Jump to content


Lert's problems with Hood


  • Please log in to reply
159 replies to this topic

Carl #141 Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:45 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,163
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostPhoenix_jz, on 19 May 2017 - 06:07 PM, said:

 

I must admit, I had noticed some oddness about the penetration at longer ranges (around 20 km), but I had chalked that up mostly to armor quality differences between whatever is used universally between ships in game, and the different steel types on the navweaps page... but that does definitely explain a lot, thank you very much. has Fnord noted that there's a certain range that they start getting wildly inaccurate, or is it supposed to be at all ranges that real world data doesn't work in the game?

 

Basically whats going on if i understood what he said is that WOWS treats the atmosphere as being thicker than it actually is. The effect grows greater with range, but is in place at any range. The formulae he uses does account for this but is still subject to some error as the formulae is at best an approximation of what WG'ings own formulae is. It's still mostly right however from what we can tell.

 

As an example compare the Bismark curve i posted above to this image of Bismarck's pen culled from a WG'ing official video by mouse:

 

 

TLDR the official is about 50mm less at 5km, but otherwise comes within a few mm across the board.


Edited by Carl, 19 May 2017 - 07:51 PM.


Phoenix_jz #142 Posted 19 May 2017 - 07:59 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Testers

  • 4,389
  • Member since:
    05-06-2013

View PostCarl, on 19 May 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

 

Basically whats going on if i understood what he said is that WOWS treats the atmosphere as being thicker than it actually is. The effect grows greater with range, but is in place at any range. The formulae he uses does account for this but is still subject to some error as the formulae is at best an approximation of what WG'ings own formulae is. It's still mostly right however from what we can tell.

 

As an example compare the Bismark curve i posted above to this image of Bismarck's pen culled from a WG'ing official video by mouse:

 

 

TLDR the official is about 50mm less at 5km, but otherwise comes within a few mm across the board.

 

I remember reading something about that on one of the threads explaining the penetration formulas, isn't it some sort of simplification because it would be to complicated to model the changing density of the atmosphere at various altitudes? I'm actually and of interested in mapping out the variance between the penetration in-game of the various shells at certain ranges versus what happens when you plug in the real-world-values, just to see where, and by how much, the data starts to diverge (As obviously, given the fact that drag is what causes the difference, the more extreme the range, the more extreme the variance; or at least that's what I'd assume was the case).

 

My "Directory of Threads" <-- Various threads I've done you might find interesting, feel free to check it out!

​Most recent addition: USN Cruiser Split


Carl #143 Posted 19 May 2017 - 08:33 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,163
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Thing is for the ranges we shoot to in game at the angles of elevation we use that aspect shouldn't be a big deal. Besides it's very unlikely wargaming simulates it. It's a dammed tricky thing to calculate normally.

Mike_Brase #144 Posted 19 May 2017 - 09:03 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 269
  • Member since:
    12-01-2015
I'm averaging 82k in her with a high of 133 and a low of 47k. I really like her her guns are comfortable to aim and they pen bow on German BB's way easier than some of her sisters at T7 plus I just deleted the entire Indy strike package this morning. All 16 planes deleted for a negative return for the CV she so far has been a blast. Thanks Lert and shout to LWM. For helping me make an informed purchase. She is a Kongo on roids.

Edited by Mike_Brase, 19 May 2017 - 09:04 PM.


Excield #145 Posted 19 May 2017 - 09:31 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,925
  • Member since:
    12-29-2015

Manual AA is highly recommendable on the Hood, I'd say. Yes, the AA is gimmicky, but incredibly useful at times and not to be underestimated. In this game, were I lost 7 AA modules, I ate this Saipan's entire DB squad that went after me. An entire T9 squadron dying to my T7 BB.

 

That said, if a T9 really wants to drop you and does it with more than one squadron of planes (To disperse the AA DPS), he will succeed. So not groundbreaking, but it's still better than some other BB's of similar tier.



KaptainKaybe #146 Posted 19 May 2017 - 09:57 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Members

  • 1,791
  • Member since:
    08-14-2012

Problem with going heavy focused AA spec on her is that it depends too much on carriers showing up in games, which is rare in Random battles these days.

 

I have AFT and I put the AA range mod on her. It'll do for now.



HMS_Formidable #147 Posted 19 May 2017 - 11:10 PM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostTalonV, on 19 May 2017 - 08:02 PM, said:

Umm no it wasn't, but for the USN, wasn't needed in Sept 39 was it? Wasn't needed till Dec 41 and ships armed with it were already coming forward.

 

But your 5in combo is pathetic against sea sparrow, right?

And of course the USN knew in September 1939 it was not going to have to fight until December 7, 1941

What a weird argument.

Technology evolves. It did so particularly fast in the 1930s and 40s.

