that one yes, thank you !
165 then quite meh
I’m not surprised. Strangely enough nobody expected their battleships to fight like tanks on a cod-style war thunder map.
3 Likes
Thank you for saying it. People have been looking at stats and blueprints so much on this forum, they tend to forget that real life battles don’t have fleets spawning out of thin air 15 km apart from each other. Works for ground and air as well.
1 Like
Yeah well, one can hope they move the spawn at least a bit further away, although i’m not expecting anything really
1 Like
Yeah… They are in such a rush to give us all the battleships but act as if giving us engagement ranges that these ships were designed for is going to bankrupt them or something.
It’s the same for ground too, I always have more fun [at top tier] on the larger maps but Gaijin only ever wants to add the awful small ones.
4 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/PQuy9704e5jj
so i did a little bug report about the velocity
1 Like
yes and no . the gun blew up not because 830m/s was to much but because the base of the shell had a flaw in the conception anjd it was at the limit of it’s resistance + the SD21 propelants charges where more powerfull during the battle of dakar because of the high ambiant heat ( above 40°C) making it produce 3700kg/cm2 instead of 3200kg/cm2 .
on top of that do you really think the engineers never tried the guns before mounting them ? it was working perfectly fine untill the charges became to hot ( dont really ask me how a big heat make the charges that much powerfull i dont really know but i guess it have to do with the thermic expansion ( if it’s correct to say ) and maybe the composition have something to do with it also .
welp they totaly ignored it and im pretty sure they didnt even took the time to read it just because it dont have official docs in it … so i made another one with MORE sources and hopefully it will pass … at least if they try to connect 2 neurons and dont send the same copy paste response to everysingle report that cant have a primary source
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/h0ccx70vmzNp
also @HK_Reporter do you think you can help with it or is it condamne to be ignored just because there are no docs with the signature of god testifying it’s true ?
As funny as it is to see Richelieu running around with submerged magazines, it is disappointing that the unique subdivided turret system the French had to mitigate the impact of internal issues was reduced to this.
I do not have any high hopes for the split turret to be modelled at all, but having the two levels of ammunition separated is technically one step closer to this implementation, since you need each level linked to each half turret. But I decided to try anyway and submit a bug report concerning this.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xILYdMTmGvKJ
Also, one more point about the split turret system. While it is true that rounds that do not penetrate the turret can put the entire turret out of action (and in no way am I expecting the other half turret to continue functioning after a frontal plate penetration), there are still some benefits to splitting the turret and elevator into two modules, one of which could be a shorter repair time of the entire turret/elevator if both modules were not destroyed. I hope the developers will be more open to this discussion since I think this is a missed opportunity to implement something truly unique and historical into the game.
1 Like
If that can ever be relevant at one point or another, we had this sketch from the Dunkerque discussion.
1 Like
Should this amount of crew be concentrated in the crew quarters during battle?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/c3MtQowqza6k
Am I the only one who noticed the Richelieu got a pretty significant nerf to survivability ?
It lost the front part of fuel tank recently and I don’t know why…
Can someone backup this change ?
IIRC - a general rule of thumb from my stage 1 chemistry (a few decades ago) an increase in temperature of 10 deg C doubles the speed of a chemical reaction.
So warmer charges might be just burning significantly faster, giving a much sharper rise in pressures since the shell will not have moved as far down the barrel at any given stage of burning, so less volume to fill.
1 Like
Speaking of:
2 Likes
Do someone know why Richelieu max speed is 56km/h? In Devblog it was written it should be “higher than 59km/h”?
And also how about the dispersion of guns, it’s still the worst out of top BB?
After the refit in the US, her speed decreased because of the additional weight.
1 Like
Yes it’s still quite bad (idk if it is the worst), but it’s quite historical tbf
Don’t quote me on that, but i think dispersion is wrong for all ships in game either way, for balancing reasons
IMHO whether dispersion should be “historical” for ALL ships without exceptions, or it should be completely balancing characteristics, no excuses for “historical” things, but idk what is developer’s approach here
Anyway even if they want to make it historical - Richelieu showed one of the worst results of guns dispersion in real life, it’s true, but it seems there were some nuances and we can discuss that
-
Cause quad turrets had the worst dispersion, BUT if you will shoot from each gun with a little delay - then it should be more accurate, right? So I think then developers should give us ability to shoot from each gun with delay and with less dispersion OR - just to make dispersion for salvos as if it has a little delay between shots. I think last one is kinda good and simple decision, so turret’s dispersion will basically depend only of type of gun’s dispersion
-
I also found interesting quote in the Internet in discussion about dispersions of 15-18inch guns from WW2
“Richelieu’s guns were actually very good guns, design of quadruple turret was basically a double twin turret (not too complex design, however with small distances between a pair of guns, that were to be fired together). To make things worse, wartime and France invasion forced Richelieu (and Jean Bart) to leave French dockyards with poor powder and shell quality. Powder bags had even to be manufactured while in Dakar and in Casablanca, mixing Dunkerque’s class powder bags, with huge differences between one charge and another. Problem was only partially solved when ammunition was provided by US manufacturers for Richelieu”
IMHO it seems the problem with powder bags probably really was so, those ships could barely run away from Germans and many systems were not ready, same problem with shells and powders production. So we should research this topic, and then I hope someone will transfer these thoughts to developers and they will notice it. So maybe that’s the reason why we can’t always rely on guns real testing results
So maybe dispersion should depend only on basic characteristics - shell’s size, speed, length of barrel and etc, not turrets characteristics and not based on results on real shooting
1 Like
It can’t, because delay coil mechanism was not installed on Richelieu until postwar. Without delay coil, a full gun salvo can give over 1700m dispersion at about 25km, and even with half salvo its dispersion was still almost twice as much as the 15"/42 on QE.
Developers have been already very kind to Richelieu by giving her “only” 0.39 vertical spread angle.
By the way, developers had already taken the presence of delay coil into account when they consider the dispersion values for ships. For example, the US standard battleships and Japanese 14" gun battleships all get pretty decent accuracy given they received delay coil upgrades before WW2