Tests at 1,380 fps (421 mps) with CPC projectiles showed that armor of 17 cm (6.75 in) could be penetrated, but that these shells could neither penetrate nor significantly damage the 35 cm (13.8 in) barbette armor when striking at a 12 degree angle.
15km distance
maybe because there are no APC on 8’’ but exist on 15’‘. Monitors on WW2 carry both CPC and HE while 15’’ HE in WW2 can be fit with both nose fuze and base fuze. If 15’’ CPC is just HE with base fuze, they won’t need to carry CPC imo.
The actual HE rounds, even when fitted with a base fuze, could not be used against anything with minimal armour, as their body was made of untreated steel, and the nose fuze further weakened the design. In most cases they were expected to disintegrate after punching a hole or to detonate on impact. On the other hand, the CPC’s lack of a nose fuze and thin cap allows it to remain in a fit-to-burst state after penetrating thin armour. So the CPC is a bit more of an “HE but can penetrate something”, while the 8" SAPC is designed to be an “AP but with a bit more HE”. In the game context, gaijin use a parameter “demarrepPenetrationK” to reduce the penetration of a shell as they wish, for example the 8" SAPC in game was given 89.5% penetration of regular APCBC, the US 6" HEBF was given 40%. Currently, the 15" CPC has been given 87% penetration. From this perspective, it should have received something similar to HEBF (~40%) rather than 87%, which should only be given to real “piercing shells”.
Iirc there are some HE-BF shells in game modeled as SAP shells, such as the Japanese 152mm Type 4 HE-BF (SAP), German 203mm L/4.7 HE-BF (SAPBC), German 150mm L/4.4 HE-BF (SAPBC), and maybe some others I can’t remember. I don’t know if there’s a big performance difference (penetration modifiers, angle modifiers, etc.) between HE-BF and SAP but I think that it’s something they should look at, if not address, unless it was specifically implemented for a reason
So me and @John_Sneeeeeeeew were playing naval, we spawn in Hoods.
Kronshtadt at 13km out, it took me 7 straddles to hit him with just one shell clearly not my poor aim if they were all straddles, in the meantime, he peppered me with his hyper accurate 12" shells from 13km out and did not miss one salvo.
John had a similar experience for the first few salvos before he switched to something closer but the Kron was focusing me hence why I kept going.
How is this supposed to be playable? Its absolutely insane this artificial dispersion. There is no naval gun applicable in-game that does not have available dispersion data somewhere.
More importantly
I finally was able to get the Greenwich Maritime Museum to send me over the range table for a community-side bug report on the dispersion of the 15" as well as the 13.5". This I should receive within 10 working days or so.
When it comes through I will make a bug report on it that the community can see, but I would very much appreciate it if anyone and everyone who plays naval can support this report as that sets a precedent for other ships who will have similarly poor dispersion.
If the report is rejected I will see about making it a suggestion that they implement historical dispersion statistics for naval guns above 10", and also potentially that they model naval shells according to historical performance figures.
Eh, if they gonna add paper to other nations then they should add super Yamato. Either way Japan will have top battleship and nothing will come close. But not like adding op paper or unfinished stuff to one nation like is happening to russian navy and not to the others. I would personally prefer only things that were finished, but who am I to change minds of devs. If they gonna add unfinished or paper ships then add some unfisnished or paper tanks too for balance in japanese tank tree.
Fixing gun accuracy would be nice (have you tried toggling the realistic aiming setting?) but clearly the one true fix is adding submarines with wire guided torpedoes, and missile destroyers with AShM’s
Another wrong thought. Unifinished ship was first added to Italy then USSR, and now Germany also had Saschen.
It will only ruin the naval. See how WOWs got decline after adding the submarine and Wargaming has to nerf submarine severly.
we wouldn’t get those, remember, Conqueror sank Belgrano with Mk.8 unguided torpedoes, so clearly we weren’t using wire guided torpedoes ))))
Yeah quided torpedos would be terrible. Its already hard to dodge normal torpedos if they are send in large numbers. Sumbmarines would be fine to add tho. So the top tier would have reason to use lighter vessel to hunt those subs down and not just everyone battleships.
I’m all for having authentic dispersion (RIP Littorios), though extreme accuracy is an issue as a whole too. While this is partly due to most real battles being at further ranges, it’s really silly that we can easily manage hits with basically every shot in every salvo, when in reality something like a 15% hit rate was considered absurdly, extremely good.
This crazy precision is why we then in turn have crazy fast repairs, meaning guns and other systems barely stay offline for more than a salvo, creating “wack a mole” sort of gameplay…
all im saying is dont hold your hopes up, HK_reporter (think thats their name); the community guy thats more involved with naval, yeah iirc they tried submitting a private report for british, german and american gun accuracy and it didnt really go anywhere.
you’ll still have my 100% support though, after all it hurts no one to try again
Yeah, but we cannot vote on that change or say ‘I have the same issue’.
And as HK said, perhaps more pressure from the community side would help so a bug report that we can support with an undeniable, primary historical source might help.
They will probably just ignore it…
But at least if the community can vote on it our feelings can be made more obvious. Also as the CM’s have said each mode has its own development teams and given the pace of naval additions… they can’t be that busy right now compared to ARB or GRB.
(Also means we can ask CM’s to give it a nudge in 4 months when it gets an acknowledged tag and then left to rot)
Im planning 1 or 2 threads in the next dev server forum for things like
Those I think the devs will actually see. Perhaps its worth prepping one for Naval shell accuracy balancing. Frame it more as a naval-wide change rather than a handful of ships, but with the Hood as a case-study example within it. Might have more success than just a standard thread post. But the fact the Renown still has the same incorrect draft it was added with after nearly a year. Its pretty clear British navy is a very low priority for them at the moment (followed closely by Britain in general)
strange statement to be making given the Royal Navy was actually larger than the US Navy at the start of WW2
Let alone the Soviet Navy
On the bright side it would seem they’re finally planning on something QE Class based, and fortunately its not event.
Gaijin do not care at all about the historical size of the RN nor the number of options nor the capability of the ships. The Big 3 still exist and then Japan has Yamato which is obviously the largest battleship ever built, so Gaijin seem to favour those
The USN only officially started to overtake the RN in 1943-44, even more impressive when you consider the UK had had its ports bombed for 4-5 years at that point.
Not too mention the fact that are large swathe of naval is more like WW1/inter-war era. Then there is no comparison to the USN.
wdym bro famous naval power the soviet union during the period of 1930-1950 would disagree with you
