Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Allied_Winter

Copy from the NA thread: The science behind detonation (part one)

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

Hello fellow captains!

 

 

LittleWhiteMouse from the NA server conducted extensive research to find out the theoretical basis of the detonation mechanic in game. All credit belongs to LittleWhiteMouse, so if you have a NA account, drop by there and share a +1 or something usefull in the ongoing discussion.

 

I know the topic detonation runs hot in this community, but I hope we can keep our cool! This is not about why detonations are in the game at all, but the mechanics that are behind it.

 

There you go:

 

 

So in last week's installment of the regular crop of detonation threads, I was inspired to try and really wrap my brain around how detonations worked in game and to see if I could exert a measure of control upon them within regular game play.  Thanks to various Q&A sessions with Sub_Octavian, I have a reasonable grasp of detonation mechanics.  But it wasn't the theoretical that I was interested in.  Instead, I wanted to see how often I could cause them, if I could do so easily and if I could teach others to do the same.  Now, I'm nowhere close to being finished.  I think if I could describe this project's current state, "almost ready to seriously start beginning to prepare for the task".  There's a lot still to do and it shocks me at the scale of what this undertaking entails.

 

Early Lessons

The first lesson that was really hammered home to me is how little I understood about internal layout of the ship's ammunition lockers in game.  Here's just a short list of some of my misconceptions.

 

  • Misconception #1:  All magazines are inside the ship's citadel.

This one shouldn't have surprised me, but it did.  Destroyers don't have citadels, so it makes sense that their ammunition wouldn't be stored in one.  But what did catch me off guard was that various light cruisers also kept their ammunition in separate storage lockers well removed from the citadel itself.  Some are even stored in the bow and stern sections, meaning it's possible to fully saturate the area of a given ship with shells, landing zero-damage hits and still hit the ship's magazine and cause a detonation.  Battleships seem to largely follow the rule of keeping their blowy-up stuff inside their citadels, though.

What does this mean for Game Play?   It means that lining up the perfect shot against some ships to do the maximum amount of damage isn't necessarily going to give you the best chance of detonating someone.  In fact, in many engagements, it will be downright to your detriment to attempt to set off their magazine when you could score reliable, heavier damage on the ship's citadel.  Inversely, it also means hits that seem like they shouldn't matter can be catastrophic as it touches off your ammunition stores.

 

2881aww.png

Tier 4 IJN Light Cruiser, Kuma, showing her magazines (in red) separate from her citadel (in yellow).  Strikes against her magazines will not register in game as citadel damage.

 

  • Misconception #2:  All magazines are well protected and are typically located well beneath the waterline to keep them safe.

So if the shells and powder aren't always stored in the citadel, how well protected are they?  Well, first the real shocker:  A lot of ships of all types (destroyers, cruisers and battleships) have magazines that sit in part over the waterline.  And while there may be substantial bits of armour around (most) battleship magazines, it shouldn't surprise anyone to learn that some cruisers have nothing more than the structural metal of their bows and sterns to keep it safe -- as little as 10mm in some cases.  What this means is that on a per-ship basis, the level at which magazines are exposed to enemy fire differs.

What does this mean for Game Play?  All ships are not created equal.  Certain ships have much more vulnerable magazines than others.  We have to dismiss the simplistic view that detonations rates between classes within the same type are going to be similar.  Destroyers may seem to detonate more than cruisers or battleships, but even within that type, some destroyers will be more vulnerable to magazine hits than others -- often to a significant degree.  Players that gain this knowledge and put it to use will make themselves less prone to catastrophic damage while being able to pull off some seemingly impossible results.

 

25tyj4o.png

Top down view of the tier 6 Battleships with magazines that extend over the water's surface highlighted in red.   Imagine is not to scale. 

Left side:  Fuso, Mutsu, New Mexico.  Right side: Arizona, Dunkerque, Bayern.  Bottom:  Warspite.
 

  • Misconception #3:  Magazines are very small targets relative to the size of the ship.

I thought most ammunition and powder magazines were about the size of one of the ship's turrets and tucked snuggly down behind the base of the barbettes closer towards the ship's center.  To hear people go on about how difficult a shot it would be to hit them reliably, you can imagine my surprise to see the variety out there.  Some ships do have tiny magazines.  Others have magazines that span a third of the length of the ship (or more!).  It's no wonder certain ships seem to pop like overripe zits when you tickle them with even small caliber HE fire on their extremities. 

What does this mean for Game Play?  Landing reliable hits against a ship's magazine isn't an impossibility -- in fact, against certain ships it can be downright laughable.  High Explosive fire with its burst radius makes this even simpler.  Generally speaking, any high explosive shell landing on the rear deck is likely to damage any above-water magazines of Gremyashchy, for example.

 

m7s5fl.png

Top down view of the tier 7 destroyers showing the differences in magazines sizes.  Of the ship's total length, some of these ships have magazine spaces that account for 1/4 of the total.  Large magazine sizes seem to be a typical design feature of Soviet and Russian destroyers.
Left side:  Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Mahan, Sims.  Right side:  Maass, Minsk, Leningrad, Blyskawica

 

  • Misconception #4:  Ships within the same class have the exact same magazine layout.

Again, I don't know why I thought differently, but when a ship gets upgraded from Hull A to B or C, it's entirely possible that the location of the magazines can shift, even if it's just raising and lowering the waterline.  What may have been an exposed, vulnerable magazine on the stock hull might be one of the most difficult shots to land on the fully upgraded version of the ship.  This also means that premiums based around a ship-class might have different layouts and levels of protection as well.

 

What does this mean for Game Play?  There are variations to magazine layouts between ships, even within the same class.  There is a lot memorization when it comes to learning where the different magazines are and which ships are more vulnerable to detonations.

 

iodk4y.png

Rear magazine of Omaha (A-Hull) on the left and the completely submersed rear magazine of Marblehead on the right. 

