Bismarck Range

[Killasushi]

Hi guys,

i recently got the Bismarck and im totally hyped. But my hype kinda vanished because i just cant seem to get the 10.6 KM range on its secondaries. All the Guides and Videos i saw only talk about the captain skills, which i got. I also got the Hull upgrade and Flags. But still it is at 8.6 KM range in game. Can some1 tell me what is wrong with me or my ship?

[Hardocky]

Buy Secondary Battery Modification 2 in the upgrades for your ship, your capitaine must have all the skills for secondaries (Basic Firing Training, Advanced Firing Training and Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament) + the flag or course

[Phlogistoned]

You forgot either the skill 'Advanced Firing Training', or the secondary equipment module.

[Killasushi]

Omg yes the Modules, thank u guys.

feeling stupid now^^

[Phlogistoned]

NP. We're all beginners at some point.

 

Personally, I wish I understood which questions to ask now. As it is, I probably fumble around in the darkness because I don't even know what I'm missing.

[DaOrange]

10.6 km on secondaries sounds nice but me myself im preffering the upgrade for less dispersion on my main batteries. After all your most damage output comes from your main batteries. That way I can  reliably hit enemy ships 20 km away..and hit hard...and still having 9.3 km range on my secondaries (with flags and 17 points captain).

[Devantejah]

10.6 km on secondaries sounds nice but me myself im preffering the upgrade for less dispersion on my main batteries. After all your most damage output comes from your main batteries. That way I can  reliably hit enemy ships 20 km away..and hit hard...and still having 9.3 km range on my secondaries (with flags and 17 points captain).

 

7% less dispersion will not make that extreme of a difference, while it sounds nice it's better to just get closer.

[Vaderan]

The dispersion upgrade on Bismarck is a comparable bad choice, since this BB just "demands" a secondary build. Just do the maths by yourself: the upgrade reduces main battery dispersion by 7%, if i remember right. I don´t know the dispersion numbers on the Bismarck, but they are huge anyway, something around 250+ metres? Per shell? A 7% reduction of this RNG-lottery is a "nice to have", if you have no real other choice. German BBs, including Bismarck, still suck horribly even at ranges below 12km, because RNG loves to screw you up. Combined with the pretty bad overall performance of the Bismarcks 38,1cm shells, a tough secondary battery on Bismarck is a way better choice for reliable damage, especially when facing smaller targets.

 

Don´t get me wrong. The dispersion reduction upgrade is the upgrade of choice on allmost any other BB, but on Bismarck, it isn´t.

[Donar79]

The dispersion upgrade on Bismarck is a comparable bad choice, since this BB just "demands" a secondary build. Just do the maths by yourself: the upgrade reduces main battery dispersion by 7%, if i remember right. I don´t know the dispersion numbers on the Bismarck, but they are huge anyway, something around 250+ metres? Per shell? A 7% reduction of this RNG-lottery is a "nice to have", if you have no real other choice. German BBs, including Bismarck, still suck horribly even at ranges below 12km, because RNG loves to screw you up. Combined with the pretty bad overall performance of the Bismarcks 38,1cm shells, a tough secondary battery on Bismarck is a way better choice for reliable damage, especially when facing smaller targets.

 

Don´t get me wrong. The dispersion reduction upgrade is the upgrade of choice on allmost any other BB, but on Bismarck, it isn´t.

 

This! There are different options for Captn skills but i think the Dispersion Module isn't worth it.

 

In some battles i feel like Bismarck range should be decreased to 16km seein these MaxRangeSnipinPros

[DaOrange]

The dispersion upgrade on Bismarck is a comparable bad choice, since this BB just "demands" a secondary build. Just do the maths by yourself: the upgrade reduces main battery dispersion by 7%, if i remember right. I don´t know the dispersion numbers on the Bismarck, but they are huge anyway, something around 250+ metres? Per shell? A 7% reduction of this RNG-lottery is a "nice to have", if you have no real other choice. German BBs, including Bismarck, still suck horribly even at ranges below 12km, because RNG loves to screw you up. Combined with the pretty bad overall performance of the Bismarcks 38,1cm shells, a tough secondary battery on Bismarck is a way better choice for reliable damage, especially when facing smaller targets.

 

Don´t get me wrong. The dispersion reduction upgrade is the upgrade of choice on allmost any other BB, but on Bismarck, it isn´t.

