Nerf Scharnhorst Armor or make it 8.0

Machinery of War Discussion Navy
,
101

— Планируется ли или будет ли пересмотрен расчёт урона от фрагментов снарядов, который, говоря простым языком, в настоящее время учитывает только количество взрывчатого или разрывного заряда внутри одного снаряда?

Если мы говорим об отсеках экипажа, то 2-3 года назад вы выясняли, почему отсеки получают двойной урон при попадании, поэтому вы ввели «односторонний урон», то есть учитывается только урон снаружи внутрь. Взрывающийся снаряд вне отсека экипажа → осколки могут повредить его, если попадут в отсек экипажа.

Взрывающийся снаряд внутри отсека экипажа → не повреждает отсек экипажа.

Мы проверили функционирование урона по внутренним стенкам отсеков, всё работает, как и с момента включения этой функции несколько лет назад. В настоящий момент мы не планируем пересмотр урона осколками по отсекам с экипажем.

In english translation

— Are there plans or will there be a revision to the calculation of damage from projectile fragments, which, in simple terms, currently only takes into account the amount of explosive or explosive charge inside one projectile?

If we’re talking about crew compartments, 2-3 years ago you figured out why crew compartments take double damage when hit, so you introduced “one-sided damage”, that is, only damage from the outside to the inside is taken into account. Exploding shell outside the crew compartment → fragments can damage it if they enter the crew compartment.

Exploding shell inside the crew compartment → does not damage the crew compartment.

We checked the functioning of damage to the internal walls of the compartments, everything works as it has since the inclusion of this function several years ago. At the moment we do not plan to revise shrapnel damage for crew compartments.

It’s quite been long that Gaijin prioritize penetration more than blast of the shell. What people usually don’t know. I’m having no problem with 11~12.6 guns if they hit well.

102

The answer reads as if the DM in fact takes into account the explosion inside the compartment and the player is just mistaken in their observation, no? At least that is what I gathered from the text.

103

Wait what?

If a HE shells explodes inside a crew compartment it does no damage?

1 Like
104

explosion inside the compartment : no damage
explosion outside the compartment : can damage if fragment from explosion penetrate the hull/armor and hit the compartment

1 Like
105

Interesting. But, I believe penetrating hits that explode in one compartment can damage adjoining compartments with shrapnel. Therefore, explosive mass is still relevant, just not to the penetrated compartment.

In my few games, I averaged about 8k damage with torpedoes. Shells were making it into enemy ships, but not doing anything. I put some 15 salvos into a Kronstadt in numerous places from about 3km, and only took his crew down about 20%.

106

you blow up the shell room first and then try to shoot little submerged Kronshtadt aren’t you

107

Eventually I did hit what I think it said was ready-use ammo, but that was about seven salvoes in.

108

“… The average rate of fire was 45 seconds (1.3 rpm) per gun at typical elevations, but this could be done at much lower rates. In 1940–1941 gunnery exercises Littorio averaged 30.6 seconds at 18.8 km, and Vittorio Veneto 29.7 seconds at 20.0 km - 1.96 rpm and 2.02 rpm respectively (achieved firing with the Charge 2).”…

Source

  • Bagnasco, Erminio; de Toro, Augusto (2011). The Littorio Class: Italy’s Last and Largest Battleships 1937-1948. Barnsley, UK: Seaforth Publishing. ISBN

Page 345

p.s. 29,7sec not 28,5 my mistake in remembering.

3 Likes
109

Edit: I’m dumb, disregard.

110

This is the reason why on those exercises Littorio class makes ~30 seconds. And there are problem. ‘Secondary Charge’(which is written as Cahrge 2) mode is quite famous as using four propellant instead of original six propellant bag, which is intended for exercise and coastal bombardment. But we don’t know what muzzle velocity is made by those ‘Secondary Charge’ mode

111

not entirely true - Charge 2 also used 4 bags, and since 3 bags were used in 1 “load”, it had the same speed as a normal operation (2 bags - 2 different movements).

Charge 2 was used in training to not consume the barrels . It has nothing to do with ROF.
Muzzle velocity of a shell has nothing to do with rate of fire.

Other nations listed 2rpm while in fact they also fired at a much lower speed (Bismarck for instance was seen to fire at 1 RPM at the last engagement / Richelieu much worse even). There are countless of different events listing to ROF, it’s a very complex matter (crew training, rammer speeds, angle of ship, sea state, reloading angle of guns, tear and wear, errors in loadings, etc etc etc etc)

Most 381mm guns or similar had a fixed angle of loading, and this affected also a bit the ROF of guns for instance. It’s not a “mathematical” number by any means; there are a lot of variables involved.

If the game always list “the best ROF” for their guns for all nations, we should do the same with ALL the vehicles/ships. Otherwise everything is screwed.

