Except a fire anywhere in the Bismarck’s elevator period is a death sentence unless it starts in the turret.
1 Like
yes except a shell room and a magazine are different you can survive a shell room detonation by having less shells now you cannot do the same for the magazine
the magazine which is the powder room is full of all the charges for that gun those are far more vunerable to fire damage than shells are
and the magazine detonating is always a one tap
while you can survive a shell room detonation
but bismarck doesnt have her shell room above water line instead its the magazine so fire always gets there first even tho it should not be able to due to the bulk head thus a artificial nerf
Yes, magazine detonating is always a one shot, but that’s not my argument. My argument is that an elevator fire isn’t a one shot and it’s proven by looking at the change logs. Both the position of the fire and and the “Ammo Wetting” modification makes it where elevator fires isn’t an instant kill.
From playing a couple of games in the South Dakota, the majority of kills (that being around 6 kills spanning across 3 games) on the Bismark and Scharnhorst are from direct hits to the magazine, not from elevator fires.
With that being said, I did incredibly well in the South Dakota mainly because I was in a full down tier for all 3 games. In addition, there was only 1-2 8.3 enemy BB and the rest being 7.3-7.7 (occasionally a 8.0 bb).
exactly my reasoning why it shouldnt be 8.3
Go fight a Scharnhorst, Gneisenau or a Bismarck and purposely aim barbettes.
I guarantee you that 80 to 90% of the time it’s either a one-tap (instant magazine detonation) or a fire that sets off ammunition within 3 to 5 seconds.
If any of these three are bow forward, you can instantly kill them through the bow with even 35.6cm shells as close as about 10km away.
So your justification is because it does really well in down tiers, it needs to be moved up? That’s not how balancing works…
Should we move the Scharnhorst up to 7.7 because my 6.3 heavy cruiser can’t do anything to it? Of course not because it’s going to make the Scharnhorst struggle a lot at 7.7 and now we have to move 7.7 ships up and the problem repeats. Do you see how this is a slippery slope?
The issue is not the ship’s BR, it’s the BR bracket. It’s too compressed. Going up from 6.7 to 7.7 to 8.7 is such major leap when you compare the ships at each of these BR. It’s like fighting an F-16 when you’re in a Sabre. The proper way solve it is expand the max BR to 9.0 or 9.3 and to adjust from there.
I have, aiming for barbettes in general is the best way to disable a ship. You shouldn’t really be facing bow forward in the first place, I can also get an instant kill against US BBs if they do that as well. You should be facing broadside or angled as it’s the best way to survive.
Angling the german ‘big 3’ is a death sentence at close to mid range. The Germans in general got nerfed pretty hard when leviathans dropped and if an elevator fire doesn’t instantly kill you, the lack of armor in the bow and frontal magazine plate will.
The Bayerns are somewhat resistant to a bow detonation because of a 230 or so millimeter magazine plate but the direct sides are about 35mm.
It’s a weakpoint in the Iowa too but Iowa has the internal armor belt to prevent a cheeky bow detonation unless it’s something ridiculously fat like the Yamato class’s 46cm APCBC which it can bounce with some consistency.
Conversely, the armor belt of german BBs isn’t tall enough to protect against plunging fire and the turtleback will usually eat the first salvo. At long enough ranges it’s worthless, at close enough ranges, the belt is worthless.
Really odd the Nagatos and Tosa are more survivable than almost every BB in the game barring SoDak, Iowa and Soyuz but it is what it is I guess.
Not like Gaijin accepts proper feedback.
I know that fire has a radius when it forms and spreads downward, but I don’t presently know how to calculate the rate of spread. The ammo wetting modification only gives you 25% fire damage resistance which will slow how quickly the shells cook off, but will not slow the spread of the fire. The height of the elevator as well as the shells physically touching the barbette is the problem, but astonishingly, your chances of losing the shells doesn’t seem to go down if you fill fewer racks.
For example, you can reduce the height of the shell stowage by up to three whole decks on Iowa’s B turret, and one whole deck on both A and X. I run this ammo loadout with extinguish times of 11 seconds and 12% fire resistance overall, and the ammo wetting mod. Yet, I still have what feels like a 50% chance of losing that turret before the fire is out.
quite literally does it faces boats that cant defend them selves from it its prime scarnhorst basically in a downtier unkillable literally no 7.3 bb should face it 7.7s shouldnt either but atleast most of them can sorta do something
The same thing can be said now. You cannot expect a heavy cruiser or early BBs to win against a competent Scharnhorst player. We don’t raise it in BR because now you have to face much tougher ships that outclass you.
The BMPT isn’t going up in BR because it only decimates down tier matches. It’s going up because it’s decimating both it’s own tier and up tier matches. The South Dakota isn’t doing that. it’s only decimating down tiers but in games where it’s facing only 8.3 BBs, it would be quite balanced.
Your argument can be applied to 8.7 BBs. It shouldn’t be facing 7.7 ships. So what we do is increase the BR of this ships but when we do, what do we get? Decompression.
Raise the max BR fist before changing the BR of near top tier ships. It is that simple
1 Like
the 6.3 cruisers that face scarnhorst can sit behind islands and SPAM he and thats why they are there BR and they drain crew very fast
Most of the 7.7s barring two or three ships are trash for one reason or another.
Mostly due to shellroom explosions turning them into artificial reefs. Others just suck because of absolutely garbage armor layouts (Ise).
Prince of Wales could have been contender for one of the best 7.7s but the penetration is so ass on her best AP shell you might as well fire tennis balls.
This leaves Colorado, which is mediocre, Fusou with the garbage british 35.6cm guns that have kind of ass penetration at 7.7 (mediocre at 7.3) and the queen of the 7.x bracket; Gneisenau.
1 Like
to be fair name another 8.0/8.3 that can actually kill it in a 1v1
cause richileu cant roma cant bismarck cant and you can even beat yamato easily who is 8.7
Nagato, Roma, Italia, Vanguard, SoDak and Bismarck are currently the only 8.3s in Warthunder.
nagatos probably the only threat on that list
Roma and Italia could do it if they actually had historically accurate firerate
1 Like
never gonna happen try submitting a bug report they tell you to make a suggestion
Already got rejected despite the baller efforts of the pasta mains and their countless docs proving 30.9 second reload with the Littorio class’s guns is possible
2 Likes
the AXIS can almost never get buffs tried my hand with germany no luck similar things with japan i heard
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/i1YDBULsV4ho
US dreadnoughts having a 40 second reload aced while japan with 41cm guns have a 24 second reload is baffling.
All the 41cm IJN ships could get a 4 to 6 second nerf and would still be an oppressive force to deal with.
1 Like