 

If I want reliable damage output on a BB then I still mainly trust on my main gun skills. If you do an 100.000 damage match then probably 90% comes from your main guns. Secondaries, even on the Bismarck, are a bit overrated imo speaking of pure damage output. Also with 9.3km on the secondaries less shells will miss their target then with 10.6km.

[Schmudla]

Also with 9.3km on the secondaries less shells will miss their target then with 10.6km.

 

that is where manual control of secondary baterries come to help

(i have tirpitz and konig for now, my plan si to build full sec bismarck just for fun (and i have to have this ship in my port, iconic ship of my youth ... , german BB are brawlers, you have to fight at close range otherwise your turtle armor is almost useless, in tirptitz my best fights are from 8 to 12km  (and under 5km where torps are functional), in bismarck i will go for 6-10km range, hydro will help against torps i hope ...

i admit that you sacrifice some main battery dmg, but that feeling when you see all of those secondary tracers flying to enemy CL 10km away and hitting ...

 

[Vaderan]

 

If I want reliable damage output on a BB then I still mainly trust on my main gun skills. If you do an 100.000 damage match then probably 90% comes from your main guns. Secondaries, even on the Bismarck, are a bit overrated imo speaking of pure damage output. Also with 9.3km on the secondaries less shells will miss their target then with 10.6km.

 

I play my Bismarck as a brawler. As a such, i want my secondaries to engage my target as soon as possible. The secondary upgrade doesn´t just give me 20% more range on my secondaries, but 20% reduced dispersion on it aswell. In combination with manual secondaries, this is quiet a buff for my close combat fighting power. It is probably the best choice to have a sufficient, reliable area denial effect on your BB, something which especially DDs really don´t like to see/experience.

BB main armament is unreliable as hell, and Bismarcks shotgun dispersion isn´t brough anywhere near where i would call it "adequate" in terms of accuracy, no matter if you take that -7% dispersion upgrade or not.

I don´t want to go into deeper mathematics, but sticking with your 100000 DMG example, just to have some simple numbers, i would like to come up with a small calculation: with an average hitratio on BB guns between 20-30% (which just means "hitting the target"), 70-80% of your shots miss. Those 100k damage result out of overpens, regular pens, and citadells, which means, you might have fired shells worth something around 1000000+ potential damage, if not more. 93.000 might have come around without that upgrade anyway, if we want to stick with those numbers. Those are basically ~5 Overpens or 2 regular pens, not even a regular citadell.

On the other hand, i have a +20% accuracy and an additional ~1km range to 14 small calibre guns on each broadside, spamming HE with a rate of up to, what is it? Every three seconds regarding the 105mm´s?

If those cause just 1-2 fires on my target, i might already have those 7000 dmg done aswell, triggered a repair cooldown and so on.

 

But i don´t want to argue with you. Stick with your -7% upgrade and be fine. If it works for you (or even makes you feel better at engaging with Bismarck on long range) do as you wish.

I had ridiculous rounds with my Bismarck, especially in brawling situations. In those, reliable secondaries are all that matter, and the damage from HE and fire is nothing to be neglected...

[trrprrprr]

There is no point for dispersion reduce as every shot has to be touched by RNGesus. YOu prolly have seen that one out of 20 salvos will have atleast 4shells flying right one by one while other spread out and all other salvos just randomly take a flight path.

 

Secondaries are very nice - even more if you chase down some other BB that cant show you the side to activate most of secondaries  next ill take is IFHE to make it a bit better

[trrprrprr]

 

If I want reliable damage output on a BB then I still mainly trust on my main gun skills. If you do an 100.000 damage match then probably 90% comes from your main guns. Secondaries, even on the Bismarck, are a bit overrated imo speaking of pure damage output. Also with 9.3km on the secondaries less shells will miss their target then with 10.6km.

 

in a 8-10km fights secondaries have helped alot - those games where i have a chance to properly use secondaries bring me ~40-50k dmg from them - where bigger part is from fires. When you chase down other BB, you are able to have a pretty decent angle to bounce runners shots while use all your secondaries to rain on him...your imaginary 7% reduced dispersion wont do much, but fires you make from machineguns will help you greatly. And they are very helpfull with sneaky DDs, it takes few secondary shot to land and DD will turn away - cos every of those tiny shots are able to damage engine/steering/light up a DD in moments...so you have time to turn away from torps launched and still be able to rain shells on that dd in 10.6km range.

