Edit: Nevermind, was trying to figure out something of which there’s already straight up datamines xD
1 Like
I don’t think It’s like that. You see, the armour loss for most new cannons is 24 mm, while for Roma It’s 103 mm (initially 130). How could It lose so much mm after 1 km then stabilize and lose less pen for longer ranges?
The coefficient Is still 0.91 too.
6 Likes
From datamines the penetration at 0m is 820mm
there are indeed improuvments but I think that we are still a bit far from the final value.
it is a mistery…
every other shell of this patch from the german 380mm to the 406mm of the soyuz (for example) lose 24mm between 0 and 1000m, the Italian 381mm is the only that loses much more (prior the recent changes 130mm). it is like when near 1000m the shell uses the airbrakes… I hope that we’ll see the 381mm in all its destructive potential.
about balance reasons…this shell indedd penetrates a lot…but it has also very small ammount of explosive, so this means less damage from detonation in non vital areas
7 Likes
I forgot about the datamines, hahah. Much easier than going around trying to calculate things, so disregard that.
Anyway, interesting. I have no idea what exactly they are doing with the efficiency values in this specific shell.
I just hope that, whatever they are doing, is in an attempt at approaching reality and NOT arbitrary changes to alter the performance of the shell.
1 Like
immagine if regia marina decided to keep the initial velocity of 870m/s XD
4 Likes
We’ll end up with 934 mm of pen at 0 m.
4 Likes
Also I forgot to add that this data looks like it was calculated using USN empirical formula, so it doesn’t have to be 100 percent correct.
5 Likes
That makes even more sense.
2 Likes
I think Roma deserves better dispersion
11 Likes
According to historical sources, Italy’s 381/50 guns were comparable to the U.S. 406 and the Japanese 460.
4 Likes
Oh wow this thread went a fair bit further than I’d have thought.
Now that I look at this, the penetration for Roma’s AP shell with a regular PenetrationK of 1 does seem a bit high, but still, the formula was meant to standardize these things. As far as I can see we still haven’t gotten a proper answer as to why the coefficient isn’t 1, but if it’s because of limitations of the calculator, then I wonder just how many shells “break” the calculator.
Anyways, I do want to show some things about Soyuz’s SAP.
If we once again try to use the calculator (just for demonstration purposes), we can see that it stops working at 44.4kg of filler, so about half the actual filler. That is, at filler weights higher than 44.4kg, the shell stops losing penetration (I’m guessing this limitation is part of the reason that K coefficient exists).
Still, Soyuz’s SAP shells still get a K coefficient of 0.87. So we get a near 100% increase in filler, but only a 13% decrease in penetration, which is kind of insane!
And Roma’s SAP does still work as is in the DeMarre calculator (and gives a point blank penetration of 728mm). It only stops working with a 33kg filler. 728mm does seem pretty high for a SAP shell but cutting nearly half its penetration is very harsh. Again, that’s just for the sake of comparison, 99% of SAP shells don’t fully adhere to the calculator.
[you can ignore the following, I’m not that confident in my results, it’s not that serious]
I did a silly little experiment, and scaled up Roma’s SAP shell to 16in while maintaining the C/M ratio and the 0.55 K value.
Shell weight → 824.3*((16/15)^3) = 1000kg
Bursting charge → 29.52*((16/15)^3) = 35.83kg
The shell ends up with 430mm of penetration at point blank, still far less than Soyuz, yet with less than half the filler!
Now of course, the Italian 381mm SAP did have that peculiar dual fuse, which does take a non-insignificant amount of space, and some weight, but it’s hard to believe that’d be enough to cripple its penetration.
4 Likes
I think Roma’s SAP shell is still heavy WIP as it underperforms even the 320mm one from Cavour and Duilio. ( and it almost weight double those shells and have higher muzzle velocity)
8 Likes
Nobody has mentioned that the devs generally tie dispersion (maxDeltaAngle and maxDeltaAngleVertical) to barrel length, so it is a bit unusual for the 380/45 on Richelieu to have the same dispersion as the longer 381/50 guns on Roma.
Both probably should have better mechanical accuracy, but the devs do as they wish for this sort of thing. Anyone who has used the British 381/42 will know the experience of using huge inaccurate shotguns that aren’t exactly historical.
2 Likes
Italy being singled out for having artificially higher dispersion is not new unfortunately. Remember when Gaijin finally adjusted dispersion for all other ship cannons to finally be accurate? Yeah, Italian 320mm was the only one who had higher dispersion patterns to deal with.
Its strange, if Roma was given a monsterous pen for a 15" the abysmal 1.3rpm could be sorta understandable, not good and still very unfair but you can see the logic. But Gaijin choosing this strange worse of both worlds option is puzzling.
