Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'secondary'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Calendars

  • World of Warships Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 9 results

  1. LittleWhiteMouse

    Secondary Dispersion List

    I've been combing through data-mine resources for my Agincourt review, specifically looking at secondary accuracy (secondaries are an important feature on Agincourt). While doing so, I started cataloguing and doing the math for secondary horizontal dispersion. It was pretty eye opening. To date, I've found seven distinct dispersion types. This is by no means an exhaustive list but it should provide players with an idea of how "good" their secondary guns are on any given ship in the game. See below for an explanation on each category. Standard FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 57 ] + 30 } Includes most secondaries in the game barring the ones listed below. Soviet 130mm BL109A FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 49 ] + 30 } The secondaries on the tier X Soviet battleships and cruisers have slightly reduced dispersion. This includes Moskva, Petropavlovsk, Stalingrad, Kremlin and Slava German Battleships FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 45 ] + 30 } German battleships received a buff with the commander skill rework. It includes the following ships: German tech tree battleships at tier VII+ The premiums Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Scharnhorst, Scharnhorst B, Tirpitz, Tirpitz B, Odin and Pommern Accurate FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 33 ] + 30 } Long associated with Massachusetts, this dispersion type has existed for a while and is present on a long list of ships. German tech tree aircraft carriers. The premium & reward ships: Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Massachusetts B, Georgia, Ohio, Agincourt and Max Immelmann The casemate mounts (only!) of Iron Duke, Warspite, Mutsu, Nagato, Ashitaka, Hyuga, Amagi, Kii, Ignis Purgatio and Ragnarok Exceptions There are a handful of exceptions out there. In increasing order of accuracy they are: FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 27 ] + 30 } - Wichita's and Florida's 127mm/38 Mod 30 mounts specifically, not any of the others. FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 12 ] + 30 } - Pensacola FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 8.4 ] + 48 } - Graf Zeppelin & Arkansas Beta. Note this is the same horizontal dispersion calculation for "battlecruiser" main battery guns, like Graf Spee, Thunderer and Georgia. Depending on how much of a keener I'm being, I may add to this list as I find more. If there's a specific ship you think should be on here, give me a shout. I'll take a look.
  2. The Upgrade "Secondary Battery Modification 1" gives "-20% Maximum dispersion of secondary battery shells" -- but I fail to see anywhere, including on the Wiki and in the API where secondary dispersion is mentioned, let alone listed. Also, the Commander skill "Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament" lists "Maximum dispersion of shells for the secondary armament of Tier A-B ships: -15% or -60%". Wargaming: how can this stat for the upgrade be applied if there's nothing to apply it to? Either the stats is not being applied to anything and it's meaningless, or you've forgotten to show that stat in the game (ship inspector -> Artillery -> Secondary Armament / Secondary battery), on the Wiki (eg <https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Arkansas_Beta> -> Arkansas Beta (right panel) -> Secondary Armament #1, and in the API (same as the Wiki, because this is where you're pulling the Wiki data from). You do list the dispersion for the Main Battery (again, for the AB: "Maximum Dispersion: 203 m.") - so... what's going on here?
  3. I recently got Erich Loewenhardt and I've played a few games with it. So far it is a fun CV to play, I don't have enough battles with her to give an overall impression. At any rate, I was curious & decided to test E. Loewenhardt's secondaries vs. her tech-tree counterpart, the Weser. Both have 5 x 2 105mm guns, but E. Loewenhardt has additional 8 x 2 150's in the hull, 4 turrets on each side. The test is as follows: both ships are taken into a training battle vs. a stationary Fuso bot. Both Weser & Loewenhardt have the secondary battery ship module, with a secondary signal mounted. I used my Graf Zeppelin captain, who has BFT, & AFT. Both ships secondaries reach 7.6 km fully spec'd. The carrier was approx. 7km away from the Fuso for each test & all secondary guns were able to fire on target. A timer was started when the secondaries began firing & stopped when the Fuso was sank. Each test was repeated 3 times for both Weser & Loewenhardt (6 tests total), to get an average of three. Here are the results: WESER vs. FUSO (Averages): Secondary Battery: Hits - 223.6 Shots fired - 1,037.3 Damage - 16,641.3 Fires: 4.3 Damage Caused by Fire: 40,458.6 Time to Sink: 5 min. 11.3 sec. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ERICH LOEWENHARDT vs. FUSO (Averages): Secondary Battery: Hits - 147.3 Shots fired - 1,082.6 Damage - 14,517.3 Fires: 4.6 Damage Caused by Fire: 42,582.6 Time to Sink: 4 min. 2.6 sec. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For every 4-5 shots fired by Weser, 1 would hit the target. (4.63) For every 7-8 shots fired by E. Loewenhardt, 1 would hit the target. (7.35) Based on the data & observations from the testing, E. Loewenhardt does not have the improved secondary dispersion & accuracy that Weser & the tech tree German CVs have. It seems to have standard secondary dispersion patterns, like other nation's CVs have. However, Loewenhardt was able to sink the Fuso quicker than Weser. Weser relies on her 5 x 2 105's, which pen 26mm by default. Loewenhardt's additional 150's can pen 38mm of armor. Fuso's central deck armor is 36mm, while her bow, stern & side plating are all 26mm (not including her side casemate armor, which is 152mm). Weser could only pen Fuso's superstructure, side plating, bow & stern, whereas Loewenhardt's additional 150's could pen all that plus the deck armor. So, in conclusion, E. Loewenhardt doesn't have the improved secondary dispersion the tech-tree German CVs get, but having the additional 150's makes up for the accuracy difference. I believe this test would go a lot differently vs. a smaller cruiser or destroyer instead of a Fuso, Weser might win in those cases. Any comments or questions are welcome! - FairWindsFollowingSeas [NA]
  4. Pure curiosity. I know some carriers pack a surprisingly serious secondary armament and the thought occured that maybe it would be helpful against DDs.
  5. With the release of OHIO (Montana with 4x2 457mm guns, faster repair, and Massachusetts (Mass) secondaries in the works, I would like to propose an alternate Tech Tree Branch for USN Battleships. Branching from New Mexico, you choose between Colorado or: T7: Nevada; with 10 15in guns and and secondaries like Mass except the base range is at least 6km. I don't think it will be WV44 since WG already promised her months ago, and no other USN BB in game has 15in rifles. Plus it's Nevada, the same BB that when used as a target took constant punishment from several ships for almost 3 days, without a DMC party or fighting back! T8: Washington; Main Battery should be at least 1.8 and at most 1.9 to put her accuracy in the middle of Mass and NC as well as and at least 20km range, Mass Repair Party and DMC cooldown, & secondaries identical to Mass except 5 sec reload instead of 4. This will give Washington the Profile of a BB with emphasis on her secondaries, but won't fully outclass NC or Mass with the former's higher sigma and range and the later's faster firing secondaries. T9: New Jersey or Wisconsin; Identical to current premium Georgia except with 3x3 406mm guns at 1.8 sigma (to not outclass Iowa and MO as ships that fire accurately at range), no EB, and some extra armor protection (Georgia is a bit frail for a BB). This way, NJ/WI will be the slower but tougher ship, while Georgia is the faster and more nimble of the two thanks to her EB, as well as her unique main battery. T10; OHIO!!!!!!! Please WG, make this happen. You did this for USN cruisers, Russian and Japanese DD's, and those changes worked fine. It's time for a new alternate branch!!! *EDIT* - Nevada never had 15in gun, only the 10 14in guns. Maybe branch off from New York and instead we have Nevada at T6 w/1944 config with the 8 dual 127mm, and then T7 Maryland or California.
  6. Mr_Secondaries

