unless they removed it on the day of the devserver droping it was not on there
this is from dollars stream on the day the dev server opened
this is from dollars stream on the day the dev server opened
2 Likes
it was also not on the dev server that was used by oxy and mike in the official stream
No dunkerque never got an AP shell .
The dev gave it a SAP shell because of the weird design and or a mistake in the reading of the blueprint .
Cheers, thanks.
IMO, there’s both Gaijin’s incompetence in this matter and banal double standards
Classifying shells by “weight of armor-piercing cap” is ridiculously absurd. And an example of double standards can be seen in some Russian and Soviet SAP shells. For example, 120mm SAP (RE dreadnought) shell without armor-piercing cap with 12.8% explosive mass has 0.8 pen coef, when all French SAP shells have no more than 0.57 pen coef
Either I’m stupid, or in Russian Empire/Soviet Union shells were made of titanium
12 Likes
Stalinium probably.
Yeesh, I was aware of the shell not being the correct type and the turret not having its historical split sections but man, I wasn’t expecting the ship to be that bad. And just like that, gaijin made me stop grinding the tree once again. I was already suffering with Colbert and Dupleix (speaking of which, Dupleix has no business being at a higher BR than Colbert and at the same BR as Hipper/Eugen) being limited to SAP shells, I am not doing through the same crap with a de facto top tier BB.
It’s pretty insane how whenever a French vehicle is concerned and there are some uncertainties, not matter how minor, gaijin will always chose the most negative option.
9 Likes
Turrets have split section. Actually, historical ‘bulkhead’ of French quadruple turrets are only 40 mm, which is unable to stop any kind of splinter made in-game(Well, not so different in real life too)
1 Like
If im not wrong at mer el kebir ( ot it was the richelieu at dakar but it’s almost the same thickness) a shell penned the turret and killed everyone on the side of the splitter but not the other so actualy it is supposed to work
3 Likes
I don’t think Gaijin is going to make balance/gameplay decisions based on anecdotal evidence though.
If the bulkhead is 40mm, they’re going to model it with the effectiveness of 40mm. I can’t really blame them for that.
From my experiences in Naval Arcade, Dunkerque is actually performing pretty well, especially with the mobility and survivability upgrades. I haven’t touched the targeting upgrades yet because I just feel they’re not necessary. I don’t feel underpowered in the ship, in fact I feel like performs noticeably better than the other 6.7s. Maybe it’s just that enemy teams don’t know how to react to a battleship rushing straight at them instead of hiding behind cover though
They may have nerfed the Dunkerque a lot, but I will keep grinding for her
2 Likes
guys bofors did a pretty solid bug report for the dunkerque shell that have all it’s chances to pass . if you guys want to help the dunkerque to get her proper APC shell then you know what to do .
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/zunkeeXHtKTf
16 Likes
That’s one amazing report, but I have a feeling it’ll go the same way as the usual super-detailed, solid, well reported and borderline confirmed French reports; ‘forwarded’ and never responded to
1 Like
The splinters in game aren’t that destructive like you described. Their penetration mostly ranges from a few to a dozen millimetres depending on the shell’s C/M ratio.
However, the result would be the same, as the 40mm bulkhead would not stop the blast effect of most battleship shells which typically penetrate about 50-70mm depending on the weight of bursting charges.
It’s only 210mm. “Bow in” I can only see working if you go against heavy cruisers, or 6.3 capital ships but at the range. Otherwise they just gonna puch right through it. Even American 7.0 battleships with 330mm can’t go “bow in”.
Few times I tried both of them I got oneshoted very quickly. Reverse angling is the way. It can tank even japanese 410mm for a long time.
Hopefully we’ll get a positive improvement out of it.
1 Like
Do you know of barbettes were split in 2 as well (like turrets)? I heard someone mentioned it, but I have no Idea where they got it from.
Here are some scans if that helps.
https://3dhistory.de/wordpress/warship-drawings-warship-blue-prints-warship-plans/french-battleship-drawingsplan-sets-newest-first/french-battle-ship-dunkerque-as-build-1935/
Reality disagrees with you. Dunkerque’s second turret’s roof was struck by Hood’s 15in/381mm guns on its right side, which resulted in everyone in that part of the turret being killed while the left part remained functional.
1 Like
I was talking about the damage model in the game.
Speaking of reality we also have example of non penetration jammed the turret on Jean Bart. Having a shell explode directly inside the turret isn’t going to end up great for you regardless there’s a bulkhead or not as turrets are extremely complicated and delicate mechanism. You may expect a bulkhead inside the turret to save personnel or avoid ammo detonation, but believing the turret can still be functional is just naive to put it lightly. It’s not even a French specific issue, in reality there were so many examples of turrets getting jammed by non penetrations or hits taken somewhere else like barbette.
Remember whatever bulkhead you have or not inside a turret it’s still one turret that being served by one set of rotation mechanisms.
1 Like