But the big shock was the difference between theory and reality

It took an actual shooting war (september 1939) to expose this


Edited by HMS_Formidable, 19 May 2017 - 11:22 PM.

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


The_Librarian54 #148 Posted 20 May 2017 - 01:58 AM

    Seaman Recruit

  • Members

  • 4
  • Member since:
    08-21-2016
I agree 100% with Lert. This is exactly how I have felt for a while. You balance around guns, shells, armor, hull, speed, and maneuverability. Not gimmicks like AA in a game with few CV's anyway.

General_von_Falkenhayn #149 Posted 20 May 2017 - 02:43 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 326
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Having griped as much as I did yesterday, I finally took her out for some randoms in the Sink the Bismarck campaign.  

 

I was pleasantly surprised; I had little difficulty cracking 100k damage and even had a 148k game.  Sure, the guns are meh, but you are so huge, with such good handling, so much HP and pretty darn good armor you can stick around the fight for a long time (while dictating the range with your 32 kts) and just keep raining down shells for the whole game (I use fire prevention, which keeps fire damage quite low).  The few times I was caught broadside by enemy X while angling to enemy Y, I didn't take catastrophic damage (maybe 8-10k, which is tolerable when you have 5 heals and 67,000 HP).  The main issue was competent enemy DDs, as it always is for a BB.  

 

Still, it's a weird, weird ship.  There really is nothing else like it in the game.  The guns are derp, the armor is formidable (strange, since she's a BC), and her rudder shift is really, really nice.  I continue my wish for Warspite level guns.  But as she is she does quite well as a fast, maneuverable tank with shotguns.

 

At least she'll get me through the campaign in a breeze.



MaliceA4Thought #150 Posted 20 May 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,643
  • Member since:
    10-04-2013

View PostGeneral_von_Falkenhayn, on 20 May 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

Having griped as much as I did yesterday, I finally took her out for some randoms in the Sink the Bismarck campaign.  

 

I was pleasantly surprised; I had little difficulty cracking 100k damage and even had a 148k game.  Sure, the guns are meh, but you are so huge, with such good handling, so much HP and pretty darn good armor you can stick around the fight for a long time (while dictating the range with your 32 kts) and just keep raining down shells for the whole game (I use fire prevention, which keeps fire damage quite low).  The few times I was caught broadside by enemy X while angling to enemy Y, I didn't take catastrophic damage (maybe 8-10k, which is tolerable when you have 5 heals and 67,000 HP).  The main issue was competent enemy DDs, as it always is for a BB.  

 

Still, it's a weird, weird ship.  There really is nothing else like it in the game.  The guns are derp, the armor is formidable (strange, since she's a BC), and her rudder shift is really, really nice.  I continue my wish for Warspite level guns.  But as she is she does quite well as a fast, maneuverable tank with shotguns.

 

At least she'll get me through the campaign in a breeze.

 

Yeah I am getting high damage games at the moment, but were you in any T9 matches ?...  so far I have seen 1 T9 match because theres so many damn BB's around doing the Bismark Campaign and in that T9 match I had to resort to HE to do even mediocre damage.

 

I strongly suspect that once the BBgeddon dies down and Hood sees more High Tier games, things will change a lot.

 

M


Edited by MaliceA4Thought, 20 May 2017 - 03:18 PM.

  

 

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, whilst defeated warriors go to war and then seek to win
(Sun Tzu)

A Veteran is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to "My Country" for an amount of "up to and including my life."


Phoenix_jz #151 Posted 20 May 2017 - 03:56 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Testers

  • 4,389
  • Member since:
    05-06-2013

View PostCarl, on 19 May 2017 - 03:33 PM, said:

Thing is for the ranges we shoot to in game at the angles of elevation we use that aspect shouldn't be a big deal. Besides it's very unlikely wargaming simulates it. It's a dammed tricky thing to calculate normally.

 

So does that mean at closer ranges the real-world ballistic curve values can give accurate, or at least close to accurate, numbers for penetration? Or is that also inaccurate?


 

My "Directory of Threads" <-- Various threads I've done you might find interesting, feel free to check it out!

​Most recent addition: USN Cruiser Split


cavscout1739 #152 Posted 20 May 2017 - 07:46 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 33
  • Member since:
    03-24-2015
National RN guns have wth meh. Flavor is OP anti-air covering only individual ship. That would be stupid squared. But about as logical as pissing off playerbase with bundle/campaign SNAFU.

General_von_Falkenhayn #153 Posted 21 May 2017 - 12:57 AM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 326
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostMaliceA4Thought, on 20 May 2017 - 03:17 PM, said:

 

Yeah I am getting high damage games at the moment, but were you in any T9 matches ?...  so far I have seen 1 T9 match because theres so many damn BB's around doing the Bismark Campaign and in that T9 match I had to resort to HE to do even mediocre damage.