 

38% of the time it works everytime

I took these lessons to heart and decided to start my preliminary work just seeing if i could cause detonations with any form of regularity.  There are two levels of RNG at work where detonations are concerned and I wanted to minimize their influence as best I could.  The first step was to minimize the chances that my shots would deviate from the target.  This was easy enough to solve -- just park myself within 3km of unmoving bots in the Training Room.  The second was a little more difficult to isolate but I'm rather proud of the solution I came up with.  I found a way to mathematically guarantee that I could detonate a target 100% of the time:  Find a target to shoot at with magazines located in the bow or stern section of the ship where damage saturation would prevent the ship from sinking from direct damage alone.  There would be one catch to this, though.

 

I selected Omaha, the tier 5 USN Light Cruiser as my target of choice.  The A and B Hull Omaha have forward magazines located above the waterline, beneath the #1 turret.  This is a rather easy target to hit, even up to ranges of 10km.  The C-Hull Omaha also has her magazines in the same location, but because she rides lower in the water, they're fully submerged.  These magazines are not a part of the ship's citadel.  As my chariot, I picked my Atlanta.  The reason was simple:  She has a great rate of fire.  In theory, this would give me more bites of the apple, as it were, when it came to stacking damage quickly against the Omaha's magazines.

 

I was immediately rewarded by detonations -- and a lot of them.  After hundreds upon hundreds of bots murdered and thousands of shells fired, I'm at a 38% detonation rate.  This may seem a far cry from the 100% I was boasting earlier, but high explosive shells have this unfortunate habit of setting the Omaha bots on fire, y'see, so those 62% that survived horrendous explosions were casualties of the fires set, not direct damage done.  However, this test is repeatable.  With a player sitting in the Omaha managing the Damage Control Party consumable, it's entirely possible to keep the ship alive indefinitely until the magazine cooks off.

 

I took this a step further by trying some one on one duels with active and armed bots in the Atlanta.  I set them off with the same reliability -- peppering their bows while they manoeuvred and shot back, dodging their torpedoes.  While they put out the first fire I would set and in theory should have prompted more detonations, this was offset by the gunnery challenges of hitting a not-really evasive target underway and at further ranges.

 

What does this mean for Game Play?  The only thing this proves is that if you hit a magazine often enough and the enemy can survive taking the damage, detonations are inevitable -- which may not seem like much of a discovery, but it's an important one.  Detonations would be far more commonplace if ships had more hit points and it makes me wonder if statistically, for example, Khabarovsk with her Repair Party has a higher rate of detonation than a Khabarovsk that runs without it.  Oh, the things I would do if I could pull down the server statistics from Wargaming...

 

Even more Questions

As usual, whenever I start looking into game mechanics, I end up with more questions than answers.  Before I move onto the next step, I need to sit down and try and get these figured out to isolate testing results.

 

  • The first is simple enough:  We know that as a magazine takes damage, the chance to detonate increases.  This value never reaches 100%, even when the magazine's health is fully depleted.  The big question is what is this upper maximum?  Is it the same for all ships?  Is it balanced by tier / upgrade status like Fire Resistance Coefficients?  Do different ships have different maximums?  Is it possible, even, that different magazines have different maximums within the same ship?
  • Do separate magazines share hit points as one big communal pool or does each magazine have its own HP pool?
  • How module is damage calculated -- how much damage does an individual shell do to a component?  Is it fixed to the shell damage we see in port or is there some other equation at work? 
  • Is it better to hit modules with a single large alpha strike or does chipping at it with a series of smaller, rapid fire hits give a better overall chance?
  • Does overpenetration damage affect modules or are they ignored?  I've been unable to set off an Omaha's magazine with overpenetrations thus far with my Atlanta, so I'm inclined to believe they cannot.
  • Can the blast radius of HE shells seems to be able to set off magazines? How big are these radii on given shells?  Gamesmodels3D.com (from which I gathered those nice screenshots) lists Atlanta's as "0.38" while Warspite and Hood have "2.23" -- what unit of measure is that tied to?  Is that meters?  How are these AOE effects counted?  Can an non-penetrating HE hit set off a magazine?
  • What about standard AP penetrations?  AP shells do not have a blast radius.  Does their path need to stop inside a magazine in order to cause damage to the module?
  • And finally, torpedoes have a blast radius too.  Does this conform to the same unit of measure as HE shells?  How exactly is their module damage calculated?

 

2i2565f.jpg

Two detonations seconds apart.  This second Omaha detonated on the second hit from Atlanta's guns.

 

Going Forward, one Deflagration at a Time

Depending on what answers I get to the questions above, there's several obvious paths I could undertake from here. The most likely is more stationary-bot work -- attempt to isolate the per-shell chance of various guns against easily-struck magazines.  From this, the likelyhood of individual hits setting off a detonation can be very roughly calculated and the feasibility of targeting magazines in Random Battles as a strategy to trying to eliminate targets can be approximated.  For example, my tests with Omaha have shown that at the ranges Atlanta can guarantee hits into the forward magazine of Omaha, if presented with a broadside, it's much more expedient to simply hammer their citadel with AP shells instead -- they'll die within two reload cycles as opposed to requiring lord knows how many hits to kill the Omaha via detonation.

 

The same will need to be done with torpedo strikes and then bomb hits from aircraft.  Then individual ships will need to be tested for their vulnerability to detonations and eventually (maybe!) I can include an entry under the durability sections of my reviews as to a given ship's risks of blowing up.  Having this kind of knowledge would be invaluable, especially when it came to knowing which modules a ship should invest in with its first upgrade slot.

 

Fun and engaging indeed!

 

 

Source: http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/125532-fun-and-engaging-science-part-one/#topmost

 

 

Greetings

  • Cool 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

Part two is here! LWM talked directly to Sub_Octavian to gather some more insights about detonations. She will conduct further test on this topic with her newly gathered knowledge. Again all credits belongs to LittleWhiteMouse!!

 

 

After making a little post about detonations (which you can read here!), I was approached by Sub_Octavian from Wargaming who volunteered to answer some questions I had about detonations.  You can imagine the excitable, ear-breaking, high pitched sounds that I made at that moment (my corgi sang along). The jumbled, confused battery of questions I inundated him with doesn't make for very comfortable reading, so I shall paraphrase him and quote directly where applicable into a more comfortable narrative.
 
