Sorry Italian fans. Dev server just howed that Roma has a RoF of a mere 1.3 rounds per minute.
3 Likes
Surprised they didn’t nuke Richelieu similarly.
Also interesting that they didn’t nuke Gneisenau or selvastopol
1 Like
So they are making it Soldati of battleships. Sometimes I imagine how Vyacheslav Bulannikov takes Italian flag, puts it over a dartboard and throw darts at it.
2 Likes
they could have started from a 50 seconds reload and get down to 40 aced tbh. it would have been the middle ground between the originary 45 seconds confirmed by the regia marina, bad firing position and perfect firing positions.
about the penetration values of the ap shell… i also remember reading either in a book or an extract form a uni research that the regia marina tested the penetration value of the 381/50 on their own armor and got some great pen results which would (even tho, those two sources wouldn’t be enough to justify a change in gaijins eye i suppose)
3 Likes
they might be using some Regia Marina tests that used a constant in the De Marre formula that’s not accurate for the new shells. It was fine for the WW1 ones, but for these new shells it would be better to use USN’s Empirical Armor Penetration formula which would result in higher pen values.
i found official Marina Militare documents published by their office that has values of the penetrating AP and SAP power.
is there someone else with data at hand so that we can make a more comprehensive bug report?
Why was the EC3/ter «Gufo» radar not included in the RN Roma model?
2 Likes
FYI the 120mm guns on the Roma are NOT the star shell howitzers - they are old 1909 model type - Littorio class isn’t shown as one of the ships they are fitted on, but that is what the model says.
They elevate up to 30 degrees, so I guess they could still be used for star shell - 200 ammo modelled for each.
1 Like
1 Like
I really hope that they don’t nerf the Roma.
@Smin1080p_WT any comments on RN Roma current state, are devs going to fix its multiple issues (penetration, protection, RoF) or it’ll will retain reduced capabilities to keep it at low BR?
1 Like
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/IlqqKpYCEgJn
Let’s just hope that the last statement from the moderators won’t go as they say or we’ll really have an Ariete 2.0 situation in our hands for no logical reasons.
Do we not already cement present on Kongou, just add it anyway??? Even if they believe it to be for water-tightness, which I disagree with.
In Italy we say “severo ma giusto” strict but fair. (Referred to your comment)
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/eaL6xjKCpZSB
This is a report I made about the solution on the 381mm RoF problem (and all the 1st, 2nd, 3rd charge confusion that went on), taking multiple sources into consideration.
For the solution without the tecnical gibberish about shells and charges here’s the paragraph about it:
Spoiler
Now on the main topic: how the italians reloaded their heavy guns.
They used a method called “Caricamento ordinario”.
In this method the shell was loaded first and then the bursting charges were loaded into the powder chamber.
To be fully operatonal the powder chamber must be fully loaded so that the carges were closely in contact with the “Cannello” (the igniter) to avoid missfires or, in the worst case scenario, the return of the shell in the powder chamber and its detonation inside it.
For a first charge shot there were no problems as all six charges were loaded, securing the powder chamber, but what happened for the 2nd and 3rd charge shots?
In this case the missing gaps in the powder chamber were filled with a special pouch called “Stoppaccio”. This charge was inert and easily flammable, with exactly the same dimensions of a normal charge.
Its role was to push the true charges against the igniter and secure the projetile, completing the load.
This can be seen in this image (this is a visual representation from the author):
This means that, even during 2nd and 3rd charge shots, the loading mechanism must complete its entire cycle to secure both the chamber and the projectile in place to avoid major damage on the gun.
This validates the average times achieved by italian sailors during the 1941 trials where they reached a 30s average reload due to their better training and solved issues with these massive guns.
If you want to comment the report please only add additional information that support it, do not clutter it as it only slows down the validation process.
Thank you for your attention and the help given.
5 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MoRuEzaAdDJP
Please everybody try to support this futher report as the previous one was changed to “not a bug” without even contacting me for an explaination, claiming that only data about 1st charge shots should be given to prove the point, meaning that they didn’t read it fully or thy’re trying to rewrite history as they want.
The explaination was clear as the powder chamber MUST always be fully loaded to fire, meaning that every shot was akin to a 1st charge shot as the reload mechanism had to complete its entire cycle.
Don’t know why they’re trying so hard to butcher the Littorios before their arrival (no cement layer, now no relistic RoF) but they’re trying their best.
If any moderator can also help I would be grateful as I’ve attached to the previous report only raw, hystorical data and disregarding them as pure “explainations” is an insult to the work of many hystorians that are translating and bringing us new sources every day.
2 Likes
Aaand…it get’s immediately closed for the usual “not a bug”.
Enjoy an overly nerfed Littorio without its proper RoF and cement armour.
Just to show how inconsistent are the responses:
1st major report: Community Bug Reporting System
|
|
Answer: prove that there’s no difference in reload times between 1st,2nd,3rd charge shots
|
|
2nd major report ( data given that the reload rates are the same):
Community Bug Reporting System
|
|
Answer: not a bug.
Something needs to be done as someone is clearly closing his ears to factual data to implement a complete different history.
That’s an insult to every naval historian that collected and transcribed those data for everyone.
3 Likes
This is actually sad…
2 Likes
Gaijin are you aware that with this unjustified behaviours your employees are being ridicoulous?
1 Like