 

 

[MeTaLMooSe]

Yeah, Bismarck is ALL about those secondaries and it's hydro ability. There are plenty of other battleships to give you main battery satisfaction.

But that Bis gameplay makes her such a fun beast to play I think you're missing out if you don't.

[DaOrange]

true, I'm a sniper in heart but of course I took on quite some brawling in my Bismarck, doing more then 200 secondary hits etc while using manual secondaries...but still found the damage output from those secondaries below my expectations...and certainly not close to 40 - 50k

 

I can punish hard with the 380mm shells even on long ranges while other people tend to complain about the innacurate guns with their secondary builts. I agree it's all on playstyle and preferences. I'm quite cautious and not tend to push in right at te beginning. I have seen many Bismarcks vanish into the deep like that getting shot and torped from all sides after like 2-3 minutes 

 

 

So..an 'semi' secondary built with 'only' 9.3km range is sufficient for me

[MeTaLMooSe]

It's not so much the actual damage accrued. It's the threat of the potential damage the enemy fear. That unrelenting hail storm of HE that chips away. The fires, the damage control that can't cope.

If you are a destroyer then it's outright damage.

I think Bismarck's secondaries give a huge psychological advantage and most enemies will try and stay out of the kill zone.

So don't rely on them for a huge addition to your damage but as that weapon of fear.

A Bismarck without its full secondaries is like a shark that's lost its teeth.

[Comrad_StaIin]

i dont take that shitty disperision upgrade on any ship as it doesnt make a difference at all

bettet take AA or secondary mod

[Valqyrie]

Main armament mod can come handy but this ship is good for up-close engagements where dispersion doesn't bother you as much as when you try to snipe. Secondary all the way up to tier 10. At tier 10 you might actually want to get that main battery mod or AA mod since it's way too hard to get in 10km range before a DD nukes you for half of your HP.

[caferaca]

+1 for bismarck secondary build. This is easily the most fun BB I've played. The panic it causes is hilarious. DD's run into islands, cruisers show broadside trying to excape ( which you punish under 10km). If you are top tier it yolo o'clock

 

[Jaylah]

Thx for the discussion guys. I wil unlock the Bismarck soon and was wondering if I shoud og for main gun upgrade for the dispersion reduction or for the secondary battery modification. Im like to browl, but prefer to stay at around 12km distance to targets in a BB. With Bismarck I wil end up playing many tier 10 games and going up close to be able to use secondaries is frightning me a little. I see secondaries comming into play at the later stage of the battle.  

 

[Widar_Thule]

The only thing that can answer the questions on the usefulness of the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" and the "Aiming Systems Modification 1" is testing, testing, testing. And that is what I have done in the form of dozens of tests in the training room and to a lesser degree in regular matches, since the results of regular matches do not always lend themselves for objective evaluation unlike the controlled condition tests in the training room.

 

The results of dozens of tests under controlled conditions are:

 

1. With the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" your secondary and tertiary armament hits more BUT it keeps hitting the same spot in the center of the enemy ship and due to that they actually do less damage OVER TIME. Once this center is already on fire or destroyed not much more damage can be done there. That means that OVER TIME less damage is actually done with this commander skill due to the same spot being hit over and over again. Without this skill the secondary and tertiary batteries fire all over the place, they miss a lot but they also hit the enemy ship from bow to stern, meaning they eventually will start fires from bow to stern which will do more damage over time. In training room tests with battleship "Tirpitz" using only her secondary and tertiary armament against an AI controlled "Yamato", the "Yamato" sinks in half the time WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" than with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament". So the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" skill actually does less damage to the enemy and weakens your ship. This was also tested with battleship "Tirpitz" using only her secondary and tertiary armament against both moving and stationary "Shimakazes" and the result was the same. Due to the wild scattering of the more inaccurate secondary and tertiary armament WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" the "Tirpitz" actually does more damage OVER TIME and starts more fires WITHOUT this skill than with it. If you do not believe it, do some tests in the training room yourself, be sure to put the AI in a mode where they do not fire back and do not use your main guns only the AI controlled secondary and tertiary armament. Next to that what is even worse, is that a commander with the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" skill will have his ship only fire on ONE target and only if it is manually targeted/selected by the player. So a "Tirpitz" without this skill will have all her secondary and tertiary armament (3x2 to port and 3x2 to starboard 15cm and 4x2 to port and 4x2 to starboard 10.5 cm) firing on the enemy while a "Tirpitz" with this skill will have only HALF her secondary and tertiary armament firing on the enemy (3x2 15 cm and 4x2 10.5 cm). So the skill actually effectively cuts the effective secondary and tertiary armament in half, which is a serious reduction in firepower when in short range combat with more than one enemy ship to port and starboard.

