The actual compartment system is not balanced at all

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1
Do you like the actual compartment system ?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
Do you want it to change ?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
Do you like the proposed idea to be in game.
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Hello everyone,

I’m here (again — you?!) to tell you a story. A story I’ve been repeating for months and months about the “new” compartment system.

I’ll explain why this system is bad, why it increases the survivability of many ships while decreasing it for others, and why I think this system should be reworked again, using different ideas.

As everyone knows, ships are divided into multiple compartments.
For every 3 destroyed compartments, you get a hull breach and the ship sinks.
Ships can have between 4 to 11 compartments.

Spoiler

image
image2043×501 132 KB

The more compartments you have, the better your chances of survival.
All these compartments have the same amount of HP depending on the ship class (if I’m right — that’s what Gaijin said).
To damage a compartment, you need to penetrate it.

Now let’s get to the point.

What happens if you do not penetrate it?
You basically deal no damage to that compartment. Logical.

What happens if you do penetrate it?
You deal damage, and if you overpenetrate, you deal double damage.

So now you know how it works.

Ships are armored in different ways: all-or-nothing armor, or full armor coverage.
So what’s the problem?

The problem is that ships without armor on the hull can be destroyed much faster than other ships at the same BR (Yamato, Musashi and some others).

Spoiler

Taskent test on Yamato.
One shot on an armored area, and another on an unarmored area.

image
image1708×847 110 KB

image
image1670×852 108 KB

Even if you don’t take much internal damage, you will sink faster than many other ships.
Now you understand why your Yamato is basically food for literally everything.

To balance things, I recommend keeping the current compartment damage model only for torpedoes, and bringing back the old system with hull plates that can be destroyed.

Change this system :
In my opinion, the damaged-plate system was much better than the current damage model.
Once a plate is destroyed, shells could pass through it and damage the plate behind it. Till deal damage to amunition/engine rooms.

There is poll to know if you like this damage system and if you want to changed by my idea.
Maybe you have better idea than mine. Feel free to say it in comments !

8 Likes
2

G’day Bombe, I’m slightly conflicted in opinion of the compartment mechanics, like they make sense if you look at them as if sections of a ship yet their damage models are strange.

Like I can survive a catastrophic magazine detonation with extremely damaged red hulls segments yet I take a torpedo to the bow that doesn’t detonation a magazine an yet there goes three hull segments, it should at least correspond with catastrophic damage over well that which is especially annoying if a second or third spawn an there’s a random torpedo (torpedo net spawns lkke in EC when? Boom Defence Ships if you want to make it player related?)

I remember the hull armour system well, I was under the impression it was still in game yet hearing it isn’t is interesting (might be because I rarely go up against armour thicker than 3" since I don’t venture above 5.7 often), inadvertently it would definitely be a helpful nerf to several ships now that I think of it.

Still the current system is a boon to vessels that if without would suffer greatly if they didn’t have such a system, I’m talking slow corvettes & weakly armed frigates an to extension certain smaller vessel with armoured centrepoints (I can’t think of the word currently).

2 Likes
3

About coastal, and low BR. I do not think it would change anything because they are not armored at all.
ships will remain as it is IMO.
Fregates remain bad in most case (USS coolbaugh for exemple)

1 Like
4

Can they change the system based on the maximal weight of water a ship can take before flooding become unstoppable. With like the titanic with 4 compartments.
They should remodel the compartment system so if you take a hit in the superstructure it doesn’t damage your compartment like in Real life where you needed to damage the section which is underwater or near to let water pass through it

5

Sorry if it is very long

6

As you said if you hit a plate of the ship which is not below or equal to the waterline no damage but external damage for the hull

And also will them fucking model the bulkheads on ships so if your compartment is flooded it won’t extent to the entire ship apart if the bulkhead is destroyed by shock damage like a Torpedo

7

It was but this is the shit that led to Scharnhorst being an unstoppable juggernaut.

The current system keeps ships from actually staying in the fight when enough damage is dealt which drastically speeds up matches and keeps people from abusing the repair system (if all your stuff is destroyed and the crew is safe in the citadel areas and can’t be hit by the enemy, you’re more or less invincible until you actually start repairing again).

The current unsinkability mechanics has problems as some battleships just can’t take any sort of damage (Rodney) before they just flood to death from no compartments left.

For Yamato and Musashi, this is rarely an issue since any shells to the bow just instantly kills 'em.

1 Like
8

I agree that the compartment system needs changes, but I THOROUGHLY DISAGREE with armor plates becoming ERA again, specially problematic since they always are arbitrarily modelled too, so some ships are covered by 10 plates while others are covered only in 4, etc.

Remember Battleship armour becoming useless because they were hit a few times?

Not only that: you forget that the armord egradation system is STILL ingame, except the armour effectiveness is only reduced once damaged instead of just disappearing like ERA as it did at first. S more balanced and realistic approach than the old version which you suggest to return.

I believe the solution is:

1- Keep the current compartment system.

2- Except 3 flooded compartments don’t automatically lead to the ship sinking completely. There are watertight bulkheads made for this purpose. Ships could sail for days with thousands of tons of water inside.

3- Only below-the-waterline hits should lead to permanently flooded compartment damaged. Why should the deck being destroyed lead to a flooded compartment?

But I think the core idea that a broken compartment becomes impossible to pump out is realistic and good. Certainly much better than Battleship armour becoming ERA again.

1 Like
9

Yeah 👍 and also that the superstructure doesn’t count as compartment damage

1 Like
10

Since they removed it, i never saw any degradation of those armor.
Maybe i’m wrong.

And the fact that the compartment is all side for one compartment…
This thing is dumb too .

There are pleinty way to make this system better. But it need to change cause its totally unbalanced at all.
Just aim the non protected zone, and you will sink the ship.

11

Another unfortunate Victim of the unsinkability mechanic is pretty much the Richelieu Class. The proper way to play them is essentially reverse scraping but the hull is just so insanely fragile that literally singular salvos of some ships can turn segments from green to red which is just so incredibly huh??? I remember one time where i was fighting a Kaiser with the Richelieu and i almost lost the fight simply because my Hull Stability was just gone after it, add on top the fact that i wasnt even able to hit him the majority of the time because of the trash accuracy and you get an insanely near unplayable state for those ships.

1 Like
12

Yes, I suggested three measures which I believe would greatly improve it both in terms of realism and gameplay;

13

the 3 is good. And I think it should be 2 sided. Not one sided like we have now

1 Like
14

It’s still in the game - If you’re wondering why your turrets suddenly get a yellow outline, there’s your answer.

If diving shells existed, maybe.