Squee.png
You said it, Queen Cordelia!
 
What We Knew...
Some aspects about magazines were already well known and documented on the World of Warships wiki:  Magazines are a module and have special rules for how they take damage. They have their own internal hit points completely separate from the ship's hit points.  Attacks which successfully hit a module depletes this hit point total.  Each time a module takes damage, there's a chance it will be temporarily disabled, though these critical hits are not universal across all module types.  Main Battery, Torpedoes, Engines and Steering Gears all can take these critical hits while AA guns and Secondaries cannot -- these latter mounts existing in a binary state of "fine" and "destroyed".  Using your Damage Control Party will restore these temporarily disabled modules back to working order immediately, otherwise there's a short delay before they repair themselves.  Once a module's hit points are fully depleted, it is destroyed.  Your Engines and Steering Gears cannot be destroyed, but repeated hits can temporarily disable them again.  There is no recovering a destroyed module.
 
Magazines are a module very similar to Engines and Steering Gears.  Depleting their hit points does not cause a detonation -- instead, it's the critical hit mechanic which sets these off.  Each attack which successfully damages the magazine has a chance to detonate the magazine.  The more damage a magazine takes, the higher the chance each attack will cause a detonation, reaching an upper maximum when the magazine's hit points run out.  This upper maximum value never reaches 100% but we were never told what it was...
 
What We Didn't Know...
All ships have the same chance to be detonated when hit in a magazine that has lost all of its hit points.  This value is 10%.  I say again, there's a 1 in 10 chance of setting off a detonation upon a fully depleted magazine with every hit that strikes it.  This value can be modified by the use of signals and modules.  These bonuses are multiplicative.  For example:
 
Fully Depleted Magazine
+ India X-Ray (5% increased detonation)
+ Magazine Modification 1 (70% reduced detonation chance)

0.1 * 1.05 * 0.3
0.0315
3.15% detonation chance per hit to magazine
 
The Juliet Charlie signal drops the chance of detonations down to zero, no matter what.
 
This chance of detonation is universal across all ships and all tiers.  To quote Sub_Octavian: "... the proportion is universal across all ships. Yamato fully destroyed magazine has a 10% detonation chance when being damaged. Katori fully destroyed magazine also has 10% chance."   This value scales equally too -- no ship has a greater chance of detonating per successful hit to their magazines.  A Fuso that takes damage which reduces her magazine's hit points to 50% has the same chance of detonating as a Fubuki that gets her magazine's hit points reduced to 50%.  But herein lies the catch:
  1. Some magazines are harder to damage than others.
  2. Some magazines have more hit points than others.
This helps explain why some ships just seem to blow up more, or why certain ships seem more vulnerable to different kinds of attacks.
 
Magazine Resilience
There are four different attacks that can do damage to a Magazine:  AP Shells, HE Shells, Bomb Hits and Torpedo strikes.  Ramming, flooding, fires and harsh language do not affect magazines (even though it feels like they should).  Successfully hitting a magazine with each weapon takes good aim or a sheer volume of fire.  The challenges for striking a magazine are many, but the level of protection surrounding a ship's magazine varies considerably, not only by ship type but also by ship class and within the ship itself.  One magazine may be more exposed than another and most ships have at least two.
 
The most simple attack to understand are AP Shells.  They can only damage a magazine if the shell detonates inside the module.  Over penetrations cannot damage a magazine.  Penetrations which pass through the magazine but explode beyond it cannot damage the magazine either.  AP 'explosions' don't have a blast radius, so the stopping point of the shell is crucial.  It's only these direct hits which can attack the magazine's health pool and prompt a chance to cause a detonation. 
 
Landing hits against a ship's magazines with AP shells presents some very big challenges.  The direction of shells can change via normalization as it passes through armour plates, so aiming directly at the magazines on a straight path may not be the most expedient way to bulls eye these vulnerable locations.  I can say from experience -- trying test hitting magazines with AP shells has been a nightmare.
 
Normalization2.gif 
Normalization is the effect of a shell "biting into" the armour to increase its chances at penetration while changing the direction of its path.  Different size shells have different normalization values and vary from as much as 10º for destroyer-caliber guns to 6º for battleship-caliber weapons.
 
 Things get a little more interesting with HE Shells, Bombs and Torpedoes, in that they all use the same base mechanics.  When one of these attacks hits, it explodes on the surface of whatever it strikes.  There is no physical penetration (lewd! ♥) of any of these munitions.  When these attacks explode, they create a blast effect, which Sub_Octavian called a "splash" (LEWD! ♥), that damages everything within that area equally.  Thus, one HE hit with a sufficiently sized blast could damage multiple modules at the same time.  But let's let Sub_Octavian explain it when I asked him about HE shells penetrating magazines:
 
 "Well, technically HE shell cannot explode inside the magazine, as it always explodes right on contact with any surface. So, HE damage to magazines (and other modules) is splash damage. Splash damage is rather simple. Wherever HE detonates, splash area is build around the point of detonation. If any module (internal too) is within it, it is dealt damage. Each shell has splash "penetration"..well, the power of splash. Each module has splash protection. Protection is calculated based on module armor and sometimes, based on nearby armor protecting it. Then, after calculation it can be tweaked for balance reasons (if I remember right, we did increase this protection for some German cruisers many months ago). Splash power is calculated based on shell specs, and may be tweaked too - as well as splash alpha damage and splash radius. If protection is too high (or splash power is too low), no damage is dealt to module. E.g. each time a DD shell explodes near BB magazine it does...nothing. However, BB HE shell may damage DD or even cruiser magazine. If damage is dealt, it is lowered depending on splash protection of the module. Proximity of explosion does not matter here, it only determines the area withing which all modules are checked for splash."
 
Detonation.gif
Animation showing the 'splash' effect of an HE surface explosion.  Internal modules are similarly affected but are generally afforded better protection.
 