 

2. The "Aiming Systems Modification 1" in many, many tests with "Tirpitz" in the training room against all targets types (battleships, cruisers, destroyers" actually yields about 10 percent more main gun battery hits at all ranges (short range < 15 km, longer range >15 km). So for example without this "Aiming Systems Modification 1" module with an accuracy of 20 percent with your main guns you would get 20 hits if you fire 100 main gun rounds. With this"Aiming Systems Modification 1" module you would get 22 hits if you fire 100 main gun rounds, so that means 22 percent accuracy and that translates into 2 main gun battery hits more than without the skill.

 

Conclusions

In my opinion you are better off with the module "Secondary Battery Modification 2" which improves your secondary armament "accuracy and range by 20 percent" or the "AAA Guns Modification 2" module which improves your Anti Aircraft Artillery (AAA) "range by 20 percent". Improving the range is what counts in my opinion, the earlier your secondary, tertiary and AAA armament start to do damage the more effective your ship is. As to the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill it is really not worth it since it simply weakens your ship both in inflicted damage over time and by halving the secondary and tertiary armament which actually fires on the enemy, not to mention the extra  manual input action needed from the player to select an enemy ship as target for the secondary and tertiary armament for it to work in the first place.

 

The combination of  "Direction Center for Catapult Aircraft ",  "Adrenaline Rush ", "Basic Firing Training ", "Advanced Firing Training ", "Manual Fire Control for AAA Armament" commander skills together with the "AAA Guns Modification 2" module for "Tirpitz" is more useful for me. Only launch the two catapult fighters just before the torpedo bombers come in for their attack, always turn towards incoming torpedo bombers and go in full reverse just before they drop their torpedoes and only use your Damage Control Party until after all dive and torpedo bomber flights have executed their attack. That setup and tactic for example lets me regularly shoot down 30 to 40 aircraft (that is about 30-40 percent of the total number of aircraft aboard most carriers in WOWS) if a carrier decides to all out attack me in "Tirpitz". Usually the only times this fails is when a tier 9-10 Japanese or Saipan carrier commander who is an expert at using torpedo bombers focuses on me, then I only shoot down about 10 to 15 at best. Expert Saipan or Japanese Tier 9-10 carrier commanders can always sink "Tirpitz" in one attack with their torpedo bombers, but at least you will shoot down more aircraft with such an AAA setup in "Tirpitz" than without it. If there are two Japanese or Saipan expert carrier commanders focusing on you in "Tirpitz" then nothing will help you survive their combined torpedo bomber attack anyway, but that does not happen often fortunately. One important thing to remember is that if your commander has the "Manual Fire Control for AAA Armament" skill, your ship will still fire all her AAA even if you forget to manually select an enemy aircraft flight (but then without the 100 percent extra effectiveness), whereas with the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill your ship will NOT fire her secondary and tertiary armament AT ALL if you forget to select a target for them!

 

TLDNR: Do not use "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" and do not use "Aiming Systems Modification 1", other commander skills and modules offer your ship better damage output potential based on extensive testing. As a general rule of thumb, any commander skill or module which does not give you at least a +20% bonus has no significant impact in a match.

 

[Jaylah]

Thx for information Widar_Thule. What you are writing about "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" makes sense. I was wondering how dmg dealt OVER TIME translates to random battles. I mean how long are you with in range of a enemy ship where you can use your secondaries? 1 min maybe in close encounter?

[RUSSIANBlAS]

The only thing that can answer the questions on the usefulness of the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" and the "Gun Fire Control System Modification 1" is testing, testing, testing. And that is what I have done in the form of dozens of tests in the training room and to a lesser degree in regular matches, since the results of regular matches do not always lend themselves for objective evaluation unlike the controlled condition tests in the training room.

