Jump to content


So, citadel fix in 6.5? Or more delay for reasons


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

Hillslam #1 Posted 25 April 2017 - 03:26 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 381
  • Member since:
    01-20-2015
anyone taking bets? 

The Iowa is the better battleship. That fact doesn't require you to like it.

When your knowledge comes from nothing but books, your knowledge is worthless.


GhostSwordsman #2 Posted 25 April 2017 - 03:46 AM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,856
  • Member since:
    07-02-2015
Considering that the last thing I heard from Sub_Octavian was maybe 0.6.6, I'm gonna say no, no citadel 'fix' in 0.6.5.

          warships.today stats(direct link)     Wargaming.net WoWs profile overview

~You are an ocean of waves, weaving a dream, Like thoughts become a river stream, Yet may the tide ever change, flowing like time, To the path, -yours to claim~Thou seek the dark with an unsheathed blade, Now a white, ivory throne beckons, So obtain the fate you sow, On this path, be weary, friend and foe~ - "Lost in Thoughts All Alone" English Cover - by Amalee

Soshi_Sone, on 26 April 2017 - 05:36 PM, said:

Literally speaking, one can only run into Lert if one is not alert.
Ultimate BBQQ Recipe: 1 BB(the bigger, the juicier), 2 or more Cruisers and/or Destroyers, HE spam(apply generously), no salt required. Smoking your BBQQ is optional, but it adds lots of extra flavor.  Melt for 3-10 minutes and enjoy! Serve with fish for an even more exotic taste!

TenguBlade #3 Posted 25 April 2017 - 04:49 AM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,105
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015
Bloody hell, you people are impatient beyond belief...just let them get it right, and in the meantime work around the citadel and learn to play the ship so that once it is lowered, your stats and performance go up even further.

Edited by TenguBlade, 25 April 2017 - 04:50 AM.

Don't know if you have a dark sense of humor?  If you laugh at this, you do.

IJN: Yamato, Amagi, Ibuki, Mogami, Shokaku, Hiryu, Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Kamikaze R, Katori, MikasaKongō, Myōkō, Kirishima, Haruna, Hiei, Ashigara, Nachi, Haguro, TakaoSouthern Dragon

USN: Montana, Iowa, New Mexico, New Orleans, Pensacola, Cleveland, Langley/Bogue, Farragut

European Navies: Gnevny, Shchors, Nürnberg/Yorck, Bayern, Fiji, Blyskawica (Gift from Compassghost), Scharnhorst (First and only bought), Admiral Graf Spee


Hillslam #4 Posted 25 April 2017 - 03:10 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 381
  • Member since:
    01-20-2015
I do just fine in the 'wa

Which h is entirely beside the point. There's no legitimate reason this ship should need to be played like a cruiser in this game.

It's entirely artificial and is way past time to be corrected.

WG won't "get it right" they'll get it where they want it to be based on how they think their customers want the ship to perform in game.

When it got set back in beta there were more customers that wanted a USN XP pinata than a tier leader. No telling if that's changed.

The Iowa is the better battleship. That fact doesn't require you to like it.

When your knowledge comes from nothing but books, your knowledge is worthless.


Carrier_Lexington #5 Posted 25 April 2017 - 04:00 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

Alternatively, instead of lowering the citadel, WG could always just give Iowa and Montana the Decapping Plate Armor that they were equipped with which justified their armor scheme.

 

Of course, the way Decapping Plate Armor works is only if the shell hits it at an angle, so Broadsiders will still be punished, but you'll get a lot more room to angle and dodge than you have currently.


"Heresy!"


TenguBlade #6 Posted 25 April 2017 - 04:40 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,105
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 25 April 2017 - 11:00 AM, said:

Alternatively, instead of lowering the citadel, WG could always just give Iowa and Montana the Decapping Plate Armor that they were equipped with which justified their armor scheme.