112

381_Rear_Arsenal
381_Rear_Arsenal1520×1739 329 KB

381_Turret
381_Turret1582×1514 189 KB

Nah. The hoist itself moves six bags at one time, although rail from magazine to hoist can carry only four bags at time.

Actually not if condition is so different from what ship is now in WT(for example, famous 34 seconds reload of US standard battleships cannot be in WT as it was in their original turret with ready rack while standard battleships in WT have modified turret without ready rack) But well, I sometiems wish Littorio to get 2 rpm by Gaijin’s mercy.

113

First - that’s a plan view which is interesting but it doesn’t get the full picture…
Second - since 4 bags are used [for each gun, mind you…], we don’t know if both magazine were used or not as standard procedures (we don’t know if all the 4 bags came from one magazine to the other or it was left+right magazine to hoist as standard practive) - if you know this great, let me know, if not it’s just conjecture that they used only 1 magazine.
Third - It shouldn’t take 16 seconds more to load 1 bag from one of the other magazines to the hoist and to put in the firing chamber (it’s ridiculous to even think about this) - moreover, if you see the scheme, the hoist are always going up in pair , so even if 4 bags are used, always the 2 hoists are used - the times are the same
Fourth - Notwistanding “not in condition so different”, that’s a ridiculous statement - how do you know what different condition were used ? They just didn’t train in 1940-1941 just for the fun of it - they timed the loading speed to simulate an actual engagement using a “training charge” as to not wear the barrels. Actually Charge 2 is even more realistic for “war training use”, as Charge 3 was for real training

p.s. not an expert on Littorios, so If there are some docs, very happy to see them or docs about firing procedures of Regia Marina

Again, all other vehicles uses the best “real” ROF as tested by the military in war condition (not paper stats).
Moreover, Regia Marina ALWAYS used very conservative numbersfor their guns and listed the “realistic” rate of fire (this was confirmed months ago by another user - see the 100mm Minizini ROF compared to Russian calculation - it’s 20-30% or so less [i go by memory], even though they’re the exact same gun)

114

image

I’ve said those sentence as in US Standard battleships, loading procedure is really big difference before modernization and after modernization. In the picture above you can see 18 shells were stored after the turret. This is the reason why in 1920s firing exercise US 14’’ battleships sometimes makes 30s seconds reload. But this ‘store’ is removed in modernization during late 1920~early 1930s because of safety reason(well, no one at that time forgot that British battlecruisers explodes cause of those stores in turrets). This is why Gaijin did not accept 34 seconds reload report AFAIK.

This could be the skeptical fact that ‘if those difference of number makes reloading procedure different’ Littorio could not get 29.7 seconds with its full muzzle velocity. Gaijin did not accept any ‘best’ real ROF without any consideration of condition.

But on the other hand, I don’t think Gaijin will give 45 seconds as does time definitely contain time for elevating and de-elevating barrels. Littorio class has very high loading angle and it means there would be a big time needed for those.

115

The loading angle of Littorio’s cannons was at 15° … the loading angle of Bismarck’s cannons as a comparison was at 2,5°…

But only for Littorio the “loading angle” is considered? This is very very deceiving and an unfair way of thinking; at 15° , the Littorio was basically firing at 23.000 meters -----) meaning that while firing at that range or around that range, the loading angle has not any influence whatsoever on ROF.

Bismarck’s cannons, on the other hand, if firing at 23.000 meters was basically also at an elevation of 15° or so… meaning the cannons had to go back and forth at 2.5° to reload and cycle again, losing another 2-4 seconds perhaps?

It’s a question relative to ALL BBs in this case… different engineerings, different concepts - at standard BB firing ranges the Littorio was actually more able to sustain its usual/normal firing rate compared to the Bismark - while at extremely close range it was the opposite.

Moreoever, the training and the elevation rates of the Littorio were 6°/sec for both.

116

Maybe I wrote as not what intended. What I want to say is ‘For a balance reason, Gaijin will reduce time for elevating barrels from those 45 seconds as 45 seconds is too long for battleships’

117

Okay, so nothing new actually.

118

oh didn’t know it was already well known ))
In fact you’re right, the book was written quite a few years back but didn’t remember this.

Not a expert on naval warfare anyway - I have a friend in Rome Italy , I should ask him if he can go to the naval military archives there and find something , would be awesome to see some docs like that one in gunnary training also for other guns

2 Likes
119

Very intresting, i’m always fashinated about the pasionate people’s ability to find hystorical sources.

But… sorry to make the devil’s lawyer, this tread was raised for discussing about Scharnhost.

It would be way better to open an new thread for discussing about your discovery regarding italian ship.

4 Likes
120

Back to the Topic, yes Scharnhorst goes to at least 7.7 and if possible 8.0. Current 7.0 is too crowded. Some should go to 7.3 and some should go to 7.7 ASAP

5 Likes