 

I strongly suspect that once the BBgeddon dies down and Hood sees more High Tier games, things will change a lot.

 

M

 

Granted, only one T9 game so far.  And I've noticed that with the horrible shell Krupp and penetration, salvos on broadside belt armor BBs aren't as good as they are when you have decent shells.  Yet her better autobounce angle/shorter fuse mechanics make her guns pretty good against angled targets (the irony).  I seem to get consistently good hits against angled KM BBs when aiming high, though shooting belt armor yields poorer results.

 

I do agree, though, that once the BB craze dies down and Hood gets consistently uptiered, it'll be a whole lot harder.  It's just such a weird ship.  And unlike the Warspite, which has guns that can slap anyone hard in its tier spread if they make a mistake, the same can't be said of the Hood: broadside BBs get off rather easy from their mistakes because of the Hood's rubbish sigma and bad shell penetration values.  



Mr_Lube #154 Posted 21 May 2017 - 01:37 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 64
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostGeneral_von_Falkenhayn, on 21 May 2017 - 12:57 AM, said:

 

Granted, only one T9 game so far.  And I've noticed that with the horrible shell Krupp and penetration, salvos on broadside belt armor BBs aren't as good as they are when you have decent shells.  Yet her better autobounce angle/shorter fuse mechanics make her guns pretty good against angled targets (the irony).  I seem to get consistently good hits against angled KM BBs when aiming high, though shooting belt armor yields poorer results.

 

I do agree, though, that once the BB craze dies down and Hood gets consistently uptiered, it'll be a whole lot harder.  It's just such a weird ship.  And unlike the Warspite, which has guns that can slap anyone hard in its tier spread if they make a mistake, the same can't be said of the Hood: broadside BBs get off rather easy from their mistakes because of the Hood's rubbish sigma and bad shell penetration values.  

 

this guy [edited]

TenguBlade #155 Posted 21 May 2017 - 01:46 AM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,235
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostBattlecruiser_Tiger, on 18 May 2017 - 07:32 PM, said:

Simple answer - and the answer I always have defaulted to from the start: Wargaming hates the British.

Every time nonsense like this gets upvoted, I'm reminded of why I have zero faith in this community any more.  This "victim of bias" mentality is historical denial at its finest.

View PostIzolyn, on 19 May 2017 - 01:45 PM, said:

Scharnhorst should still have 27mm bow armor, yes? Even if that's not what you're doing in that particular situation, its bow is still vulnerable to overmatch from 410cm cannons.

 

Perhaps more importantly, if you were to place any other T7 battleship in the same position (firing at them at the same angle and at the same ranges, though not necessarily at the same spot), would they be any less vulnerable? If so, does that particular situation make up for them being substantially more vulnerable in many other situations?

The bow is 25mm thick on the upper half, and 60-something on the lower.

 

Scharnhorst isn't vulnerable from the front solely because of her bow.  Half of it is unable to be overmatched, and the entire thing sits very low in the water.  The other - and arguably greater - weakness from up front (and the reason why she isn't a T8 even though un-nerfing her AP and buffing the reload to 17 seconds could easily place her there) is her superstructure.  Unlike Tirpitz or Bismarck, the superstructure, secondary battery, and torpedoes extend far above and around the "shield" created by her main turret and conning tower armor.  It's very easy to pen those for substantial damage or incapacitations.  This isn't the case with the superstructure in particular of the Bismarck sisters.

 

Not helping is her turret shape and their size.  I believe the frontal faces are of the same thickness as Bismarck's, but the sides (in particular the underside) and barbette of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau are more weakly-armored.  The boxy shape of German turrets in general is also a major hindrance since that makes them easier to penetrate and damage.  For Scharnhorst in particular this is bad news since her guns have low HP: turret HP is based off the weight of the mount IIRC, and Scharnhorst's come in at about 826 tons each while Bismarck's (and Gneisenau's) weigh about 1160 tons each.  The lower-tier German BBs don't have the superelevated turrets as exposed to fire, and shell alpha at those tiers is generally much lower, while higher-tier German BBs only get progressively-heavier and thus meatier mounts, which makes it less likely to suffer an incap while attempting to use your turrets to tank.


Edited by TenguBlade, 21 May 2017 - 02:05 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


crzyhawk #156 Posted 21 May 2017 - 06:27 AM

    Admiral

  • Members
  • Beta Testers

  • 10,842
  • Member since:
    05-08-2015

View PostTenguBlade, on 20 May 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Every time nonsense like this gets upvoted, I'm reminded of why I have zero faith in this community any more.  This "victim of bias" mentality is historical denial at its finest.

