Think its an armor hole around the barbette or something?
No, this is a global bug affecting all ships, barbette armour will completely stop working under certain conditions
4 Likes
I am surprised it took THREE (3) whole HE salvos to kill it.
Most USN ships blow up in 1-2 salvos, so I guess this is technically an upgrade lmao.
2 Likes
Now i’m getting very puzzled… and curious 🧐
What are these “certain conditions” ?
If u can share…
@HK_Reporter , ever since I got Scharnhorst 2 days ago, I’ve sunk dozens of American Battleships in one shot to the barbettes… just like this:
Arizona, Nevada Mississippi, Tennessee… just different flavours to the same phenomenon: Ammunition load exploded. This phenomenon also happens on other ships, like the Bayerns, but it’s just too extreme on American Battleships’ case, which is further worsened by their extremely slow reload.
That being said, I hit the barbettes dead on with AP, so I wonder, at this point; are American BBs really victim to a bug, or is their barbette ammorack design just inevitabily terrible?
I mean, HE killing them is obviously a bug, but I suppose there’s nothing they can do against other BB’s APs, in which case not even fixing the HE bug/holes would help them ultimately.
2 Likes
Does the game still model shell rooms as detonable? Would explain a lot.
1 Like
All American battleships from Texas all the way to Iowa/Montana were designed to have shells stored in their barbette, so there’s nothing too wrong with the in-game model
EXCEPT
They shouldn’t be easily destroyed by fragments because battleship shells, even of HE types are made of well over 50mm+ thick of steel irl
AND
When destroyed they should not blow up the ship. Technically the shell room detonation in game isn’t fatal by itself but the explosion is so strong that in most cases it would have detonated the magazine nearby hence the ship will be destroyed regardless.
Strictly speaking, for 100% realism battleship’s shell room shouldn’t even explode when getting destroyed. Developers insist to make them explode since otherwise it would make ppl confusing, because most of mil fans nowadays were educated by Hollywood
4 Likes
USS Alaska works as intended, in this case! Her barbette shell rooms blow up, but it’s never a one-hit kill. Sure it deals a lot of damage, but it’s rarely ever fatal, if ever at all.
So, all in all, American BBs should be way more survivable even with this design?
Being the shell rooms way harder to detonate on the first place, and, additionally, not even fatal upon detonation (like Alaska’s case currently).
3 Likes
Very strange espesially when the game proudly proclaims adherence to realism. Hey, having shell rooms not be detonable would be a nice realistic teaching lesson for the player.
Until they flip their decision this just leaves all US battleships as XP pinatas for other nations.
Joy.
1 Like
I think gulf war refit USS Iowa would help balance the US naval tree
If they made a W move and added arliegh burke, Ticonderoga, and gulf war Iowa class refit the game might be playable for US naval
Also Ohio class subs with game ending nukes that get a kill counted for every enemy vehicle alive and every other spawn they have left
Also don’t forget that right now we fight at ranges the armor wasn’t designed for. The barbette armor on Tennessee is 320 mm and on Iowa it is 430 mm which at longer ranges is plenty enough to stop the APs from other nations.
For example at somewhat less then 15 km the Mississippi and Tennessee should be immune to Scharnhorst AP. And at 15 km be immune even to AP from Bayern/Sachsen/Kronstadt/Conte.
2 Likes
That being said, it would be impossible to fight at realistic and intended engagement ranges with the current shell dispersion hahah.
With many guns, specially 380+ mm guns, shells literally come out of the barrels like they are twisted… it’s very difficult to hit anything past 11 km because of it already.
But yeah, as you said, ingame engagement ranges are the reason why Germany will always be superior than the U.S; their BBs were designed for close range brawling, while U.S ships were designed for long range engagements… and ships currently fight in the natural habitat of German ships.
1 Like
Honestly I would be interested if dispersion can be modified as engine power so in RB we could have much more accurate guns and fight at longer rangers.
IMO it’s fun plus to have AB and RB with Same objectives since both play basically the same since the speed boost and spotting has very very little effect on naval gameplay. So objective revamp and longer arrange fights could differentiate RB from a b and resurrect it.
1 Like
It appears not even Scharnhorst is exempt of this… ammorack one-hit killed by… 102mm SAP hitting the turret. Gaijin REALLY needs to fix this ASAFP.
1 Like
Maybe modeling of superior american radars will balance out the accuracy thing and give US warships a chance
2 Likes
Yep! They could simulate advanced radars even without implementing any new specific mechanics or anything;
Just make acquisition and fire solution updates 3x times as fast and make range updates be in real time.
That would give WW2 American BBs an edge in targeting, in spite of having worse armor gameplay wise for the map sizes and mission types found ingame or, in the case of modernised Standards, extremely slow reload.
In the case of modernised Standards, at least this would help them make their few salvos every match count.
2 Likes
It was more the fire control center which was excellent, multiple other navies like the British and German also used radar.
when can we expect to see some 16 inch US stuff to deal with the OP japanese and german top tiers?
So when is this going to become a mechanic :P
1 Like