 

The results of dozens of tests under controlled conditions are:

 

1. With the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" your secondary and tertiary armament hits more BUT it keeps hitting the same spot in the center of the enemy ship and due to that they actually do less damage OVER TIME. Once this center is already on fire or destroyed not much more damage can be done there. That means that OVER TIME less damage is actually done with this commander skill due to the same spot being hit over and over again. Without this skill the secondary and tertiary batteries fire all over the place, they miss a lot but they also hit the enemy ship from bow to stern, meaning they eventually will start fires from bow to stern which will do more damage over time. In training room tests with battleship "Tirpitz" using only her secondary and tertiary armament against an AI controlled "Yamato", the "Yamato" sinks in half the time WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" than with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament". So the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" skill actually does less damage to the enemy and weakens your ship. This was also tested with battleship "Tirpitz" using only her secondary and tertiary armament against both moving and stationary "Shimakazes" and the result was the same. Due to the wild scattering of the more inaccurate secondary and tertiary armament WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" the "Tirpitz" actually does more damage OVER TIME and starts more fires WITHOUT this skill than with it. If you do not believe it, do some tests in the training room yourself, be sure to put the AI in a mode where they do not fire back and do not use your main guns only the AI controlled secondary and tertiary armament. Next to that what is even worse, is that a commander with the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" skill will have his ship only fire on ONE target and only if it is manually targeted/selected by the player. So a "Tirpitz" without this skill will have all her secondary and tertiary armament (3x2 to port and 3x2 to starboard 15cm and 4x2 to port and 4x2 to starboard 10.5 cm) firing on the enemy while a "Tirpitz" with this skill will have only HALF her secondary and tertiary armament firing on the enemy (3x2 15 cm and 4x2 10.5 cm). So the skill actually effectively cuts the effective secondary and tertiary armament in half, which is a serious reduction in firepower when in short range combat with more than one enemy ship to port and starboard.

 

2. The "Gun Fire Control System Modification 1" in many, many tests with "Tirpitz" in the training room against all targets types (battleships, cruisers, destroyers" actually yields about 10 percent more main gun battery hits at all ranges (short range < 15 km, longer range >15 km). So for example without this "Gun Fire Control System Modification 1" module with an accuracy of 20 percent with your main guns you would get 20 hits if you fire 100 main gun rounds. With this "Gun Fire Control System Modification 1" module you would get 22 hits if you fire 100 main gun rounds, so that means 22 percent accuracy and that translates into 2 main gun battery hits more than without the skill.

 

Conclusions

In my opinion you are better off with the module "Secondary Battery Modification 2" which improves your secondary armament "accuracy and range by 20 percent" or the "AAA Modification 2" module which improves your Anti Aircraft Artillery (AAA) "range by 20 percent". Improving the range is what counts in my opinion, the earlier your secondary, tertiary and AAA armament start to do damage the more effective your ship is. As to the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill it is really not worth it since it simply weakens your ship both in inflicted damage over time and by halving the secondary and tertiary armament which actually fires on the enemy, not to mention the extra  manual input action needed from the player to select an enemy ship as target for the secondary and tertiary armament for it to work in the first place.

 

The combination of  "Direction Center for Catapult Aircraft ",  "Adrenaline Rush ", "Basic Firing Training ", "Advanced Firing Training ", "Manual Fire Control for AAA Armament" commander skills together with the "AAA Modification 2" module for "Tirpitz" is more useful for me. Only launch the two catapult fighters just before the torpedo bombers come in for their attack, always turn towards incoming torpedo bombers and go in full reverse just before they drop their torpedoes and only use your Damage Control Party until after all dive and torpedo bomber flights have executed their attack. That setup and tactic for example lets me regularly shoot down 30 to 40 aircraft (that is about 30-40 percent of the total number of aircraft aboard most carriers in WOWS) if a carrier decides to all out attack me in "Tirpitz". Usually the only times this fails is when a tier 9-10 Japanese or Saipan carrier commander who is an expert at using torpedo bombers focuses on me, then I only shoot down about 10 to 15 at best. Expert Saipan or Japanese Tier 9-10 carrier commanders can always sink "Tirpitz" in one attack with their torpedo bombers, but at least you will shoot down more aircraft with such an AAA setup in "Tirpitz" than without it. If there are two Japanese or Saipan expert carrier commanders focusing on you in "Tirpitz" then nothing will help you survive their combined torpedo bomber attack anyway, but that does not happen often fortunately. One important thing to remember is that if your commander has the "Manual Fire Control for AAA Armament" skill, your ship will still fire all her AAA even if you forget to manually select an enemy aircraft flight (but then without the 100 percent extra effectiveness), whereas with the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill your ship will NOT fire her secondary and tertiary armament AT ALL if you forget to select a target for them!

