Again, Yamato - with 46cms - has to pixel hunt both Soyuz, and to a lesser extent, Iowa and SoDak.
They just need to aim in the general direction of the Yamatos.
Not remotely enough if I have to point stern forward at an angle and still have a chance of being instantly killed with an ammunition explosion… With only 15 rounds left in the frontal magazine.
Meanwhile, Soyuz can be borderline comatose in terms of brain activity and still be at the top of the leaderboard.
So Yamato loosing 85% of the crew from single hit, in the middle of the hull, due to issues in its model - it’s Soyz problem not Yamato? What next, Littorio class long reloads is also Soyz problem? Absents of “reduced-charges” for better angles, crew-boxes eating shrapnel and explosions, barely noticeable difference in he-fragmentation penetration for different shells(88 kg - 77 mm, 10 kg - 60 mm), shell shrapnel or explosions having no pen on around plates if shell exploded on some surface(barbet, armor deck, bulkhead etc.) except that one on which it exploded(which leads to no any nearest modules getting damage with those hits) for sure its all “Soyz” problems, not game itself overall.
I have never had this issue in either Yamato or Musashi. I have seen this issue on Mutsu and Nagato, however. Hell, I’ve even abused it by purposely aiming boilers.
Curious mental gymnastics. They’re not the topic of discussion. There’s already been plenty of solutions to increasing the firerate to 31 second reload aced. And has been denied repeatedly.
Because a 40.6cm shell should have both similar penetration and nearly double the explosive payload of same era contemporaries, right? With not only a faster reload but similar (or better) accuracy characteristics, right?
While also having an armor scheme that (it would not have had in real life due to a variety of reasons listed) almost completely invalidates even the largest guns constructed - and placed - on a battleship that saw combat.
While also out speeding (historical, which I’m fine with) but also being fully capable of outmaneuvering (something it couldn’t do period due to rudder layout had she been finished) the battleship that historically had a 640m turning circle?
I have zero issue with the Pr23 existing in warthunder. I have an issue with a battleship that makes literally everything else arguably pointless.
Edit
And no, it’s not because it’s Russian. If Iowa or even Yamatos were in the same position that Soyuz is currently in, I’d be complaining too.
Because 80 kg of explosions should explode way harder than 8 kg of it but in game it not.
Iowa 18.55 kg, Soyz - 25.7 kg, Vanguard - 22 kg, Rodney - 20kg, Richelieu - 21.92 kg where did u get double i dunno?
Soyz reload in game is slower than in its actual project(which is 2.5-2.6 RPM).
Iowa have better manuver, Richelieu too, as all other ships with better speed, acceleration and lighter mass have it, when speed is the key to maneuverability. So that also not a Soyz problem but game itself.
Ground game mechanics and designs stretched on naval gameplay is problem here, not the one ship characteristics. If shells and guns had proper performance, if damage models and damage design had no flaws and issues, if maps had good design, if the was more than 3 respawns and good synergy between ships classes, if in naval plane gameplay wasn’t nerfed to the ground and plane BRs for naval combat were properly tweaked down(or even planes flight and attack in groups) - there was no tread like this, where people demand nerf to a ship just cause it hurts them.
If you never have it, doesn’t mean that there is no issue.
That looks like the aa ammo just above the main belt midships exploded (top picture should be the small area with white frame) that made the yamato instantly disappear when she was introduced. That explosion (or the shells themselves) probably took out all the boiler rooms as well. Somehow gaijin seems to think the IJN would stick 30-60% of all people on the ship into the engine rooms during battle. With a big explosion midships i would expect some quite heavy crew loss, but 85% is quite excessive (even more so when the model viewer labels this aa ammo as 2200 rounds lol). But not entirely sure, what do the russian captions say translated?
EDIT: Btw, February statshark stats are out. Sojuz now sits at 10.67 K/D and 3.6 K/S. What a surprise. But im sure gaijin is working hard on bugfixing yamato and other ships models /s. But that might also be due to less people want to play top tier naval rb so theres more and more bots per game (most likely resulting in every ship’s k/d going up), considering how broken, pointless and unbalanced it is at 8.7 not exactly a big surprise.
