	New York (top), New Mexico (top)
14"/356mm	Mark 16 (Texas)	60.0	6 Buffed	Texas
16"/406mm	Mark 3	60.0	6 Buffed	Colorado (stock)
16"/406mm	Mark 5	60.0	6 Buffed	Colorado (top)
16"/406mm	Mark 8 (NC)	60.0	6 Nerfed	North Carolina
16"/406mm	Mark 8	60.0	6 Nerfed	Iowa, Montana

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
3"/76mm	Mark 29	60.0	10 Buffed	Smith
4"/102mm	Mark 16	60.0	10 Buffed	Sampson, Wickes, Clemson
5"/127mm	Mark 15	60.0	10 Buffed	Nicholas (stock)
5"/127mm	Mark 38	60.0	10 Buffed	Nicholas (top), Farragut, Mahan, Sims, Benson, Fletcher, Gearing

IJN

Cruiser shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4.7"/120mm	Type 0	60.0	10 Buffed	Hashidate
5.5"/140mm	Common	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Tenryu, Kuma, Katori, Yubari, Iwaki Alpha, Kitakami
6"/152mm	Type 4	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Chikuma
6.1"/155mm	Type 91	60.0	7 Nerfed	Mogami (stock)
7.9"/200mm	Type 5	60.0	7 Nerfed	Furutaka (stock)
8"/203mm	Type 91	60.0	7 Nerfed	Furutaka (top), Aoba, Myoko, Tone, Mogami (top),Atago, Ibuki
8"/203mm	Type 92	60.0	7 Nerfed	Zao

Battleship shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
12"/305mm	AP, 850lbs	60.0	6 Nerfed	Mikasa
12"/305mm	41st Year Type	60.0	6 Nerfed	Kawachi (stock)
12"/305mm	41st Year Type	60.0	6 Nerfed	Kawachi (top)
12"/305mm	Mark VI	60.0	6 Nerfed	Ishizuchi
14"/356mm	Type 5	60.0	6 Buffed	Myogi, Kongo (stock)
14"/356mm	Type 91	60.0	6 Buffed	Kongo (top), Fuso
16.1"/410mm	Type 88	60.0	6 Buffed	Nagato (stock), Amagi (stock)
16.1"/410mm	Type 91	60.0	6 Buffed	Nagato (top), Amagi (top)
16.1"/410mm	Type 91 (Izumo)	60.0	6 Buffed	Izumo
18.1"/460mm	Type 91	60.0	6 Buffed	Yamato

Battleship secondary shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
5.5"/140mm	Type 2	60.0	8.0	Nagato, Amagi
6"/152mm	Type 4	60.0	8.0	Myogi, Ishizuchi, Kongo, Fuso
6.1"/155mm	Type 91	60.0	8.6	Izumo, Yamato

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
3"/76mm	Type 0	60.0	10 Nerfed	Tachibana
4.7"/120mm	APC	60.0	10 Buffed	Umikaze, Isokaze
4.7"/120mm	Type 0	60.0	10 Buffed	Wakatake, Minekaze, Kamikaze, Mutsuki
5"/127mm	Type 0	60.0	10 Buffed	Hatsuharu, Fubuki, Kagero, Shimakaze

Russian navy

Cruiser shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4.7"/120mm	Model 1905	60.0	10 Buffed	Novik
5.1"/130mm	SAP-46 (Orlan)	60.0	10 Buffed	Orlan
5.1"/130mm	Model 1911	60.0	10 Buffed	Bogatyr (top), Svetlana (stock)
5.1"/130mm	Model 1917	60.0	10 Buffed	Svetlana (top)
5.1"/130mm	SAP-46 (Profintern)	60.0	10 Buffed	Profintern
6"/152mm	AP, 91lb (Bogatyr)	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Bogatyr (stock)
6"/152mm	AP, 91lb	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Diana, Aurora
6"/152mm	Mark 27, mod 8	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Murmansk
6"/152mm	B-35	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Budyonny, Shchors, Chapayev
6"/152mm	B-35 (Kutuzov)	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Mikhail Kutuzov
7"/180mm	AP-32	60.0	7 Buffed	Kirov
7"/180mm	AP-32 (Dankskoi)	60.0	7 Buffed	Dmitri Donskoi
7"/180mm	AP-32 (Molotov)	60.0	7 Buffed	Molotov
9"/220mm	AP-23	60.0	7 Buffed	Moskva

