I feel as though they should be highly skeptical of engineering notes for non-built vehicles. Just because German engineers said the P1000 Ratte would only weigh 1,000 tons does not mean it would IRL. Someone calculated that vehicle out and found that it’d weigh nearly twice that if the thing were built. I’m sure if Soyuz were built IRL, its armor would not be as thick as advertised, as the Soviets lacked the metallurgy at the time, even to make armor that thick. It was common for an engineer to over-promise vehicle characteristics on paper, and it still is today.
Exactly this. especially when at the best case scenario its armor would have been significantly worse than any other BB at the time due to their inability to produce up to date naval armor.
you can just shoot her 2nd front turret barbette and set it on fire causeing it to explode even 6.7 wyoming can do it
They fixed this in the last updates, now a fire that start really high up takes a lot of time to reach the ammo, allowing players to put it out.
Hitting the barbette now will only slow down the gun, nothing more.
You can stay even at a 60° angle with Soyuz (basically flat) and all those overlapping armor plates will always save you.
1 Like
scarns got tiny low damage guns so it will be fine im more worried about Gneisenau
According to the reasoning of the gaijin we should wait for Italy for the battleship Marco Polo, considering that they put ships never completed… very powerful 406mm cannons reload of 30 seconds and finally Italy will also be able to compete with the Soyuz battleship (it should be the same ship only with the original Italian project of the Russian battleship)
It is not only the ship never completed but also not even started construction. Actually, design itself is not completed and WOWs’ Marco Polo is very different from real life considered Project UP. 41 design.
Better, so the gaijin according to his reasoning will be very strong!!
Anyway I was ironic in the first comment
Unfortunately, they don’t even acknowledge this. When pointed out the mistake, they said “not enough info”. I have no idea how to find information about a battleship that wasn’t even fully built. At the same time, in the in-game modeling, the Sovetsky Soyuz have extremely small ammunition dimensions. The image from left to right shows the ammunition sizes of the Mutsu, Rodney, Iowa, and Sovetsky Soyuz. Ammunition for guns of similar calibers should have similar widths in an orthographic view (and considering mass, these shells should even have similar volumes). It’s clearly visible that the shells of the Sovetsky Soyuz are much smaller than those of other 16-inch class guns, and The spacing between shells is smaller than the other. Meanwhile, when compared the shells of the Sovetsky Soyuz with its main guns, the shells are way too small to be fired from those main guns at all.
7 Likes
3D model =/= hitbox.
The 3D model does indeed equal the hitbox in this case, that is, unless the penetration viewer is incorrect and the vessel in matches is somehow not indicative of it’s actual design.
Russia just developed space folding technology so they could fit an incredible amount of ammo into the Soyuz while everyone else has to fill 40% of their ship’s volume with ammo.
1 Like
That’s because those are Kronshtadt 305mm ammo racks and tower elevators that they copy pasted into Soyuz, scaled only the elevator, separated a bit the shell rooms form the charges and called it a day.
The design is so poorly implemented that the magazines are miles away from the elevators (look at all the other ships how close they are to insure minimum delay during reload).
By that design the russian crew would have traversed more than 10m holding a 1T projectile plus all its charges in less than 6s to ensure the fire rate that they gave to this ship.
The only way they could have done that is using Asterix’s magic potion ( hystorical footage showing russian crew passing the projectiles to be loaded onto the elevator at 3:46):
Spoiler
3 Likes
So please tell me how to check the hitbox. Even the tutorial in the game suggests selecting the strike position based on the X-Ray. Unless the hitbox of the sovetski Soyuz is twice the size of the model, it will be smaller than the expected size. As a technical moderator, I believe you can provide me with corresponding technical support, such as telling me the location of the hitbox instead of just repeating “visual model doesn’t correspond with damage model.” or “3D model =/= hitbox.”
1 Like
CDK → AssetViewer
Or you can use the cursor to feel where the hitboxes are. It’s when the modules light up, you are touching it.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.