The Under-performance of KM Armor Piercing

[dasCKD]

 

The general inaccuracy of German ships is far more observable in their battleships than in any of the other classes, but nevertheless remains a problem that needs addressing on a far larger scale. The national trait of the Germans is twofold, firstly they either possess the hydroacoustic search consumable on ships that would otherwise not have access to such a consumable, and their second is their extremely powerful AP shell. Except of course, the power of the AP shell of the Germans is largely a fabrication.

 

The power of a ship's HE shell is relatively simple, tied to its static penetration value, to the gun arcs, to the chance of fires, the accuracy of the gun, and to the alpha damage of the shell. AP shell on the other hand, to the best of my knowledge, depends on the angle of impact, the shell weight, the shell speed, the shell caliber, the accuracy of the guns, and, perhaps most importantly, the shell's Krupp value. Out of all the shells available in the game right now, the German cruisers and destroyers all possesses alpha damages significantly higher than their competitors and they possess respectable muzzle velocities which would naturally make players assume that they should perform rather well when it came to using their AP shells.

 

 

Considering that the German line in the case of their cruisers and destroyers depends on their AP shells to do damage, this is of concern. German ships, the nation depends on their AP for a lot of their performance, actually has one of the poorest performing AP shells in the game. In the experiment, 0% of the SN destroyer's shells shattered on impact. 38% of the USN destroyer's shells shattered on impact. A staggering 49% of the KM's shells shattered on impact. At 4 kilometers, the Soviet destroyers had no difficulty landing citadel hits. The American destroyers landed some citadel hits. No matter how I modified the firing solution, the German destroyer failed to score even one citadel hit. This is a problem with the cruiser line as well. A German cruiser like a Roon can fire on the open broadside of a Zao or Moskva at 10 kilometers and expect no more than 1 or two citadels when those respective ships firing at those exact same target could expect instant annihilation or at least the removal of half their victim's health pool.

 

For a line focused on armor piercing, this record is appalling. Not helping is the fact that compared to their counterparts, they possess greatly diminished accuracy that any armor piercing focused line depends on for performance. I think that this issue needs addressing as soon as possible, especially in light of the overall poor performance of German cruisers and destroyers in the larger context of the game. The AP shell performance should hold parity if not superiority with the AP performance of the other nations and simply having a higher AP alpha damage is not close to enough compensation if this test was at all indicative of the overall performance of these ships in the larger context of the game.

 

[dasCKD]

Ugh. Imgur sucks. I'll fix this ASAP.

[txtspeak]

Balance m8.

we can't let the germans have the best armor, best secondaries, best AA AND best guns

[El2aZeR]

we can't let the germans have the best armor, best secondaries, best AA AND best guns

 

He didn't mention KM BBs, no?

[dasCKD]

we can't let the germans have the best armor, best secondaries, best AA AND best guns

 

That's the thing though. The German cruisers might have the best armor, but that's because their armor profile exploits battleship overpenetration like WG exploits Soviet military "sekerit" documents. Cruisers can still land crippling damage on German cruisers. The German destroyers in fact have no advantage in armor profile compared to any of the other destroyers. They, in fact, have some of the poorest survivability considering their large size (which means that AP shells are less likely to overpenetrate) and poor protection that offers no benefits against HE compared to any German destroyers. Their battleships, in anything, overperform. The AP shells of German cruisers and destroyers need serious help though.

[txtspeak]

 

He didn't mention KM BBs, no?

 

riiiiiiiiight.

sorry I missed that

[mtm78]

The AP shells of German cruisers and destroyers need serious help though.

 

+1 in a way. I citadel other cruisers at 20km with Hind if they are perfectly flat broadside. But even a few degrees angle and it's no dice because the shells are the lightest 203mm shells in the game and they loose penetration power with distance. But at medium / short range, they are more then fine due to muzzle velocity. 

 

Therefore I don't want heavies shells, this would make their close / medium range performance probably over the top. But better normalization would help, due to normalization counteracting some of the angling. Better fictional 'krup' values could also work I guess but idk how this would influence short / medium range performance. 

[creamgravy]

The destroyers are fine.

 

Look at those wonderful damage figures when the shells don't hit belt armour. Always aim for centre mass/superstructure over trying for citadels 

 

 

[AwesomeChicken]

The destroyers are fine.

