Lol so they unrealistically modeled Yamato’s ammo to be above the WL, but the Soyuz they conveniently put all the ammo under the WL when it should have more exposed ammo than Yamato. The Soyuz shell rooms should be almost entirely above the WL on top of them being way too small.
9 Likes
I reported the issue that the explosive weight of the 46 cm Type 91 AP shell is 33.85 kg according to Japanese sources, but 23.859 kg (52.6 lb) according to US reports.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vi4wAwa9Gcft
8 Likes
Do we have the historical documents to report Sovetsky?
Might as well get a long list of them in whilst we are in the dev server and they can hopefully be changed (who am I kidding)
By the way, below the 410mm armor there is an armor plate to protect against underwater bullets that gets thinner as it goes down, but in the game its maximum thickness is 165mm. In reality, I think the thickest part is 205mm thick. Did the developers actually implement the armor correctly and just show the average thickness of 165mm?It’s probably just a fictitious figure in dev.
9 Likes
The guy from dev server forum part have some historical info on Soujiz looks like. He shared with more info on RU forum.
From shell velocity possibly being too high, wrong armor type, ammo position, and possibly explosive type.
Not sure from what book he’s taking this info and if anybody made any bug reports.
3 Likes
Yamato ammo size and position right now makes the ship very easy to detonate.
1 Like
Hopefully it will get improved 🙏
2 Likes
It seems that this waterline is LWL. I compared Soyuz’s shape on dev server, and total hull, not only citadel is more submerged than this. So waterline with full displacement seems reason of this.
1 Like
State of Yamato after patch goes live.
ps. State of the naval modes on dev server and after update comes live
2 Likes
Why Yamato use 91, but 1?
Type 91 shells were all 6/∞ crh with boat tail. The diameter of the bourrelet was 18.07 in (45.898 cm). The original Type 91 APC was L/4.25 or 76.9 inches (195.35 cm) long. The later Type 1 version was L/4.47 or 81 inches (206 cm) long. The main difference was the length of the windscreen, as the conic angle went from 23.5 degrees to a longer, sharper 21 degrees. Type 1 shells also introduced a dye bag, which slightly increased their weight over that of the Type 91. The base of the Type 1 was slightly different from the Type 91 as the original two driving bands were replaced by a single double-width band with a copper ring in the middle of the band. The modified type superseded the original in 1941, so these battleships may never have carried any but the newer shell.
1 Like
To what extent are there configuration errors in the armor and compartmentalization of the Dev Yamato?
Currently, the diagonal bulkheads seem to have the same armor thickness as in historical fact, but there seem to be mistakes in the underwater side armor and compartmentalization in the turret.
1 Like
Fellas i present a question what happens when you have aircraft carriers that were supposed to be battle cruisers but then got converted into aircraft carriers? Like in warthunder they are battlecruisers but what happens to the naming scheme if the aircraft carrier version is added aswell?
1 Like
I think they’re going to deal with that by simply not adding Bearn, Akagi, Kaga, Lexington or Saratoga as they were designed. Afaik they haven’t added the same ship twice, much to our detriment.
I’ll also add that our Yamato sits high given its displacement. You can even see this on the diagram. If you look at the diagram and the armor…
7 Likes
I wrote bug reports on Yamato. Maybe some bug reports are duplicated, but they won’t be superfluous (but I warn you that I wrote everything in my own language :) ) But I don’t think it will stop us from helping fix the ship.
11 Likes
Do you guys think it would be interesting if they added the mine clearing boats from godzilla minus one?
Good job. Was the TNT fillar for he APHE shell reported?
No, I didn’t report it.