Bombs and Torpedoes have particularly large and powerful blast-effects, making it possible for even near misses from bombs and innocent looking bow-hits from torpedoes set off magazines under the right circumstances.  Sub_Octavian was clear that torpedo hits near a Battleship's magazines do not guarantee module damage there.  Torpedo penetration power is high, but so too is the level of protection around battleship magazines.  Different ships and different parts of the ship will have varying levels of defense.  Experimentation can help uncover these vulnerable areas where they exist (I may have already found two).
 
Magazine Damage
Magazines themselves vary in size depending on the ship and can be calculated easily.  Each magazine has a number of hit points equal to half the normal hit points of the ship.  Myoko with 39,200hp has magazines with 19,600hp each.  Yamato's massive magazines clock in at a hefty 48,600hp.  This alone affords larger ships a measure of protection against detonations, reducing the chances of taking a catastrophic hit by simple grace of increasing the number of hits needed to deplete the magazine.  Once combined with more effective magazine protection, it's no wonder that smaller, ships like destroyers and light cruisers detonate more often.  Aside from these two factors, there's largely little need for Wargaming to tweak magazine vulnerability-- armour and the ship's size generally takes care of this automatically.
 
The question then becomes:  How much damage does an individual attack inflict on these magazines?
 
AP Rounds have the simplest and most direct value.  They inflict their AP Alpha damage.  This is the maximum damage listed of the shell in port.  For example, a Warspite or Hood's 381mm AP shell inflicts 11,400 damage to the hit points of a magazine.  Atlanta's own AP shells inflict a rather wimpy 2,100 damage.  Comparatively, AP rounds potentially deal more damage than all other forms of attack on a per hit basis and can be considered a kind of trade off for the challenges of landing hits.
 
HE Rounds (and Torpedoes and Bombs) have a more complicated calculation.  The amount of damage they do comes (once again) from the "splash" damage Sub_Octavian described, modified by the protection and armour surrounding the magazine.  Thus, this value varies depending on not only your target, but where you hit it and with what type of ammunition.  Note that Bombs, Torpedoes and HE from large caliber guns are much more powerful (and larger) "splashes" making them more effective at damaging magazines than smaller caliber attacks.  This can include near misses of the ship itself in the case of bombs and possibly Battleship HE too (must test this!).
 
When an attack does damage a magazine, the detonation calculation is taken immediately based on the reduced level of hit points.  In this manner, the size of the attack only matters while there are hit points still remaining in the magazine.  Once the magazine's health is completely depleted, the amount of damage an attack does is largely irrelevant -- only the number of hits matters with each getting the same chance of causing a catastrophic explosion.
 
Still Fun, Still Engaged
The challenges facing testing this come from a lack of reliable feedback when magazines are actually struck and how much damage they take.  Lert and I just finished sinking 300 Yamato for the next part of our detonation test, each done in batches of 100.  The lessons Sub_Octavian has provided puts the results into a little more context, so now I want to sink at least another 100 before presenting my findings.  I want to tank Sub_Octavian for taking the time to answer my questions.  Stay tuned for more fun (and engaging) detonation revelations.

 

 

Source: http://shipcomrade.com/news/310/fun-and-engaging.html

 

 

Greetings

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
4,089 posts

Very nice read.

 

Thanx for the share and very big thanks to LittleWhiteMouse!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,760 battles

All of that contradicts this scenario.

https://clips.twitch.tv/AntediluvianPowerfulYakinikuFeelsBadMan

 

There is no way 130mm AP shells, even stalinium, could enter the magazine of a Yamato. Also the Yamato magazine resides within the citadel, but no citadel hits were scored.

So either this isn't the entire truth, or Yamato has a wonky magazine. Which might very well be the case due to this old gif

2rIe38a.gif

Where, once again 130mm stalinium, HE this time, detonates a Yamato. It is old, so things have likely changed, but it is absolutely worth bringing up to either dispel (it doesn't happen any longer) or to bring a weird hitbox to the attention of someone important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,924 posts
19,751 battles

So either this isn't the entire truth, or Yamato has a wonky magazine. Which might very well be the case due to this old gif

 

It's been a long time since Yamato had wonky armor (was it Yamato? Pretty sure it was Yamato). Like "glorious stalinium DDs didn't even exist"-long (aside from Gremy ofc).

 

Besides, wouldn't explain the miraculous "no hit but detonation" thing either.

Unless ofc splash damage can cause magazine HP to deplete without being actually capable of damaging them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,760 battles

Well, HE splash can damage the magazine. And it doesn't seem like a magazine needs to be depleted to detonate (that just means it is at maximum risk). So a near miss against a weak enemy or one with a magazine close to the side can be enough. I think it is BS, but that is apparently what it is.

 

The point with my links is that within a reasonable time period weird things have happened with Yamato Detonations, from sources that really shouldn't be able to cause it, if we go by the explanations relayed to us.

Edited by Unintentional_submarine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,890 posts
2,549 battles

All of that contradicts this scenario.

https://clips.twitch.tv/AntediluvianPowerfulYakinikuFeelsBadMan

 

There is no way 130mm AP shells, even stalinium, could enter the magazine of a Yamato. Also the Yamato magazine resides within the citadel, but no citadel hits were scored.

So either this isn't the entire truth, or Yamato has a wonky magazine. Which might very well be the case due to this old gif

2rIe38a.gif

Where, once again 130mm stalinium, HE this time, detonates a Yamato. It is old, so things have likely changed, but it is absolutely worth bringing up to either dispel (it doesn't happen any longer) or to bring a weird hitbox to the attention of someone important.

 

I have especially watched thet first one frame by frame after I have written long [edited]response only to notice you were linking stream highlight xD

and as long as I could tell in the quality given one of the AP shells have hit nearly flat on the top of the turret casing of the no2 turret 

 

[or deck just behind it I'm not 200% sure atm]

and ironically in the gif below very similar area is being hit by lotta of splashes rolling for rng box.