 

Look at those wonderful damage figures when the shells don't hit belt armour. Always aim for centre mass/superstructure over trying for citadels 

 

So why, if KM DDs have superior penetration, do they land less citadels/penetrations than their counterparts?

 

And don't forget that they pay for their "superior" AP by having the worst HE shells in terms of damage and fire chance.

[peoplescavalry]

At least you have HE, best secondary, hydro, unsinkable BBs AND pretty banging guns but no lets complain about not sinking enough ships to go with your super duper AP penetration mantra. Anyone in a US BB or RN CL would love to be in your boat, excuse the pun.

[Niaro]

Ok I like my super secondary build KM Cruisers. but what sane person would prefer to be in one of those instead of a RN CL...

[mtm78]

At least you have HE, best secondary, hydro, unsinkable BBs AND pretty banging guns but no lets complain about not sinking enough ships to go with your super duper AP penetration mantra. Anyone in a US BB or RN CL would love to be in your boat, excuse the pun.

 

German CA's got best HE? Lolwut

[peoplescavalry]

Haha no folks I said a HE round, never said it was any good! I know the cruisers are solid but not OP and the DDs leave a lot to be desired but those awesome German BBs have muddied the waters for anyone requesting buffs.

[triumphgt6]

At least you have HE, best secondary, hydro, unsinkable BBs AND pretty banging guns but no lets complain about not sinking enough ships to go with your super duper AP penetration mantra. Anyone in a US BB or RN CL would love to be in your boat, excuse the pun.

 

I am not swapping my Fiji for any German cruiser, thank you. Or the Belfast!

[dasCKD]

Haha no folks I said a HE round, never said it was any good! I know the cruisers are solid but not OP and the DDs leave a lot to be desired but those awesome German BBs have muddied the waters for anyone requesting buffs.

 

I couldn't care less about the main line German BB. That isn't what this thread is about. Bringing the battleships in does not subtract from the fact that German AP has subpar performance per caliber and that hurts cruisers and destroyers the most.

At least you have HE

 

The worst in the game.

best secondary

 

The destroyers have no secondaries, and who cares about a cruiser's secondaries?

hydro

 

So do the RN CLs, and they get smoke as well unlike the German cruisers. Good, long lasting smoke.

unsinkable BBs

 

Who cares about the battleships? This isn't what this thread is about. Honestly, people would save me so much time and effort if they just READ WHAT I WROTE. The Americans have the best destroyers in the game, I guess that means that their carriers are fine and need no changes whatsoever! WHY DIDN'T I REALIZE THIS SOONER?!?

pretty banging guns

 

Poor HE, bad AP shell weight, velocity maintenance, and Krupp values. Mechanization surpassed by the British. Rate of fire surpassed by the British and the Americans. AP shell characteristics surpassed by literally every single other nation in the game.

Anyone in a US BB

 

Battleships UNIVERSALLY outperform their destroyer and cruiser counterparts.

RN CL

 

Give the KM cruisers and destroyers the shell performance, autobounce angles, and penetration mechanics of the RN cruisers and I will not lodge a single complaint against the German cruisers or destroyers again until the end of time.

would love to be in your boat

 

Really? Then would you please explain to me why in the last two weeks, baring premiums, the German destroyers are some of the least played destroyers in every single tier but the lowest one? Go on, take your time. I'll wait.

[dasCKD]

The destroyers are fine.

 

Is it really fine when, at certain ranges, even the tiny 127 mm guns of the USN ships outperforms the 150 mm guns on the KM despite the latter being an AP focused line? The penetration of the general guns don't even intersect until about 6 kilometers out. I also picked a ship with notoriously poor armor for my experiment so you would think that the AP focused destroyer line would AT LEAST be able to keep up with their counterparts.

[mtm78]

Montana could use some love, I hear that a lot. Not saying btw that Hindenburg is weak, it's not. i kinda like it even. But Minotaur ---> Fiji and arguably even Leander are doing fine statistically and I don't think they 'need' HE. 

[Exocet6951]

I can't talk for the DDs, but I have no complaints about AP performance on CA/CLs

Especially not on the 203mm, which always feel on point.

 

I even took the Konigsberg for a stroll on the test server, as it had been a long time since I had not played it, and not only was I pleasantly surprised to see her guns doing full 360 rotations, allowing for amazing combat maneuvering while still firing, but the guns felt as good, if not better than what I had remembered.