I will also remind that in War Thunder her armor and survivability is nothing special, every other big gun can easily deal with her making her a bit of a glass cannon. So in gameplay terms, a very effective gun would go wonders in establishing a niche to make the Italians heavy hitter in NRB.
5 Likes
To add something more to dispersion. during the battle at Cape Spartivento, Vittorio Veneto fired from a really long range (28.5-32.5 km) at HMS Manchester. The fifth and seventh salvos were on target. The shells fell really close to the ship.
5 Likes
“According to historical sources”? That’s a random blog, that lists “web” as its source. We need something serious, not… whatever that is.
2 Likes
We do have one standardized way of calculating penetration, it seems quite unfair to artificially nerf Roma. Especially when it also has the worst accuracy of its peers (equal only to Richelieu):
| Iowa | Bismarck | Sovetsky Soyuz | Vanguard | Yamato | Roma | Richelieu | Conte di Cavour | Francesco Caracciolo (gun from 1914) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| maxDeltaAngle | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.32 | 0.22 | 0.34 | 0.34 | 0.32 | 0.34 |
| maxDeltaAngleVertical | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.34 | 0.24 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.34 | 0.39 |
It’s confusing, why Roma, the peak of Italian warships, gets worse spread than the Conte di Cavour - which is before it in the tech tree and is already the least accurate gun in the current top-tier (with Kron, PK, and Scharn being the top-3 most-accurate guns as of Hornet’s Nest).
Detour discussing the accuracy of Sovetsky Soyuz vs Roma
(BTW: How Sovetsky Soyuz is getting the top accuracy when the one thing we know about this ship is that its guns were hilariously inaccurate? With Italians shells having spread issue, we at least know that it was a transient issue (it dependent heavily on how much the liner was used, with guns having an optimal point, where they were on pair, if not better, than the peers from the foreign navies) and the class scored some good shots on targets during a number of encounters (typically straddles, but that’s just bad luck rather than guns or shells being inaccurate) - before Gaijin always tended to pick best-case scenarios for a competing characteristics of various weapon systems, yet somehow it isn’t the case for the Italian Navy’s accuracy 🙄)
IMHO one of the two should be done: buff the accuracy in-line with Bismarck and alike, or buff the penetration in-line with the formula, without artificial nerf to PenetrationK.
Even with 900 mm @ 0° @ 0m Roma would still be well-balanced in BR 8.3, as its armor is nothing remotely comparable to heavier battleships, and its explosive filler is tiny.
The ship should be a peer to Bismarck, and instead it seems like its just artificially nerfed.
(These are the values as of v. 2.46.0.22)
8 Likes
It honestly should be better than the Bismark (my opinion at least). The shear amount of range finders they put on the Littorio class of ship gave them magnificent range finding capabilities. Their gun layout was superior to the bismark as having the secondary 15" guns around the boilers was not a great idea if you liked the idea of moving, along with its turtle back design meaning less armour over the key areas.
It should be on par if not better than the bismark and yet gaijin have decided it should be 8.0 and therefore keep its capabilities nutered in order to keep it at that br.
If it got all the buffs it could get (30 second reload, concrete foam installed, better pen, better accuracy) it could comfortably sit at 8.3.
They decide they want to fill a br gap and then use a ship to form fit it to it, even if it means nerfing it to make ti fit better.
Especially egregious when the soyuz is being given its optimal stats. the armour alone is bad enough as they gave it that stupidly thick belt due to low quality armour and yet its being given the same stats as some of the best steel in the world during that time being the british and germans? where are they coming up with this logic. Each nation had their own way of treating the steel with differing effects (of course in game its not so easy to model this). Making armour more or less effective against large 15" guns or 6 inch guns is asking a little too much but simple % increases would show the technological differences in the steel production.
Suffice to say, the soviets were literal decades behind in armour technology with them still using the harvey hardening method when the germans would be using thier own specialised krup method which was seen to give a 5 - 20%increase in effectiveness over it (depending on who you ask) which shows just how much armour gaijin is giving the soyuz.
One more thing, that 5 - 20% increase (which is just a general stats rather than anything specific, itwas just seen to be that much more effective in the roles it was used) was for the method used. So for the germans, their krup method was that much more effective than other krup methods. And the krup method was already another 10 - 15% better than harvey. It goes to show how monumentally stupid it is gaijin giving the russian armour the same stats as other ships when they HAD to use that much just to give it similar stats to other nations.
3 Likes
Russia might have introduced KC from Germany before WWI.
Theoretically, the MK8MOD6 armor-piercing projectile used by IOWA can penetrate the 420mm/7° partial armor of Sovetsky Soyuz at a distance of 15km and a heading Angle of 37 degrees. Or penetrate 406mm/4° at a 40-degree heading Angle. The paper MK8MOD6 armor-piercing bullet created by GAIJIN can only penetrate the armor at the same Angle at distances of 5.5 kilometers and 6 kilometers respectively.
2 Likes