If this is true I don’t really understand the WT mechanic which treats shellrooms and powder magazines differently. The idea has been that propellants inside metal cartridges (shells^^) are mostly inert to fatal chain-like detonations.
WT Naval is really …
not to mention most ww2 era bbs had co2 exstiguishers and could redirect steam to magazines for damage control is pretty nerfed in this game for most countries
Explosives within hardened armor piercing steel ammo are functionally inert, but light and soft brass cases are only slightly more resistant than silk bagged charges or nitrocellulose cases. The primary job of the brass is to obturate while under pressure in the chamber while the gun is firing. It keeps the gas pressure from coming back out through the breech. But brass won’t stop hot shell fragments from lighting up the magazine, or prevent a fire in one charge from spreading.
they also have flashtight ammo storage which with brass casing helps a decent bit
heres her turret room btw theres a FORE and AFT charge which can be individually flooded you can leave one flooded in combat and use the other when that one runs low you can dewater it and use the other as there stored in water tight containers
In addition, bagged charges normally had a cloth envelope or pad sewn onto the end of the charge . This contained an igniter charge of several hundred grams of black powder which enhanced the action of the primer when the gun was fired, insuring that the fairly weak flash from the primer ignite the charge. While the main propellant, cordite, USN NC, German RP, etc. was fairly insensitive to all but the most sustained and intense flash, the igniter pads were not and keeping the charges in flashtight cannisters whilst in the magazines helped minimize accidental ignition from flash reaching the magazines. In German charges, the igniter pads were protected by the brass case of the main cartridge. In fore charges, the body of the charge was made of a sheet of rolled propellant with a rolled propellant central igniter tube running down the long axis (this tube, being internal, was not as vulnerable to flash as the end pads of USN and RN bagged charges). The propellant charge itself was stacked around the central tube and the ends of the charge sealed with a disks made of sheet propellant glued on. The whole was covered in cloth and the ends equipped with removable brass ‘bumpers’ to protect the charge during handling.
A British post-war analysis of the mountings on Baden criticized them for their lack of flash protection, but this seems overstated. The German use of enclosing all charges in brass greatly reduced the risk of flash igniting the charges. Thus they did not need the elaborate anti-flash fittings as found in British post-Jutland designs. The analysis noted that the German turrets were less foolproof than British designs as there were places where mistakes could jam them. The British report further stated that there was “a remarkable absence of precautions against sabotage” which seems more of a curious indictment against British sailors than a criticism of the German design.
@HK_Reporter
are these modeled in game as they dont seem to be because Bismarck and other german BBs die to flash fires in barbettes still they should give to time to exstinguish most fires
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_15-52_skc34.php
bug report for gniesnau
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/DGrLU5C8gCK4
Realistic:
Arcade:
It’s not the full set of data, only the ones that the platform register, but we clearly see that there are 3 groups:
For the overperforming one we already proposed different solutions on this topic, like changing the filler of her shell to TNT instead of the late war mix that she has or changing the armor composition to avoid the 1000+mm of protection that all those internal layers give her from basically every angle except broadside.
For the two struggling we have a problem.
I really can’t think of a way to balance her in Realistic and Arcade ( that doesn’t involve some kind of magical mechanics like in the competitor game ) apart from giving her a special spawn further away on every map, like what they initially did with DDs and cruisers.
That way brawling ships that likes to get close like Bismark can select the inner spawn and those ones that act more like a second line snipers ( or like that gameplay) can select the outher spawn and start from there.
Still, I hope that we’ll see changes soon as the hype is starting to die and they’ll be able to collect less and less data from those ships.
It seems for Iowa the biggest problem is users.
I’ve seen so many time Iowa players don’t empty their shell and carry full of ammunition. Definitely don’t know how to use their ship.
sounds like your average american main
I’m playing every nation on naval, both bluewater and coastal.
Iowa is very good ship when empty shell room and angle properly, which is not an hard thing thanks to her excellent mobility.
shes almost what scarn was when she was added a unkilliable monster for anything that isnt toptier
Thats quite gamey. This whole shellroom nonsense needs fixes.
It’s what often happens when think your dimestore AI can do all your “research”, and assuming you also don’t care about the actual truth.
It’s the full set of data: that’s all games played since they came into game last update. Some Statshark Global stuff for vehicles before it launched in February is incomplete, but for any new vehicle since Feb 1 it’s 100% complete.
