Right now naval is way too much about magazine-hits anyway. As if the mechanics of ground-rb are transfered to the seas. I´d love to see more of wearing down, crippling vessels. On top of that some ships have very, very tiny magazines, for instance Blagorodny, and others have giant magazines raising above the water-line on a fourth of the vessel´s lenght, for instance like Armada or Cadiz. Those ships are of comparable size, calibers and ammunition-quantity. PS I´ll search for a funny replay later where my fresh Hood after dying in a destroyer gets scratched by a Zheleznyakov on the top of the second battery and instantly explodes :). There´s still a lot to do for this ambitous damage-model Gaijin chose.
3 Likes
All battleships do, especially when you dont have ammo storage researched yet.
Imagine building a battle-ship costing more than a decent fleet of smaller vessels and send it out to combat without means to fight fire, repair parts, apropriate ammo-storage, decent ammunition and a bad rudder. Makes perfect sense, doesn´t it?
1 Like
Well many ships in ww2 were old and dated and needed refits. Hood needed her refit desperately but just couldnt be releived at sea. She for example needed completely new engines.
So the idea isnt beyond reason, especially for a game.
1 Like
No 40km is the spotting distance, you engage much closer but atleast you have time to choose your targets and make a formation instead of 5 seconds into combat shells are fired in your direction.
1 Like
Plunging fire would but at 10km and below there is no segnificant plunging fire except from cruisers or battleships with EXTREMELY low shell velocity. The deck armour and bulkheads/inner armour produces more protection than just bulkhead and inner armour.
And it is a thing in naval, des moines players constantly get ammunition detonated in the bow because they take maximum shells. You can kill them easily in 1 salvo. You can tell the experienced players with them because they never take shells to the brim and when you hit them in ammunition stores they may detonate and catch fire but it doesnt sink the ship.
Your ship would have to be about 500 feet tall to spot anything at 40km.
Even the Japanese didn’t build pagoda’s that high.
1 Like
Sorry but you aren´t correct for example Fuso has horizon 22 km evay but that doesn´t mean that it can´t spot targets further eway. I would say that for other BBs the spotting range (superstructure and some main battery turrets can be seen) is around 34 km and in theory Fuso can visualy see other Fuso at even 45km.
Alaska has the spotting range at 32 km, Kronshtadt and Hood are also at 32 km only for example the Scharnhorst is at “just” at 30 km. Even when we look at WW1 BBs like Wyoming have the spotting range 32 km evay but can´t actually do firing solution at this range.
All these ranges use only visual spotting ranges radar would make these even further eway.
Theoretically, in perfect visibility which doesn’t exist, being able to see the top pixel of a mast does not mean that the ship can be identified. Without identification you wouldn’t have bearing, so no plot.
Unless you can find instances where ships were spotted at such ranges in WW2?
I said spot not identify, and scout aircraft and reports are given by intelligence where ship locations where sighted to be. What I am saying is that ships in warthunder at top tier naval that have firing ranges of 20-30km, should not spawn in at 12km or less. They should spawn at 35-40km since it gives people a chance to think about what direction they will sail and who they will target once they slowly crop up into identification range, rather than just what it is now =
Spawns in*
AHHH FIRE EVERYWHERE, 5 People already shooting me! Who am I supposed to shoot, oh gosh 3 teammates just ran into me and are trying to turn but I can’t.
*Instantly dies from shells meant for one of those other 3 teammates crashing into your hull in the first 30 seconds to minutes.
1 Like
As I said in the post the 39 m heigh mast (where the view ports are) of Fuso allows it at range of 34 km to see 10.7 metres heigh target which means that in case of Alaska it sees superfiring turret and superstructure.
Well Yamato started firing from range of 31 km against Taffy 3 which was made up from smaller ships which would be way harder to spot and identity, then battleship.
Escort carriers were hardly small.
Still nowhere near 40km…
What sources are you using to back up these assertions?
The greatest range at which one ship’s guns have successfully hit another vessel is 24 km (15 miles), a feat that occurred twice during the second world war. On 8 June 1940 the German battleship Scharnhorst hit the British aircraft carrier Glorious at that range in the North Atlantic, while a month later on 9 July, during the battle of Calabria the British battleship HMS Warspite hit the Italian flagship Guilio Cesare at a similar distance. Both are remarkable feats of gunnery considering that in each case both vessels involved in the exchange were moving at high speed.
However the guns started firing further out than that, it’s just the accuracy was good enough that finally some shells could hit the ships at that distance of 24km. Expect them to have been opening up around 26km+ by leaving time to get closer whilst more shells where fired increasing likelyness of impact.
Yes I know, I posted the 26,000 yard figure earlier.
But that isn’t spotting a target at 43,000 yards which Shadow is claiming.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_11-545_skc34.php
The Scharnhorst using it’s 283mm guns at it’s maximum elevation of 40* had a range with the APC rounds of just under 41km. Accuracy would be incredibly low but that is the maximum range. You ofcourse need to see the target at that range, so either scout aircraft/other ships would have to help with firing commands. Or you fire using the directory of other ships with much higher range for gunnery.
So again if scharnhorst can technically hit something (not accurately) at 41km max.
And it’s in world record is 24km, then it stands to reason it probebly spots things around the 26-28km mark. So warthunder top tier naval should not definitely not be spawning in against eachother at the ludicrouse cruiser v cruiser range of 12km or less.
What assertions am I making?
What I meant about the size was that the escort carrier and the DD aren’t really tall and especially aren’t very distinct target since at the range where Yamato started firing only 8 metres of the hull + 6 metres of small superstructure were visible.
This is what one Fuso can see of other Fuso at the 40km the height of the visible part is 13 metres which is just one metre shorter the that of the IRL example. Not to mention I mentioned that it is just theory not any parctical info.
And this is at the 34km range
1 Like
I do not know if you’ve played naval recently, but after recent changes your SL income cant’ be negative.
So your’re not paying anymore 30K SL per death
I have played recently, the only reason I’m even bothering to spade BB’s right now is because of no negative SL benefit of premium time. Still, it’s not enjoyable to detonate constantly within the first couple of minutes of a match, basically earning no SL and no RP, making for a very long, painful slog of a grind.
Hood costs about 40k losing her. And by the arcady magizine-hits-is-everything-that-really-matters and the seemingly random super-shots that happen you can easily lose lions. But above all the fun is lost.