Your welcome for the Screenshot I think :D
You were in Barham?lol The battle was like 30min ago
Yep, I did say hi in chat, but I think you missed it :D
Lol ahh sorry, I definitely missed it. What type of ammo did you use?
I really hate this mechanism, even since start as I also play standards(not recently though) and Japanese ones too. Ships with no bow/stern armor(what we could call AoN) are too pron to this mechanism.
1 Like
I was slinging 15" APC rounds and a constant stream of 6" HE. Was probably the 6" doing most of the flooding.
They should reduce size of unrepairable breech sections. From what we have now to many small cubes. So it would take longer to get flooded, and it would happen more gradually. I feel like that would be more realistic instead of getting like 1/7 of the ship flooded instantly.
It’s definitely not fun what we have now.
1 Like
Yeah very likely. It’s funny how 6in HE can sink this massive battleship.
I got lucky because the battle finished early. It wasn’t that far from another unrepairable breech
1 Like
The sinking mechanic will really fuck over all of nothing ships. I won’t take into account that multiple ships were designed with citadels that had enough buoyancy to keep the ships afloat in case everything around them was flooded
1 Like
Also a nice video to keep up y’all’s motivation
we really should have secretly made the N3 BB’s
Report is almost finished for dispersion, a funny result of our tests.
Here is the dispersion pattern from Hood which is 287m long against me in my Hood on a salvo from 15km, this should have corresponded to a 96 metre dispersion pattern.
As you can eyeball, this pattern is longer than Hood. So more than 3 times too high at what is really an unrealistically high engagement range in-game.
So here’s another, same conditions, but from 10km, this should have yielded a dispersion of no more than 70 yards… Yeah.
3 Likes
Thanks to @Morvran and @John_Sneeeeeeeew for helping get these screenshots, now I just need to calculate the length of these values probably find an average too and write the report, ( the easy part).
6 Likes
nice to know but man that is bad dispersion
one thing that might be a nice addtion would be to put a circle of the expected dispersion at the ranges from the center of the ship
I think the whole flooding thing is exacerbated by the fact gaijin seems to not model ducol steel behind the armour plates whilst it’s also missing as the exterior skin
Splinter armor doesn’t seem to have much if any real impact on unrepairable breach resistance. Even the bow compartments on Scharnhorst behind 70mm RCA get shredded in a couple salvos by the current meta breachers like Fuso or Marlborough. Rodney is probably more vulnerable than it ought to be to breaches currently, but it also has a pretty poor ratio of armored vs unarmored waterline length as a weight saving measure for treaty compliance. So while flooding resistance on Rodney should be buffed it will also probably always be a comparative weakness relative to other ships with an all or nothing scheme.
Nice to see at least something is getting fixed 👍🏻
Do we really need dispersion tightened when hit rate in the game is already orders of magnitude higher than reality?
It’d be nice if we could have more realisitic hit rates so we could in turn not have comically fast repair times which are often faster than reload times. Having to play whack-a-mole with modules is one of my few gameplay complaints with Naval. :P