 

so if we assume that 130mm cannot have very big splash this crossreference - while giving that minimal benefit of doubt to the explanation provided so far - would lead to conclusion that at least back then there was a magazine module for yamato just under the deck under main battery turret no2 - if memory serves the armor of turret/deck around was weak enought for 130mm shell to have a chance to penetrate it [especially since stalinium shells are soo good at penetrating things obviously] which adds up to actually kinda coherent description of both of these situations

 

questions that arises are following: what the heck was ammo magazine doing so close to the deck surface for DD caliber to reach it with splash, and if it is still there.

 

and then personally if I were to suggest a small improvement to the mechanics I'd suggest for HE/bomb/torpedo splash only initiated rng roll if the check of that amor protection and all that complicated thingy shows up that this hit would damage the magazine module - please bear in mind that I worded this in this way instead of saying "actually damage the module" because in case of module being already drained to 0 even if hit calculates that there is damage to be done there no damage will be dealt due to no hp to be damaged further.

 

although it could be debatable if draining hp of magazine module shouldn't bypass rng and gives us awesome fireshow of magazine detonation - I mean this is mostly the point where irl this thing woudl go off anyway..... coudl possibly require a potential countermeasure to prevent HE spamming BBs from sploding every DD with near misses.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,760 battles

Due to Yamato's all-or-nothing scheme 130mm AP can certainly penetrate the hull below the turrets (32mm, but not the deck due to auto bounce angles and 57mm). The actual turrets can't be penned anywhere, neither can the barbettes (the thinnest possible plates are 190mm and at the rear of the turrets). Similarly neither can the citadel area. So how did the 130mm AP manage to hit the magazine since that is apparently the only way to get detonated? Either we are not told everything, or Yamato has/had a magazine hitbox issue, with it sticking outside the citadel, so shells detonating above the magazine roof, actually hit the magazine hitbox. A bit like in some games where there are clipping issues and you can shoot a guy in an exposed bit of arm sticking through a wall.

 

The HE scenario is naturally a bit iffy since we don't get any values as to how much the armour reduces the splash effect. But if we were to assume the magazine hitbox sticking out of the protected citadel space, then the splash of 130mm HE might be enough to reach it if it hits the lower parts of the 32mm sides. I would assume that 32mm armour isn't enough to stop 130mm HE.

 

Or... there is more to the mechanic than we are told.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
240 posts
4,897 battles

I think one needs to check the patch of that Yammato detonation. There was a mechanic that damage to any weapons, including seconday guns, could cause a detonation. This mechanic should have been remove quite a while back.

 

BTW, The thread in NA devolved frustratingly quickly when ISSM start beating the "Remove detonation" drum...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,890 posts
2,549 battles

with it sticking outside the citadel,

 

but mouse have confirmed in the first post that alot of ammo magazine modules are outside of citadel area......

 

how much the armour reduces the splash effect.

 

as far as I understood Sub_Octavian part it seems armor and such reduce only damage to the moduel from the splash - but "hit" is registeres as long as it's within splash radius....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,760 battles

 

but mouse have confirmed in the first post that alot of ammo magazine modules are outside of citadel area......

 

 

as far as I understood Sub_Octavian part it seems armor and such reduce only damage to the moduel from the splash - but "hit" is registeres as long as it's within splash radius....

 

No, Yamato's magazine isn't outside the citadel. The magazines that are outside in on cruisers. This in in order to not make those cruiser unduly easily citadelled, thus the citadel only really applies where there is armour. Enter the French and Lesta had to jump through weird hoops to make no armour work.

In any case, LWM's magazines outside the citadel does not apply to Yamato. That much is certain. The Japanese weren't so stupid as to nearly bankrupt their country and then leave the most vulnerable part of the things that caused it outside the armoured box of the all-or-nothing scheme.

 

SO's comments I understood to mean that armour thickness stops the splash of HE when sufficiently thick. Or rather it reduces the module damage, all the way down to 0. If no damage is registered, it doesn't matter as far as the magazine is concerned. Otherwise we would see Yamatos and Montanas blow up from HE spam from DDs all day long, as their splash radius is enough to hit the magazine if nothing were to stop it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

Yeah, think so myself, the splash impact is something we still know very little about. We'll see what LWM brings up during her ongoing tests.

 

 

Greetings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,890 posts
2,549 battles

In any case, LWM's magazines outside the citadel does not apply to Yamato. That much is certain. The Japanese weren't so stupid as to nearly bankrupt their country and then leave the most vulnerable part of the things that caused it outside the armoured box of the all-or-nothing scheme.[1]

 

SO's comments I understood to mean that armour thickness stops the splash of HE when sufficiently thick. Or rather it reduces the module damage, all the way down to 0. If no damage is registered, it doesn't matter as far as the magazine is concerned. Otherwise we would see Yamatos and Montanas blow up from HE spam from DDs all day long, as their splash radius is enough to hit the magazine if nothing were to stop it.[2]

 

[1]historical displacement of ammo magazines is one thing a placement of module in the ship model by devs is the other though.....

[2] SO have said that size of splash heavilly depends on caliber of HE shell [if you have somehow acces to shell data proving the claim that they can reach the magazine modules with splash on hull\deck of yamato and/or montata they feel free to share a link or sth

 

as for the 0 damage hits as far as the currently given explanation goes 0 damage hit is still "damaging" hit so it may trigger rng machine - with only that exception to other cases that it will always go at minimal possible chance - and since this one is not given either this alone may be reason why we don't see those ships explode from DD he spam

 

[remember that fully depleted magazine without other things added ontop of that goes only as far as 10% chance - so who knows how incredibly low original value is......]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,385 posts
15,539 battles

BTW, The thread in NA devolved frustratingly quickly when ISSM start beating the "Remove detonation" drum...

 

Nah... People suggesting something reasonable?! Impossible! :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

 

Nah... People suggesting something reasonable?! Impossible! :trollface:

 

I also wandered a bit around and it's ... well rather frustrating how the discussion can go downwards on the internet.