Soyuz 40.6cm APCBC: 39.58kg equivalent.
25.7kg explosive mass. 1108kg shell. 830 m/s. 852 to 572mm of penetration
Soyuz 40.6cm SAP: 88kg explosive mass. 1108kg shell. 830 m/s. 629 to 422mm of penetration. 28 second reload.
Iowa: 40.6cm Mk13 HE: 68.28kg equivalent.
69.67kg explosive mass. 820 m/s. 106 to 59mm
Iowa 40.6cm APCBC: 18.18kg equivalent, 18.55 explosive mass. 1225kg. 762m/s, 857 to 583mm of penetration. 29 second reload.
Yamato class 46cm HE: 64.77kg equivalent, 61.69kg explosive mass. 805 m/s. 123 to 57mm.
Yamato class 46cm APCBC: 25.05kg equivalent. 23.86kg explosive mass. 1458.3kg. 780 m/s. 870 to 603mm of penetration. 31.7 second reload.
Rodney 40.6cm APCBC: 20.9 kg explosive mass. 929kg projectile. 788 m/s 696 to 423mm, 35.3 second reload. (The exception in the list as this isn’t an end tier battleship but a 7.7. there’s going to be some serious differences due to lower battle rating.)
Rodney 40.6cm HE: 75.25kg explosive mass. 792 m/s. 101 to 61mm of penetration.
Vanguard 38cm SAP: 61.67kg explosive mass. 225 to 122mm of penetration. 752 m/s. 30 second reload.
Vanguard 38cm Mark 22b APCBC: 20.68kg equivalent. 22kg explosive mass. 805 m/s. 727 to 454mm of penetration. 879kg projectile.
Bismarck 38cm AP: 20.3kg explosive mass. 820 m/s. 701 to 435mm of penetration. 800kg projectile. 24 second reload.
Bismarck 38cm SAP: 35.04 kg explosive mass. 524 to 325 mm of penetration.
I think you get the point.
Not only does Soyuz have more explosive payload in its SAP than every HE listed but this also comes with the benefit of it sacrificing literally nothing for best in class gun performance. That’s not including its astronomically good AP whereas other guns or even the platform itself lose out on something.
Armor? Absolutely best in class.
Speed? Not an issue for her size.
Maneuverability? Great.
The simplest solution to hit Soyuz is to nerf its armor plates by about 15 to 20% and then adjust from there.
Doing this would literally adjust it to a playstyle similar to its battlecruiser cousins: great guns, but fragile.
Basically, remove the Cemented multiplier buff. Russians simply couldn’t make cemented plates thicker than 230mm… make it RHA instead.
That’s why they made them so thick on the first place; so the thickness would make up for the weaker material.
Instead, in WT, it gets BOTH the strongest material AND thickest thickness they designed to make up for the lack of such material.
Also as a minor side note for Vanguard and Rodney, their reload times are 5 seconds longer than primary sources suggests, the current rate of fire is because the devs quote “considered it unnecessary to further increase the rate of fire” and rejected the report to increase the reload time by 5 seconds. Which suggests that reload rates can be used as a balancing mechanic. Soyuz therefore could also be given a longer reload to balance it against everyone else, but they wont
I mean, if they keep the gun performance, hit the armor as suggested.
If the 15 to 20% nerf is too much, adjust accordingly. I’d argue this sort of nerf will at least give most other ships a possibility to fight back to some degree.
That I do agree, but its something else to mitigate the shell performance if needed
No i don’t get what you trying to say.
305 Russian SAP also have bigger filler than other SAPs of that caliber, heck even bigger than HE one of the same gun. Beside that SAP for that gun was developed and manufactured. Is that a problem that russian engineers twice choose this filler rate composition?
What performance? It’s basically the same as for similar shells all those filler kgs. mean almost nothing in game atm.
The historical accuracy isn’t the argument here, game balance is.