The 38mm upper bulge/torpedo bulkhead segments on the exterior hull already somewhat serve this purpose in-game.  The decapping plate is too thin to make much of a difference anyways, IIRC it's only 25mm thick.  Most BB shells would go through it regardless.


Don't know if you have a dark sense of humor?  If you laugh at this, you do.

IJN: Yamato, Amagi, Ibuki, Mogami, Shokaku, Hiryu, Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Kamikaze R, Katori, MikasaKongō, Myōkō, Kirishima, Haruna, Hiei, Ashigara, Nachi, Haguro, TakaoSouthern Dragon

USN: Montana, Iowa, New Mexico, New Orleans, Pensacola, Cleveland, Langley/Bogue, Farragut

European Navies: Gnevny, Shchors, Nürnberg/Yorck, Bayern, Fiji, Blyskawica (Gift from Compassghost), Scharnhorst (First and only bought), Admiral Graf Spee


Carrier_Lexington #7 Posted 25 April 2017 - 10:11 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostTenguBlade, on 25 April 2017 - 11:40 AM, said:

The 38mm upper bulge/torpedo bulkhead segments on the exterior hull already somewhat serve this purpose in-game.  The decapping plate is too thin to make much of a difference anyways, IIRC it's only 25mm thick.  Most BB shells would go through it regardless.

 

"On the South Dakota's, this shell plating is 1.25" thick (3.2 cm) and on the Iowa's it is 1.5" thick (3.81 cm). Using Nathan's formula above, the South Dakota's plating would be sufficient to decap any projectile up to 15.5" (39.4 cm) and the Iowa's plating would be sufficient to decap any projectile up to 18.6" (47.3 cm). This would imply that the Japanese Type 91 18.1" (46 cm) APC projectiles fired by the Yamato would be decapped by the Iowa's shell plating before they reached the main armor belt." 

 

Also, I was talking about decapping when the ship was angled. Your statement is correct: when a shell is travelling into a broadside-on battleship, the shell's velocity and pressure is perpendicular to the armor, so it will punch right through. The same is true with plunging fire. But a shell that's fired at an angled battleship will most likely be decapped and then shatter on the angled belt armor of the ship.


"Heresy!"


Edselman #8 Posted 28 April 2017 - 09:36 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 585
  • Member since:
    07-24-2013

For me, any time they get around to it is fine. Modeling the citadels unhistorical like that did actually kind of make sense a while ago when it was only the U.S.N. and Japanese battleships. The Yamato's citadel is raised like that and the Izumo just kind of sucked so the Iowa and Montana having citadels like that didn't really matter . . . as much as it does now. Now we have the Germans, that are just overpowered in terms of armor making the U.S.N. look weaker. The citadel lowering is kind of needed now to balance things out. But the whole thing's waited this long, it can watch a few more patches.



Viper5delta #9 Posted 06 May 2017 - 04:31 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 23
  • Member since:
    01-04-2014

I mean, I'm perfectly OK with getting a Citadel buff on my high tier American BBs...but the part they're removing from the citadel (if I remember correctly they're planning on removing Third deck from the citadel area and dropping it to first platform) contains the secondary battery magazines and the tops of the boilers...I'm pretty sure IRL that would be considered citadel space.

 


Edited by Viper5delta, 06 May 2017 - 04:40 PM.


ANDROMADA #10 Posted 08 May 2017 - 06:48 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 68
  • Member since:
    12-17-2012

View PostViper5delta, on 06 May 2017 - 04:31 PM, said:

I mean, I'm perfectly OK with getting a Citadel buff on my high tier American BBs...but the part they're removing from the citadel (if I remember correctly they're planning on removing Third deck from the citadel area and dropping it to first platform) contains the secondary battery magazines and the tops of the boilers...I'm pretty sure IRL that would be considered citadel space.

 

Almost as if WG bases their games off historical accuracy...



Hillslam #11 Posted 09 May 2017 - 02:29 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 381
  • Member since:
    01-20-2015

...except for the performance and stats of the majority of ships in the game, but yeah...