 

As far as I have read, I can understand issm's points (so far no gameplay related reasons to keep detonations in game). And while I'd like to keep this thread clean of any non-related discussion, as long as we keep it sound the discussion of 'WHY Detonations are in the game' can be seen as related to the 'HOW Detonations are working in the game'. 

 

 

Basically, I like detonations in the game. Although (and I know this) that's only a personal opinion and not a valid argument FOR detonations. The only reason I can think of is, that you can be randomly punished just for being in the game. Much like a person that lives a good life, has success in the job, a great family but dies a painfull death in his/her 40s due to multiple forms of cancer. I know that example is drastic but it describes my view of detonations in the game. Some higher form of being/fate/coincidence that (seemingly) decides randomly who should be singled out (detonations) and who not.

 

So in short: Detonations represent the randomness of some actions also happening in life. 

 

If however such a mechanic should be in a recreational fun game is a question to be answered.

 

 

Greetings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles

Funny how much effort has been put into this feature given how disliked it is and how random it appears to be. Arcade ship game - detonation simulator. Nice read though. Good job, well done.

Edited by loppantorkel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
1,676 posts
13,332 battles

Funny how much effort has been put into this feature given how disliked it is and how random it appears to be. Arcade ship game - detonation simulator. Nice read though. Good job, well done.

 

Why do you think this feature was meant to be liked at all?

 

Imho this was never meant to be a "fun and engaging" mechanic.

Its sole purpose is to increase "suspense" since it prevents certainty of outcome in an engagement.

As in RL warfare where you can never be 100% certain about the outcome of engagement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,556 posts
1,899 battles

Great post. LittleWhiteMouse does some exceptionally good work.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,506 posts
15,942 battles

Why do you think this feature was meant to be liked at all?

 

Imho this was never meant to be a "fun and engaging" mechanic.

Its sole purpose is to increase "suspense" since it prevents certainty of outcome in an engagement.

As in RL warfare where you can never be 100% certain about the outcome of engagement.

It's fun to actively citadel people. Now you know how to detonate them :great: How is that not fun?

 

Still for the average player it's random, WG could have made it just random, but instead put in massive effort in this detonation mecganic that no one knew of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

Some more information by LWM, basically Part 3 and Part 4 of her attempt to decrytp detonation mechanics.

 

 

There are still a lot of myths surrounding detonations. Let's delve into some practical demonstrations.

One of the most telling myths surrounding detonations is that they're entirely random. Now, thanks to Sub_Octavian's answers, we know how much of an influence RNG actually has on detonation mechanics (which is still substantial). I wanted to experiment with torpedoes and their large blast radius to see just how effective these munitions were at setting off a ship's magazine. Even with the dev answers we got last time, there are still a lot of questions surrounding just how big these blasts are and how armour interacts with the damage potential of torpedoes. To this end, I put together a little experiment.

Let's start with Yamato as our test subject. Few ships are as resilient to torpedo hits.

  • She has 97,200hp.
  • Her two magazines, forward and aft, have 48,600hp each.
  • She has the best torpedo damage reduction in the game, provided hits strike her anti-torpedo bulges which should allow multiple strikes in the same area without sinking her with direct damage.
  • Yamato (and all tier 10 ships) have only one hull variant, so there's no differences between their levels of protection for their magazines between stock and upgraded hulls.

To attack Yamato's magazines, I used a Minotaur's torpedo armament.

  • She can launch eight torpedoes per side.
  • These torpedoes can be launched one at a time to ensure accuracy on a single point.
  • These torpedoes have a maximum damage of 16,767hp*

* Note the listed damage in port may not (and probably does not) reflect the actual amount of damage the weapon does against modules and should be used as a guideline only. Minotaur's torpedoes have hidden stats like 47,000 alpha damage, 1,100 damage and 1,000 alpha piercing HE. Yeah, I can't make sense of that ... yet.

From what we've learned so far, we know the following:

  • Individual hits on Yamato's magazines will only have a 1% chance of setting it off so long as the magazine has taken less than 14,580 damage.
  • The best possible chance we have of detonating a Yamato is 10% per hit, but only if we can fully reduce the hit points of the magazine.
  • Torpedoes have a large "blast" radius which can affect magazines even behind multiple layers of protection.
  • The amount of protection around a magazine will reduce the amount of damage taken per hit.

From this I was expecting to see only hits directly striking the area around the magazines to set off a detonation. By firing eight torpedoes into the same area, I hoped to deplete the magazine's hp completely. From an earlier test, I knew that 8 torpedo hits from Minotaur was not enough to sink Yamato outright, provided the hits all landed in the same area and she would flood out if she didn't detonate. This experiment would be help illustrate a couple of unknowns: how much damage the torpedoes were actually doing and how much would Yamato's armour protection reduce the damage of the torpedoes?

At a minimum, I expected 8 torpedo hits in the same area to give me an 8% chance of detonating a Yamato (8 strikes * 0.01 detonation chance = 8% overall detonation rate). However, if the maximum damage listed in port was being dealt to the Yamato, we could expect to see as high a detonation rate as 67.6% (1.6% with first hit, 6% with second, 10% for each subsequent hit). This is, of course, assuming that after a magazine is 30% depleted, the progression is linear.

 
DetonationsC.png
 

Test #1 - Mike Control

Lert was kind enough to assist me with this section of the test. First, we needed to establish that not just any ol' hit would set off Yamato's magazines. To this end, we aimed our torpedo hits to strike Yamato between her bridge and funnel, right into her center of mass. Each Yamato took all 8 hits in this same location. We repeated this test 100 times. Not one Yamato detonated.

From this we could conclude that hits amidships from Minotaur would not detonate Yamato.

3unrNmd.jpg

Boring, but necessary.

Test #2 The Nose Knows

The next thing to test was how big the blast radius actually was. There are anecdotes a plenty from players claiming they took a torpedo hit on the bow and then detonated because of it. So once more Lert and I took out our Minotaur and derped fish into one location over and over and over again until we had sunk 100 Yamato. Not one of them detonated.

From this we could conclude that hits on the forward section of the bow from Minotaur would not detonate Yamato.

yzDj0Y4.jpg

Bow aiming point.