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4"/102mm	Model 1915	60.0	10 Buffed	Storozhevoi, Derzki, Izyaslav
5.1"/130mm	SAP-46	60.0	10 Buffed	Gnevny, Ognevoi, Kiev, Tashkent, Udaloi (stock)
5.1"/130mm	SAP-46 (Gremyaschy)	60.0	10 Buffed	Gremyaschy
5.1/130mm	SAP-46 (B-2-U)	60.0	10 Buffed	Udaloi (top), Khabarovsk

Battleship shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
12"/305mm	Model 1911	60.0	6 Buffed	Imperator Nikolai I

German navy

Cruiser shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4.1"/105mm	SAP Pz.Gr.	60.0	10 Buffed	Dresden
4.1"/105mm	Pz.Gr. L/3.9	60.0	10 Buffed	Emden
4.1"/105mm	P.S.Gr L/3.8	60.0	10 Buffed	Kolberg
5"/128mm	P.S.Gr. L/4.5	60.0	10 Buffed	Hermelin
5.9"/150mm	Psgr. L/3.7	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Karlsruhe
5.9"/150mm	Psgr. L/3.7 (C/25)	60.0	8.5 Buffed	Königsberg, Nürnberg
8"/203mm	Pz. Spr. Ggr. L/4.4	60.0	7 Buffed	Admiral Hipper, Roon, Hindenburg
8.3"/210mm	Psgr. L/3.1	60.0	7 Buffed	Yorck

Battleship shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
15"/380mm	P.S.Gr L/4.4	60.0	6 Buffed	Tirpitz

Royal Navy

Battleship shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
15"/381mm	Mark XXIIb	60.0	6 Buffed	Warspite

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4"/102mmmm	Mark XVI	60.0	10 Buffed	Campbeltown

Poland

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
4.7"/120mmmm	AP	60.0	10 Buffed	Blyskawica

Pan-Asia

Destroyer shells

Caliber	Name	Auto-ricochet	Normalisation	Ships used on
5"/127mmmm	Mark 38	60.0	10 Buffed	Lo Yang
5.1"/130mm	SAP A	60.0	10 Buffed	Anshan

[ValerioWTF]

i get that these are just tiny tiny nerfs and that they will mostly be irrelevant but c'mon.....Nerf to mikasa's main guns? really? L O L, as they didn't suck enough already.

She doesn't even share the gun type with any other ship, so it was unnecessary imho.

Then, if the table is correct, most ships are actually buffed, so it's quite confusing...

[Admiral_noodle]

i get that these are just tiny tiny nerfs and that they will mostly be irrelevant but c'mon.....Nerf to mikasa's main guns? really? L O L, as they didn't suck enough already.

She doesn't even share the gun type with any other ship, so it was unnecessary imho.

Then, if the table is correct, most ships are actually buffed, so it's quite confusing...

 

Mikasa doesn't hit anything anyway so it's largely irrelevant. 

 

Overall tiny tiny tiny buffs and nerfs. Basically standardisation of something that didn't need to be so complex. 

 

Mimimal changes to gameplay expected. But this is why we test

[aboomination]

Mikasa, Kawachi and Ishizuchi got nerfed? 

Also: Tachibana 

 

Thx for posting this (I just hope it is accurate data)!

 

edit: Molotov got stronger AP?

 

[cpt_gandy]

 

Mikasa doesn't hit anything anyway so it's largely irrelevant.

 

That made me laugh