 

Anyhow - we now know no buff in 6.5


The Iowa is the better battleship. That fact doesn't require you to like it.

When your knowledge comes from nothing but books, your knowledge is worthless.


TenguBlade #12 Posted 09 May 2017 - 03:30 AM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,105
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostViper5delta, on 06 May 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

I mean, I'm perfectly OK with getting a Citadel buff on my high tier American BBs...but the part they're removing from the citadel (if I remember correctly they're planning on removing Third deck from the citadel area and dropping it to first platform) contains the secondary battery magazines and the tops of the boilers...I'm pretty sure IRL that would be considered citadel space.

It does contain the 5" magazines, but the engine room doesn't extend above the third deck, which will likely be the upper bound of the citadel after the rework.  Secondary battery barbettes and magazines aren't modeled in this game for multiple reasons, chief among them being to avoid seeing really screwy AP behavior as a result of autobounce mechanics.


Don't know if you have a dark sense of humor?  If you laugh at this, you do.

IJN: Yamato, Amagi, Ibuki, Mogami, Shokaku, Hiryu, Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Kamikaze R, Katori, MikasaKongō, Myōkō, Kirishima, Haruna, Hiei, Ashigara, Nachi, Haguro, TakaoSouthern Dragon

USN: Montana, Iowa, New Mexico, New Orleans, Pensacola, Cleveland, Langley/Bogue, Farragut

European Navies: Gnevny, Shchors, Nürnberg/Yorck, Bayern, Fiji, Blyskawica (Gift from Compassghost), Scharnhorst (First and only bought), Admiral Graf Spee


admiral_noone #13 Posted 09 May 2017 - 08:07 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 133
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016
If the lowering of citadels don't come by 6.6, then we may have permission to rage. Until then, just wait.

T10 ship aesthetics polls:

DDs

BBs

CA/CLs


MrSparkle #14 Posted 10 May 2017 - 11:47 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 208
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

It can't come soon enough. I want to love my new Iowa, I really do, but man it can't take a hit for crap. It's supposed to be one of the most heavily armored ships, nearly as armored as the Yamato given steel and weld quality etc. but it's just a floating citadel with large guns, or at best a very large, unmaneuverable cruiser with no torpedoes or smoke. I just can't make the ship work. It bounces nothing, angling doesn't seem to do anything, you have to make sure you never show broadside which means you can't lead the charge like a lot of derp dds and cruisers want you to, and while the AA is fantastic how often are CVs seen? One in 8 games maybe?


WG seems to not want US battleships and carriers to be competitive. Maybe that's some Russian playerbase thing. Maybe they want the US ships to be unhistorically nerfed. I don't know. but this is not fun.



Captain_Cubby #15 Posted 11 May 2017 - 01:07 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 26
  • Member since:
    04-09-2016
I agree with the citadel issue. I'm frustrated with my Iowa. I get blown up by DD rounds and that's not right. ASlso the fire power of the secondaries sucks. Why a DD with a 5" gun can do so much more damage than an Iowa with 5" secondaries is beyond me. Time to get real with the cit location and secondary fire power.

admiral_noone #16 Posted 11 May 2017 - 02:08 PM

    Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 133
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

http://forum.worldof...863#entry312863

 

Regardless of whatever else the poster says, I think the poster there has a point about not only should Montana get a lower citadel, but Montana should also get Iowa's top engine and possibly even reduced rudder shift time, which would grant her more mobility compared to her peers (better acceleration, bleeds less speed on turns, quicker WASD).


T10 ship aesthetics polls:

DDs

BBs

CA/CLs


TenguBlade #17 Posted 11 May 2017 - 02:37 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,105
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View Postadmiral_noone, on 11 May 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

Regardless of whatever else the poster says, I think the poster there has a point about not only should Montana get a lower citadel, but Montana should also get Iowa's top engine and possibly even reduced rudder shift time, which would grant her more mobility compared to her peers (better acceleration, bleeds less speed on turns, quicker WASD).