Test #3 - Exhaust Port Two Meters Wide

The second part involved aiming directly for Yamato's magazines. There's a handy little 'square' of armour along the waterline beneath her #1 turret that made a good aiming point that's visible even at a distance. Torpedoes were shoved repeatedly into that little gap (lewd) and the results recorded. Out of 100 Yamato sunk, 13 detonated. Here's how many hits each one took before exploding:

  1. 4 hits
  2. 7 hits
  3. 7hits
  4. 1 hit
  5. 7 hits
  6. 4 hits
  7. 7 hits
  8. 2 hits
  9. 5 hits
  10. 1 hit
  11. 1 hit
  12. 6 hits
  13. 6 hits

Out of 800 torpedoes launched, 754 were needed to sink 100 Yamato. This works out to an average of 58 torpedo hits to cause one detonation. From this we could conclude that hits here would detonate Yamato.

lucKFbK.jpg

Just a little more to the left...

Test #4 - RNG is RNG

This test was very important. We established that derping fish into a specific spot could cook off the magazine, but what about "random" hits? To simulate a strike more akin to what might be found in Random Battles, Lert and I conducted this test. From a range of approximately 5km, we set the Minotaur's torpedoes to launch as a salvo instead of individually, ensuring that all 4 torpedoes per launcher would strike along the length of the Yamato. We weren't concerned with spacing them exactly. The idea was simply to put 8 fish 'randomly' into the side of the Yamato and observe how often the magazine cooked off. At best, I estimated that two to three torpedoes would strike along the magazines, both fore and aft. After launching 800 torpedoes at 100 Yamato, 4 detonated. Here's how many each victim took before exploding, though few if any of these took more than 2 to 4 hits to the same magazine:

  1. 3 hits
  2. 3 hits
  3. 2 hits
  4. 5 hits

Out of 800 torpedoes launched, 773 were needed to sink 100 Yamato. This works out to an average of 193 torpedo hits to cause one detonation. From this we could conclude that random hits against the Yamato could cause a detonation, but at a significantly lower chance than if you aimed shots specifically at the magazines.

La9N4NE.jpg

Spreadin' the love. That looks like three hits to the magazines on that salvo. Two forward, one aft.

Premature Conclusions

Let's be clear of one thing right from the word go: Sinking 100 Yamato is not enough to give a clear indication of the odds. A fluke detonation or two (or the absence thereof) throws the math way off. I would be more confident drawing any conclusions with 500 or more sunk on a given test. However, let's do some preliminary work.

First, we have to make a pretty bold assumption: That I was hitting the magazine with every torpedo. There's no feedback provided to let you know when you successfully struck a magazine or not. The closest we have for AP shells is a "citadel hit" ribbon, but that doesn't differentiate between hitting the citadel itself or the magazine within the citadel (if the magazine is within the citadel). The waters get even muddier when you start using attacks with an explosive radius. I simply do not know if all 800 torpedoes I fired in test #3 hit the Yamato's forward magazine or not. I'm dealing with a lot of unknowns:

  • Just how big is the blast effect of Minotaur's torpedoes?
  • How much damage can they do?
  • How exactly does Yamato's armour mitigate the damage?

A hit a little more to the left or right may have made all of the difference if a torpedo hit struck the magazine. Assuming that all 800 torpedoes were actually hitting the magazines, we can extrapolate approximately how much damage each of Minotaur's torpedoes was doing. The 13% detonation chance achieved is 5% higher than the 8% minimum we expected, but a far cry from the 67.6% chance had we been depleting the magazine on our 3rd hit. If we assume our torpedoes are doing a mere 3,000 damage per hit, we get the following odds per strike:

  1. 45,800 / 48,600 - 1%
  2. 42,800 / 48,600 - 1%
  3. 39,800 / 48,600 - 1%
  4. 36,800 / 48,600 - 1%
  5. 33,800 / 48,600 - 1.1%
  6. 30,800 / 48,600 - 1.9%
  7. 27,800 / 48,600 - 2.6%
  8. 24,800 / 48,600 - 3.4%

This looks fairly accurate based upon what was seen so far. But again, the small sample size can skew this result wildly. To better isolate it, we'd need more repetitions of test #3.

What this test has shown is that torpedoes are dangerous -- something we all knew. But hits have to be taken at the magazines to cause a detonation. Hits along Yamato's belt armour amidships will keep her safe. Hits to the extremities of her bow and stern are also safe. Of course, this only applies to Minotaur's torpedoes against a Yamato. There are no guarantees that a Shimakaze torpedo won't have a larger blast radius to endanger your battleship, or that your Großer Kurfurst has the same levels of protection.

More and More Questions

As an overall experiment, this one was a rather poor use of my (and Lert's) time all told. There were too many unknowns to draw any form of reasonable conclusion. We still don't know how big torpedo explosions are. It would be handy to be able to take a cross-section of a ship and be able to map where a given shell needs to strike to be able to affect certain modules. Similarly, we don't know how much initial damage these explosions come with. If we had these two elements, we could begin to isolate where would be the best parts to aim at a ship to guarantee the maximum damage to magazines and thus skew detonation results as much in our favour as possible.

The next step I have planned is to try and isolate blast radii of HE shells. This burst radius is a stat that has been datamined (Minotaur's is 1.2 for her torpedoes, for example), but we don't know how it translates to in-game measurements. Once we know that, we can begin to isolate how much damage is being done per attack and from there, we can really start to figure out which parts of a ship are vulnerable.

 

Source: http://shipcomrade.com/news/319/fun-and-engaging-science-part-three.html

 

Greetings

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
6,166 posts
10,652 battles

And Part 4

 

 

I'm sidetracking a little this week. Understanding how magazine detonations can be mitigated and/or exploited hinges on the ability to land hits reliably against the magazines themselves. Yet this game provides no direct feedback to say when a given module is struck. How can you determine if a given weapon attack is successfully damaging a magazine or not? The best we can manage is to understand how various attacks behave when they strike a ship and extrapolate from that. Specifically, I wanted to better understand just how much of an area-of-effect high explosive attacks from HE shells, bombs and torpedoes had and potentially uncover how much damage they did to modules.

