they can just call it HT and made it，not just ignore it on someships when made them RHA on others
1 Like
It is the most accurate solution, but Gaijin clearly don’t want to add more armor type. They denied addition of Ducol Steel and High Tensile Steel years ago, and still it is sadly.
They could also make it RHA at effective thickness so that the EIGHTY DOLLAR PREMIUM isn’t underperforming due to extreme laziness.
Don’t think so. 0.6 effective ness and 1 effectiveness is too different. Also, Nagato is very strong even except it. At least much better than Yamato.
It is an 80 dollar premium. Under no circumstances should it be worse than its supposed to be in any way.
It is supposed to be? Nagato is rather accurate way. Mutsu is severly buffed.
You said it yourself, structural steel is worse than HT steel. Which means Nagato has an artificial nerf because they’re too lazy to do anything else.
Are you saying that remove all horizontal armor and underwater protection is a ‘rather accurate way’? Can you explain why USN’s ships are not doing the same? Look at how the Brooklyn class is made, all the structural steel on the ship is considered as “anti fragmentation armor”!
Still, HT steel is much worse than RHA what Mutsu gets. It should not get RHA.
Because in real life they did. Nagato class is a ship that designed and constructed in 1910s and 20s when High Tensile steel is used as majority of hull structure. Brooklyn class is 1930s cruiser, when technology evolved and US navy was able to made antifragmentation armor as hull structure.
Speaking of Brooklyn class, Gaijin also made another inconsistency that they correctly made Brooklyn/Worcester/Baltimore class, while making Cleveland/Des Moines class wrongly as they also should have antifragmentation armor as their hull structure.
If HT is .6 of RHA then make the armor thickness .6 of its thickness in RHA instead of making it less effective than its supposed to be.
much worse ≠ not exist
There is a type of armor called “anti fragmentation armor” in the game, which directly removes armor plates that are as thick as 76mm or even 100mm. How can this be called an “accurate way”?
It exist. It is hidden because they are structual steel. Naval structual steel doesn’t appear in armor x-ray. Also, anti-fragmentation armor ingame is 0.9 RHA, significatnly better than HTS in real life.
so what？76mm HT= 0mm RHA is accurate？
Don’t forget that HT steel has been widely used in Japan as a reinforcement for horizontal armor and underwater protection in modernization due to its good ductility. They are less prone to cracking when facing high angle incoming ammunition, or do you think you and Gaijin have a better understanding of warship design than Japanese engineers?
Japan ADDED more HT steel to uparmor the deck of Nagato during the 1936 rebuilds when they could have used RHA.
Evidently it must not be useless if they did that.
1 Like
You only need to go to the actual game to see if they exist. The middle deck of Nagato and kongo has 76mm HT steel protection, and even if they can only provide 60% protection as you said, they can still provide 45mm protection. Combined with the thickness of each deck, its equivalent thickness should not be less than 50mm. Now, please open the game and see if their middle horizontal deck can have equivalent protection of 50mm level.
I reiterate, if these armor plates really exist in the game, why didn’t Gaijin model them? Why can’t we see anything in protection? ‘Structural steel’ is not non-existent in the game. There are a large number of structural steel exterior components modeled on various tanks, and even the 19mm deck of the first generation battleship is modeled in naval battles. Why is there nothing on the Japanese Navy side?
Don’t forget that even the decks of battleships such as the Dreadnought and Invincible, which were less than 20 millimeters in size, were modeled in the game before the Battle of Jutland. However, the three inch or even thicker steel added by the 1930s in。Japan was not modeled at all by Gaijin, and you still believe that they “really exist”?
If you still think you’re right, then I suggest that all HT and NS grade steel in the game should not be considered as any armor plates. From dreadnoughts in the 1910s to battleships in the 1930s, they should all have a structure with only a few side armor belts. Do you support this?
Similarly, Class B steel in the United States is also not equal with RHA armor, so although their resistance to elasticity is slightly better than HT, they should still be considered structural steel and removed from all ships.
The most important thing is to have a standard. You cannot let the same steel have different representations on different ships, nor can you let the same steel used as structural steel be considered armor protection in one country but not in another. It should be noted that the last generation of Soviet battleships was never fully built, and their steel level was far lower than traditional naval powers such as the United States, Britain, Italy, and Japan. However, in the game, their armor equivalence was still kept consistent.
there are 76 mm structual steel instead.
Because if they show structual steel, viewing real armor in the hangar is almost impossible as structual steel will conceal them. You should see it in cdk viewer, not in game.
I’m not against this, I’m just against stupid ideas that claiming Nagato should have 76 mm RHA in game.