How convenient, considering that all that armor argument is based on “historical accuracy”. Besides that all big guns filler performance already nerfed to abnormal level. So instead of demanding improves on all big guns performance you continue to ask for nerf just one ship.
Ok lets pretend, they nerfed reload and filler(which will change nothing) and Soyz KDR dropped to Iowa lvl(which almost the same), then what you will ask to nerf it further, now armor, ok done it’s still good what next another round of nerf? So now you have Iowa top dog, will we nerf it too? Will we continue to nerf all ships until they all be the same? Year ago was a moment when barbet fire almost guaranteed kill, which was “kinda balanced” but community opposed that(cause “ugh he killed me it’s not fair”) so now we have ships that explode form barbets fire and those which is not is it now more “balanced” for you.
To what level you all here want to nerf it to be contented?
ps. I think some sort of balance will not be achieved with some “ship nerfs”, but with bug fixes, mechanic improvements and redesigns of some game systems and maps, and you all should demand that instead of running circles mumbling “Soyz bullied me, nurf now”, but for sure it’s harder then this.
My argument was on the basis it would actually allow other ships to fight against it instead of having to just accept they do basically nothing against it.
A Tosa at 6km literally struggles to penetrate it full broadside, even with shooting the back of the turrets while it’s shooting another ship. You think that’s okay?
It’s literally the Scharnhorst problem and my solution to it is reasonable. Every other ship sacrifices something in comparison or has some drawback.
I even suggested if 15 to 20% reduction to the armor is too much, adjust until it’s a reasonable balance. Guns untouched to put it like Kronshtadt, Sevastopol and Stalingrad: Great guns, squishy hull. Although the ‘squishy hull’ would be less pronounced on Soyuz since it’s still a battleship.
Edit
When the outcome of the match is decided on who has a Pr23/has more Pr23s, there’s a balance problem.
So what’s the problem “lets nerf Courbe cause it can’t be pened by Moffet” kind of logic.
That your skill issue here. Should we nerf something based on misconceptions and bad play?
Except those matches where it doesn’t and team without Soyzes(or have less them) won against team with them.
@ParryACO-psn Is this the first time you have dealt with Kweedko?
Most people just mute Kweedko. He does nothing but gaslight and try to get the RU botes buffed so he can continue seal clubbing with them. He is NEVER honest with his intentions in his posts.
Best to ignore him, or block him. I have had him blocked for over a year now, and he has still not posted a one redeeming post. Nothing but gaslighting and lies, always.
Even the RU players on the RU forums give him hell for his absurd posts.
He is also at least partially responsible for the ruining of Naval Arcade aiming, and he intentionally hid the poll that caused the change from the English forums. He knows what he did. He doesn’t care. He ONLY cares about himself and what HE likes and wants. He will NEVER admit anything that he does, and will only lie and gaslight to hide his true goals.
Expand my reply below to read about what he did with the aiming changes, and for quotes from the RU forums where they cannot stand him either:
Just ignore and/or block him. He is not worth a single one sentence reply.
There’s always a possibility of bad play.
There’s also the possibility of packet loss, ping and a dozen other factors at play.
Except it’s consistent. It’s not ‘Oh I played five matches and called it a day’, Kweed. Don’t try to gaslight me.
Did you forget that the moffett for a while could penetrate the Yamato’s barbettes? Which still may or may not have been fixed?
There is a keen difference between a DD and a BB. The gymnastics aren’t going to work against me.
Edit
I’ve seen him post before but I haven’t been aware of his antics.
I mean looking at his pictures with the pens on the Soyuz ud really wonder what kind of stuff he thinks. Man takes screenshots of relatively close range shots at a literally unangled Soyuz and then is like “what are u talking about we can pen it with these ships”…
I’m not the one who stated that Soyz can not been penned from a broadside on relatively close ranges by japs 8.0.
Struggle =/= inability.
It still took several salvos to finally detonate the magazine.
In his defense, I did say the 41cm IJN BBs struggle to pen at 6km.
Which they do.