[mtm78]

You notice it mostly on Roon and Hind, where at range the shells lose pen really really fast.

[creamgravy]

 

Is it really fine when, at certain ranges, even the tiny 127 mm guns of the USN ships outperforms the 150 mm guns on the KM despite the latter being an AP focused line? The penetration of the general guns don't even intersect until about 6 kilometers out. I also picked a ship with notoriously poor armor for my experiment so you would think that the AP focused destroyer line would AT LEAST be able to keep up with their counterparts.

 

Do you really what to get within 5km of a high tier cruiser, pray they show a flat broadside and not shoot you? Real world difference is tiny.

128mm destroyer AP has a 21mm fuse, it's best used for penetrating superstructure and hull plating. Try spamming AP agasint broadside battleship superstructure at 10km. 

 

Larger, slower reloading KM guns are harder to use. They can be very frustrating, especially on the Hipper but 128mm KM DD AP is sweet 

[dasCKD]

Do you really what to get within 5km of a high tier cruiser, pray they show a flat broadside and not shoot you? Real world difference is tiny.

 

Firstly, it's a matter of line balance. The KM DDs really only have their Hydroacoustics going for them. At present, they are not the best at anything else. Second, it's not rare to encounter a cruiser at close ranges at maps like shatter at which point I can drop smoke. Third, the ability to score citadel hits is mostly for demonstrative purposes. The KM destroyers will quite obviously perform worse against most armor layouts than their USN counterparts at ranges where a destroyer would choose to use AP and they will definitely perform worse than the SN destroyers.

 

Hipper was one of the ships I liked. Her AP is fine at tier 8, but not at tier 10. I only find the Hindenburg and Roon to be acceptable ships thanks to the pure volume of fire that they put out. I would still prefer performance of at least what the Zao has though. I tried out the training room performance. At minimum ranges, a Zao has little issue penetrating the citadels of both the Yamato and the Montana often scoring 4 or 5 citadel hits in one salvo. With the Hindenburg though, the only success I ever had with her was firing from 1.4 kilometers down into the citadel where presumably it punched through a weakness in the armor. I think that this fact alone is enough to consider improving the KM's 203 AP at the top tiers.

[Unintentional_submarine]

The destroyers are fine.

 

Look at those wonderful damage figures when the shells don't hit belt armour. Always aim for centre mass/superstructure over trying for citadels 

 

 

 

Given the Armada video about Leberecht Maass from WGSEA, it is confirmed that that table is significantly overstating the power of the German 128mm AP. 80mm at 5km and 41mm at 10km is about 80% and ~65% of the values on that table respectably.

Not a dig at fnord_disc who has done exemplary work, trying to give us just the slightest understanding of the penetration power of shells.

[NameChangingIsToExpensiv]

 

Given the Armada video about Leberecht Maass from WGSEA, it is confirmed that that table is significantly overstating the power of the German 128mm AP. 80mm at 5km and 41mm at 10km is about 80% and ~65% of the values on that table respectably.

Not a dig at fnord_disc who has done exemplary work, trying to give us just the slightest understanding of the penetration power of shells.

 

Yes, but the 128mm Guns in this chart are the ones from the T9 and T10. I think the T9 and T10 ships have better 128mm guns.

Edit: I looked it up and Shell weight + Muzzle velocity is the same on both guns. So im not sure.

[Unintentional_submarine]

 

Yes, but the 128mm Guns in this chart are the ones from the T9 and T10. I think the T9 and T10 ships have better 128mm guns.

Edit: I looked it up and Shell weight + Muzzle velocity is the same on both guns. So im not sure.

 

Considering the lack of citadels, it wouldn't surprise me if both of the top DDs have guns of similar power, or lack thereof.

 

At present it seems that it is the drag factor that is causing the discrepancy.

[creamgravy]

I think that's for tier 9-10 LC/41 guns? The curves are a bit rough but they give a good indication of how to use the AP.

 

Don't try and citadel cruisers at 5km, use it against broadside superstructure/hulls at 8-12km.

 

How much damage can a DD do to a broadside Yamato in 60 seconds, with AP at 9.3km?

 

Result.

 

Destroyer	Damage
Z46	39265
Fletcher	29215
Tashkent	29577

 

Look at that sweet, sweet KM AP damage.