 

TLDR: Do not use "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" and do not use "Gun Fire Control System Modification 1", other commander skills and modules offer your ship better damage output potential based on extensive testing. As a general rule of thumb, any commander skill or module which does not give you at least a +20% bonus has no significant impact in a match.

 

 

I can't agree that not taking Manual Secondaries is the better choice.

 

Sometimes you don't have time for a prolonged battle and you need faster fires and damage. Also your allies might be helping you with HE and torps.

 

Also sometimes to help your secondaries along you could fire a HE salvo and ignite the enemy just before your secondaries are in range. I do that in the Scharn a lot as her AP sucks at range anyway so you might as well try to stack fires long range then go AP close up where your secondaries will continue the burn.

[Widar_Thule]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Meaning only testing done in a controlled environment with constant reproducible results are conclusive, not opinions or what one "feels" to be the case.

 

Quite simple, based on extensive testing done in "Tirpitz" both with and without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" my conclusion is that WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" you get hits all over the enemy ship from bow to stern, with fires being started and hits being registered from bow to stern. With "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" you get more hits on the enemy ship but you inflict less direct HE and fire damage in return because the same central sector of the enemy ship keeps getting hit over and over again. I did dozens of tests with "Tirpitz" against "Yamatos" and "Shimakazes" for example from version 5.5 and upwards over a period of several months, and the result was always the same: "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" always does less damage than is inflicted without it. It does not matter if the damage is done over 1 minute or over 3 minutes. If you do not believe me, test it yourself in the training room. But do not do 1 or 2 tests, do at least a dozen or so. I even tested about a dozen+ times against both stationary and moving "Yamatos" and "Shimakazes" to see if "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" would be more effective against a fast moving and turning destroyer than against a slow moving and turning battleship. But the result was the same, every single time, more total direct HE and fire damage is done WITHOUT "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament".

 

Now to be sure, I at first could not believe that "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" was actually a downgrade, so that is why I kept testing it. I reset my - then - 18 point (now 19 point) "Tirpitz" commander several times with gold doubloons to do these and other tests.

 

To be sure for many months, I used "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" on my then 18 point "Tirpitz" commander, but I no longer do because the skill is simply not worth it, the skill is in actuality a downgrade.

 

Some conclusions based on testing with "Tirpitz":

 

- with the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill "Tirpitz"  has about 15-30+% more effective accuracy than without it, depending on the target type and its movement

 

- 25% hit rate without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus stationary Yamato (baseline)
- about 27% hit rate without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus moving Yamato (baseline)

- 54% hit rate with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus stationary Yamato (about +29% than without it)
- 60% hit rate with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus moving Yamato (about +33% than without it)

- about 13% hit rate without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus stationary Shimakaze (baseline)
- about 14% hit rate without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus moving Shimakaze (baseline)

- 28% hit rate with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus stationary Shimakaze (about +15% than without it)
- 39% hit rate with "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" commander skill versus moving Shimakaze (about +25% than without it)

- with the "Secondary Battery Modification 2" module "Tirpitz" has about 5-13% more effective accuracy than without it, depending on the target type and its movement

- about 36% hit rate with"Secondary Battery Modification 2" module versus stationary Yamato (about +11% than without it)
- about 40% hit rate with "Secondary Battery Modification 2" module versus moving Yamato (about +13% than without it)

- about 18% hit rate with "Secondary Battery Modification 2" module versus stationary Shimakaze (about +5% than without it)
- about. 26% hit rate with "Secondary Battery Modification 2" module versus moving Shimakaze (about +12% than without it)

 

But as I said, the accuracy is NOT what counts, what counts instead is the actual damage inflicted both through direct HE damage and more importantly through fires. Since "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" keeps hitting the center of the enemy ship it does less direct HE damage and starts less fires. Without "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" more HE damage is done from bow to stern and more fires are started on enemy ships from bow to stern. Unless WOWS drastically quietly improved the "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" skill in the past few months, then it really is not worth it.