Montana already has the 212000HP engine from Iowa.  That's why she has a 30-knot top speed, not her historical 28.  WG was just lazy and didn't up the horsepower value to match the higher speed - seeing that she already bleeds less speed in a turn than Grosser Kurfuerst (the only other T10 BB with 30-knot top speed), I don't see why it's absolutely necessary even though it makes their buff job look sloppy.  Giving her faster rudder shift and a smaller turning circle is also another snub to Yamato that wouldn't really buff the Montana in return. Yamato is already a full 3 knots slower than the other two T10 BBs and has the lowest horsepower/weight ratio (H-40B was estimated at around 60000 tons - originally GK had 88500HP for reference) and thus the worst throttle response.  Her smaller size and marginally-quicker rudder response are tradeoffs for this.


Don't know if you have a dark sense of humor?  If you laugh at this, you do.

IJN: Yamato, Amagi, Ibuki, Mogami, Shokaku, Hiryu, Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Kamikaze R, Katori, MikasaKongō, Myōkō, Kirishima, Haruna, Hiei, Ashigara, Nachi, Haguro, TakaoSouthern Dragon

USN: Montana, Iowa, New Mexico, New Orleans, Pensacola, Cleveland, Langley/Bogue, Farragut

European Navies: Gnevny, Shchors, Nürnberg/Yorck, Bayern, Fiji, Blyskawica (Gift from Compassghost), Scharnhorst (First and only bought), Admiral Graf Spee


ANDROMADA #18 Posted 11 May 2017 - 04:10 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 68
  • Member since:
    12-17-2012

View PostTenguBlade, on 11 May 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

Montana already has the 212000HP engine from Iowa.  That's why she has a 30-knot top speed, not her historical 28.  WG was just lazy and didn't up the horsepower value to match the higher speed - seeing that she already bleeds less speed in a turn than Grosser Kurfuerst (the only other T10 BB with 30-knot top speed), I don't see why it's absolutely necessary even though it makes their buff job look sloppy.  Giving her faster rudder shift and a smaller turning circle is also another snub to Yamato that wouldn't really buff the Montana in return. Yamato is already a full 3 knots slower than the other two T10 BBs and has the lowest horsepower/weight ratio (H-40B was estimated at around 60000 tons - originally GK had 88500HP for reference) and thus the worst throttle response.  Her smaller size and marginally-quicker rudder response are tradeoffs for this.

I thought Yamato's trade off was being able to ignore armor... 



Carrier_Lexington #19 Posted 11 May 2017 - 04:14 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostANDROMADA, on 11 May 2017 - 11:10 AM, said:

I thought Yamato's trade off was being able to ignore armor... 

 

And Moskva's trade-off is being able to ignore Yamato.

"Heresy!"


TenguBlade #20 Posted 11 May 2017 - 07:25 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,105
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostANDROMADA, on 11 May 2017 - 11:10 AM, said:

I thought Yamato's trade off was being able to ignore armor... 

I'm talking specifically within the context of handling.  There are legitimate tradeoffs for lolpen ability even with in the performance of her main battery - fewer guns, lower broadside alpha strike, absolutely-anemic turret traverse.


Don't know if you have a dark sense of humor?  If you laugh at this, you do.

IJN: Yamato, Amagi, Ibuki, Mogami, Shokaku, Hiryu, Akatsuki, Shiratsuyu, Kamikaze R, Katori, MikasaKongō, Myōkō, Kirishima, Haruna, Hiei, Ashigara, Nachi, Haguro, TakaoSouthern Dragon

USN: Montana, Iowa, New Mexico, New Orleans, Pensacola, Cleveland, Langley/Bogue, Farragut

European Navies: Gnevny, Shchors, Nürnberg/Yorck, Bayern, Fiji, Blyskawica (Gift from Compassghost), Scharnhorst (First and only bought), Admiral Graf Spee





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users