The problem there is that a lot of players don’t use the forum and there was basically no mention of this mechanic in the patch notes.
Before this patch you could bring one or a thousand shells and the magazines would always act like they’re full.
Now we have a barebone visual clue for Iowa and some lines in the notes that sums up as “if you bring less ammo, the detonation will be smaller”, which is not really the best imput and probably got glossed over by many players.
Then I hope they’ll do something by the end of the year.
Tweaking parameters is the easiest part ( like changing TNT filler, reload or armor composition), but coming up with new spawns or mechanics to help a ship is a long task.
Also, if we’re seeing the same data that they see, I hope they won’t try to pull the “muh statistics!” excuse because it’s pretty clear (both in game and on paper) what’s going on at top tier naval.
Besides, next month is September, and there would be update or event, so I want USS Missouri to be in a tech tree for major update or vehicle of naval event in that month. We all know that her glorious day was September 2 of 1945.
Indeed, and this is also the case with the US standards to a smaller degree, which are very survivable if their ammo load is reduced. The problem with all US ships, however, is that the upper shell rooms are extremely vulnerable to fire and cannot be completely emptied. Even on the Iowa, you have to have one shell room filled in the barbette of turret #2.
I have max level US crews with fire extinguish times of about 10 seconds, and still at least half of the time the whole turret will go up if someone pens the barbette. It won’t do much damage, but it will permanently remove a portion of my firepower on a ship with one of the slowest reloads in the game - all without requiring the enemy to penetrate the hull.
I also rely somewhat on fire for kills because standards can’t keep up the DPM as well for crew kills, and bots with bad damacon are plenty. However, the vast majority of the time, fire kills will not count as such because Gaijin doesn’t track who burned down the magazine - only the last hit. Therefore, I usually end up with way more assists than kills at the end of a match.
@Der_Zerkquetscher
First of all, all of ships in real life cannot have sustained fire rate of maximum reload rate. Soviets do know that, and thats why they design main gun turret to have reload rate between ‘2.6 to 1.7’ depending on angle and shell usage.
And for barbette fire, no reload speed won’t have any effects on how fast fire from barbette spreads to magazine. While barbette fire itself is more of Gaijin’s articial addition(though there were no 100% guarantee that it won’t happen in real life), things didn’t change that Soyuz has seperated shell room under the hull while Iowa and Yamato stores shells on barbette. Range is much different. For Gneisenau, it’s more of her magazine DM in game include lowest part of barbette.
I can agree that barbette fire itself should be eliminated, especially as BR extends much further than before, and we could just put Scharnhorst/Gneisenau/Bismarck on to 8.7 (or 9.0). But if barbette fire exist, it is not weird that Soyuz and British battleships have better preparation time than Iowa/Yamato does.
This was a reply to (copied from another thread where it was offtopic):
Would havin a constant flow of ammo and propellant charges from the magazines to achieve these reload rates (which, somehow, russian magic i guess, are faster than the iowa and yamato (which achieves 1/4th of its K/D and 15% lower winrate, yk soft nerf stat: reload rate) wouldnt that create problems to have fires in the barbette and ammo elevator spread to the magazines? Because, if you dont want ammo and charges inside the barbette but have them constantly drawn from the magazine into the turret, like 3 times or sth the distance than on the yamato, it would be a bit more problematic to have fire proof doors and bulkheads closed at all times?
Somehow, the soyuz doesnt have any problem with that, in fact i have never ever seen one explode to a barbette fire? If theres a fire in the soyuz ammo elevator they apperently are like: well, lets better take some time extinguishing this (or just ignore it) WHILE we continue loading shells all the way from the mag into the turret in 28 seconds. Lets not get distracted by these flames over there thats not a big problem. Gneisenau goes boom to the same thing in 4 seconds sometimes (ofc depending on where the fire starts as mentioned in patch notes).
But i have exploded by 1200 rounds of aa ammunition going off that sit mid ships of the yamato. Twice. In one match. With the first incoming salvo in both occasions. While dodging/maneuvering cause i knew it was coming. Isnt that comedy? And thats also just a quick reminder that all the 8.7 ships also share the exact same repair costs (while one of them wins 15 % more matches AND gets 4 times as many kills before dying on average in rb)?