Data-mined sources have long listed a statistic called "Explosion Size" for all HE attacks. Minotaur's torpedoes have a 1.2 rating. Hood and Warspite's 381mm HE shells have a 2.23 rating while a USN 127mm shell has a 0.38 rating. All of these statistics are easily drawn up from third party sites like gamesmodels3d.com. Without knowing what these values were measuring, they didn't mean much. Yes, it's nice to know that a 381mm Battleship shell has almost 6 times the size of a 127mm USN shell, but what was that size even measuring? Radius? Diameter? Area of a circle? Area of a cube? Area of a sphere?

To test this, I selected a ship with a rather cluttered deck with low-health modules -- specifically the C-Hull Izumo. Her decks are strewn with tight clusters of single-mount 25mm guns that, according to data sources, have a mere 200hp. Practical tests show that a direct hit from a single 203mm IJN shell will kill them every single time, with multiple being killed if the shell lands near enough to them. By taking a Furutaka with her single-gun turrets, it should (in theory) be possible to get an approximation of how large an area these 203mm shells were affecting. So I loaded up the training room and began shooting at Izumo and taking measurements.

heeYf68.jpg

Bow anti-aircraft mounts on C-Hull Izumo -- the perfect test bed for AOE blast radii. The deck is similarly clustered across the length of the ship, giving plenty of test-area.

ZMtIwDP.jpg

Example of 203mm HE shell damage from a single hit. Two AA guns were destroyed yet those around it were not. Repeated tests helped define what the minimum blast radius had to be.

From the Q&A with Sub_Octavian, we know that all modules within the blast radius are equally affected, short of armour providing some kind of protection. For deck element AA guns, there exists very little to no protection at all. Simple test firings in this manner gave an indication of how big the blast had be and how big it could be. This was, of course, assuming that the blast was circular or spherical in shape (so help me, if it's a cube or a cone, I will lose my head).

After littering the decks of several Izumo with 203mm impacts, I then moved up to 381mm guns on Hood. I got around the problem of two-shell impacts in the same area muddying results by standing off at range and lobbing HE shells onto Izumo's decks. Dispersion ensured the shells never landed near each other.

QOBSrAI.jpg

It was immediately shocking how much larger the area of effect was from 381mm HE shells. This indicated that the data mined value were not calculating area, but rather the radius or diameter of the blast.

With all of these test results, I went back to the data mined statistics and tried to make sense of them again. The breakthrough came from a pair of derp moments. The first derp was that I knew I had seen a similar style of measurement, in non-descript units in other stats and that came up from AA guns. Sure enough, the ranges of the AA auras were described in these units and they could be quickly converted to their known ranges. This would have saved me some time had I realized it sooner.

  • 5.0km = 167
  • 3.0km = 100
  • 2.5km = 83
  • 2.0km = 67
  • 1.5km = 50
  • 1.2km = 40

This gave us a unit of measure -- 1 unit = 30m (or 0.03km). From these, I could then plot out what the in game values. So I began converting and plugging away. This gave my 203mm Furutaka guns with 0.84 value a 25.2m radius. This gave the 381mm off Hood an enormous 66.9m radius. Now, the ships in World of Warships are twice the size they should be (Yamato measures over 520m in length in game, but she was only 260m or so in real life), but this still seemed a little big to me. Using dseehafer's wonderful ship-scale comparison, I began plotting the hits onto these scale models and found my second derp immediately.

7UMme6p.png

Furutaka in red, Hood in yellow. The outer rings are from my initial calculation. The inner rings are the corrected values. Blue are Minotaur torpedo AOEs (at proper scale) from my tests in Part Three at the specified impact points.

My circles were twice as big as they should be. The problem was that I had assumed the AA values were a radius when they appear to be a diameter. When the values were halved, from 1 unit to 30m down to 1 unit to 15m, everything began lining up all hunky dory. Is this actually correct? The test data seems to support it. From this I was able to make scale models of all of the blast sizes for the values I had and begin overlaying them on ships. Some of the data was initially quite exciting, especially when it came to ideas on how to specifically target modules.

6sFrVgd.png

Maybe we should start throwing around more battleship HE at destroyers?

My early elation was quickly marred with frustration. Initial tests using this new found data to try and pop the torpedo armaments of Gneisenau with Furutaka's 203mm guns (and thus try and isolate how much damage was being done per shell) yielded unexpected results and brought into question just how certain modules are damaged and destroyed. Per Sub_Octavian's explanation, damage is initially fixed and then modified by the amount of armour protection surrounding a given module. Thus, close range hits all striking the same place should (in theory) produce the same results. Instead, I saw inconsistency.

It took as few as 3 hits to destroy Gneisenau's torpedo mounts. It took as many as 39. Between 6 and 8 were most common. I wasn't missing -- I was causing critical damage on the torpedoes with my first shot in many cases. So what gives? This points to another significant gap in our understanding with how modules (specifically those with a working-damaged-destroyed mechanic) interact with high explosive damage. The information we have in the wiki describes that as soon as a module is reduced to zero hit points, it is destroyed -- so why the disparity between three and eight hits needed to destroy it when the same place was being struck (never mind thirty-nine hits)?

This kind of inconsistency extended to deck elements too, like AA guns. A hit that should have destroyed 4 AA guns instead destroyers 3, but instead of one of the outer guns surviving, it's one of the inner guns that somehow managed to dodge the attack despite clearly being inside the radius. I can attribute some issues with modelling and/or collision errors, but talk about demoralizing. If I can't accurately predict when external modules are being damaged (and with visual aids and critical hit indicators to assist), how can I accurately predict and calculate magazine damage? I need more information about the hit-boxes of modules and how their critical hits work.

This, of course, calls for more experimentation.

 

 

 

Source: http://shipcomrade.com/news/320/fun-and-engaing-science-part-four.html

 


Greetings

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×