Had something similar in colossus.
Got set on fire,. Immediately started to cancel the repairs I had going at the same time but before I’d even done that much I blew up.
But had a target that survived having it’s main turret set on fire 3 times without issue. Seems exceptionally random at times.
Yeah the new fire system has really destroyed the survivability of most ships. Worst hit seem to be American and Japanese, but in the worst case any ship can be basically immediately destroyed. I’ve seen lots of near instant detonations that don’t quite feel fair. Notably shell room detonations now account for the total explosive mass of the shells in the module, so you really shouldn’t ever bring HE if you have a choice now and shouldn’t fill your stowage entirely as it can be about as lethal as a magazine detonation now just with a longer death time. I like the system in theory but I think it needs two big changes. First, marginally increase the time it takes for fire to get to and detonate ammo modules on the low end, giving the player more time to extinguish fires and avoid detonation. Second, make shell room modules only detonate to fire damage. IRL they were not particularly vulnerable to detonation from shock but would eventually detonate if exposed to extreme heat long enough, with devastating consequences similar to their new level of damage. Lundgren’s revised analysis of Kirishima’s wreck goes into it in detail as that happened to the ship, very interesting read available free online.
Yeah, those would be good changes. Actually have the fire propergate from section to section and for it to take at least a few seconds to move down each layer.
As it stands currently there’s a lot of variation in the actual models as well which isn’t helping things. I don’t think there was ever a ton of modeling when it came to flash protection on the ships, but there’s also the disparity between ships with the powder handling room modeled as part of the magazine dm on some but not others. Probably things ought to be more standardized in that regard since I’d imagine that was a poor man’s way of accomplishing what the current system does but I would guess now makes those ships doubly vulnerable.
Yeah, definetly a half-baked implementation at this time
I’m hopeful they’ll improve it. There’s at least the bones of a good system here this time and I don’t think it’ll take a terrible amount of work to fix
It seemed to work fine on warspite earlier
While I heard bluewaters were being painful now with fire, as I’m currently grinding French coastal with Acnoit, don’t have such experience for now.
Those are only cosmetic fires though
Took a look at rodney again:
Her magazines are in the wrong locations
It should be between the turrets and not around them and deeper down
Also another thing i just found out:
HMS Nelson got a major armour rework in 1937 which Rodney sadly didnt get
Can’t wait for them to add Nelson w/ better armor in an event instead of TT
A boat load more AAA as well I think
I mean AA really is just down to the year we would get
True, but hopefully it would be a late war fit.
They are around the turrets in real life:
However developers cannot make the DM exactly as shown in the plans because it adds up a lot of complexity while giving very little difference to gameplay, because the projection of magazine in line of incoming gun fire is always a rectangle. Besides, as explained many times, the X-ray model is only for cosmetic and does not reflect the actual DM. There’s no problem with the height of magazine either, the DM exactly matches the dimension of magazine compartments in the blueprints in side projections.
nah, actually deck armor on bow. AA difference between Nelson and Rodney makes difference since 1940 afaik(Nelson discard catapult earlier than Rodney)
Have a beautiful day with HMS Warspite and HMS Hood. Now it feels good that I can be confident in playing against Scharnhorst.
So Gaijin just give little more ‘historical’ reload buff to Royal Navy, 25 seconds for 15’’ and 30 seconds for 16’'.
IMO if HMS Glorious comes to 5.7, she should change her Mark XIIa APC with Mark Ia APC.
Not only Mark XIIa is shell that developed in interwar period so unlikely to be supplied to HMS Glorious(1919), but also almost 50% more explosive filler. Being a 5.7 ship, she usually doesn’t need such high penetration of Mark XIIa shell, rather need high damage of Mark Ia.