 

WG often does a piss poor job with "getting it right".  In many cases, it DOES look very much like there is anti-Allied bias, while RU and Axis stuff gets the benefit of all doubts.


Bill_Halsey #157 Posted 21 May 2017 - 01:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 621
  • Member since:
    01-01-2016
The question is fighting across different tiers. T5-T7 you can afford to be aggressive. Just be wary of Warpite, Mutsu and Gneisnau. T8-T9, even the CA's will give you trouble.

Taichunger #158 Posted 21 May 2017 - 03:42 PM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,407
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostLert, on 19 May 2017 - 09:53 AM, said:

Third, this thread is not about ship balance vs tiering. The USN and IJN examples you cite (in a very USN fanboyish way) are completely different from what I'm trying to discuss. Those ships are balanced on their own merit, on their own base line performance. You might not agree with their tiering and wish to see every IJN ship nerfed and downtiered and every USN ship buffed and uptiered because glorious undefeatable USN, but even you can't deny that those ships are slotted into their place based on merits of the in-game base ship itself without artificially moving it up or down via gimmicks. Lately though, WG has stepped away from that and has started balancing and tiering ships purely on gimmicks, rather than the ship's base line performance. The Royal Navy cruiser line is a very good example. Most of them would work fine a tier lower if given normal AP instead of super AP, meaning that the ships themselves are not balanced properly, but WG is artificually pushing them ahead of where they arguably belong in the name of 'national flavor'.


Excellent explanation.


----------

Still needed: (1) a NO CV button for the MM (2) Remove Shatter (3) a button for demounting all flags (4) the icon in the status bar to signal someone wants to div/chat with you


Taichunger #159 Posted 21 May 2017 - 03:48 PM

    Captain

  • Members

  • 4,407
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View PostSeanPwnery, on 20 May 2017 - 12:00 AM, said:

I got in about 9 or 10 battles in the Hood last night. I went ahead and bought it after watching TheMightyJingles video review of it (if you're on the fence about dropping a Benji on Hood, watch his video - it'll either convince you to do so, or not to do so). Other than that, I tooned up with a friend in his, and we went to town, these were my lasting impressions thus far:

 

  • It's a new ship, people by and large are enamored with it and want to kill it if facing one. The longer these are around, the better the chance of learning how and where to hit her for citadel shots (I ran into two people who knew exactly what to do and where to do it already)
  • Rudder shift mod makes this a very comfy ship to play
  • Turret rotation time is a bit painful when you're zig-zagging away from an invisible DD, or when you're constantly getting peppered by anyone with inertia fuses.
  • Deck fires are monsterously annoying with this ship
  • The less power of the guns I can live with, but the reloading time feels a bit painful at 30 seconds, especially when...
  • The secondaries while being a paltry after-thought, are very short-ranged for their tier ... not a fan.
  • 4 Upgrade slots ... weak... I'd love to have had the concealment mod slot :unsure:
  • Yay, I get AA defense cooldown (did not see a single CV last night) .... no hydro though... yikes. :ohmy:

 

Would I recommend it to people? Absolutely - it plays a bit to my strengths despite a few obvious weaknesses of the boat, I can more or less live with the ship the way it is if I had a 5th EQ slot or longer-ranged secondaries. The idea of 6 EQ slots like the Arkansas Beta makes me drool a bit. :D

 

After 6 games I am averaging 78K damage. She's super tanky and her rear turret angles make her a good brawler. I use her to set fires early then switch to AP. She kills cruisers like any 15" gun ship. As for BBs, just aim for water line or deck-belt gap, and she'll deliver 10-15K damage salvos. DDs give her trouble, since she has so few guns.

 

Highly recommend this ship, she's my new favorite ship. Once you know how to play her, she's solid and very well balanced for the tier. Wouldn't mind a shorter ROF, though. :)

 

 


Edited by Taichunger, 21 May 2017 - 03:48 PM.

----------

Still needed: (1) a NO CV button for the MM (2) Remove Shatter (3) a button for demounting all flags (4) the icon in the status bar to signal someone wants to div/chat with you


TenguBlade #160 Posted 21 May 2017 - 06:08 PM

    Vice Admiral

  • Members

  • 9,235
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

View Postcrzyhawk, on 21 May 2017 - 01:27 AM, said:

WG often does a piss poor job with "getting it right".  In many cases, it DOES look very much like there is anti-Allied bias, while RU and Axis stuff gets the benefit of all doubts.

Yet you would think that Axis warships get the shaft even harder if there truly were national motives at work...after all, the Soviets were on the Allied side during the war.  Japan and Russia still bicker to this day about some territories nobody cares about.


Edited by TenguBlade, 21 May 2017 - 06:08 PM.

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