    Roma's secondary pen values?

    Hey all, Just curious, myself and a fellow Roma player were messing around with the potential of a secondary build just for fun, when we noticed that the pen values didn't seem to add up to our calculations. Our understanding is that HE shells have a 1/6 penetration value...so, whatever the calibur of the gun is, divided by the penetration value, is what the HE shell will penetrate. According to the Port Stat cards, the penetration values of the 90mm shells, and the 152mm shells is slightly lower than 1/6 penetration value. 90mm/6 = 15mm. 152mm/6 = 25.33mm or 25mm rounded down. This intentional? I scoured the web page for a similar document and checked Reddit, but didn't find anything. Just curious is all. Can someone please confirm?
  7. French T9 BB not suitable for secondary build. WHY? Just WHY?
  8. Say from a build like this http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/1000000000100010000011001000100019
  9. Lampshade_M1A2

    Buff the 5"/38

    Generally speaking secondaries in this game are rather lackluster, but one in particular has been made to really suck for no good reason. With the possible exception of the guns on the yet to be released Massachusetts the famous 5"/38 is very unimpressive. It has a low rate of fire, low damage, short range. WG has kept it in the dumps for some reason. It's overdue for a buff. In reality the 5"/38 in mountings with integral hoists could manage a burst rate of fire exceeding 20 rounds per minute, or a shell every 3 seconds. A good gun crew could sustain 15 rounds per minute, or a shell every 4 seconds. Currently the rate of fire is a mere 10 rounds per minute, meaning a 6 second reload time. Virtually every other secondary gun in the game gets its maximum burst rate of fire so why should the 5"/38 be any different? Even the older 5"/25 on several of the older USN ships has a superior rate of fire at 13.33 shots per minute (4.5 second reload). Currently the 5"/38 does a maximum of 1,800 damage per HE hit and the shell is listed as "HE Mk32". This seems to be a reference to Common Mk.32 which only had a 2.58 lb bursting charge. Yet in reality AAC shells were the most common ordinance and often used as "general purpose" HE shell with point detonation fuses. These had a bursting charge that was typically 7.25 lb. For comparison the Japanese 5"/40 which fired a lighter shell with less explosive filler does 2,100 damage, although that particular gun may be a bit out of line with others in terms of damage. Base firing range depending on the ship is either 5km or 6km with the exception of the Massachusetts. Not very good for battleships. So why not a buff? A semi-useful secondary battery would compensate USN cruisers for their lack of any torpedo armament. For USN battleships it would somewhat improve their performance at closer ranges but they'd still be comfortably outclassed by the Germans there. Add a km of range and increase the rate of fire. Maybe increase the damage too. Massachusetts could keep her selling point of good secondaries by having the 20 round per minute rate of fire versus 15 for other USN ships as well as better range and greater accuracy. The 5"/54 on the Montana and Midway is another issue. Current it has the correct rate of fire but it has a miserably short 6km range despite the fact that this gun in reality had a much longer range than the earlier 5"/38. It also does the same damage despite firing a significantly heavier shell. In my opinion secondaries across the board could use a buff, but lets start with the worst of the lot for now.
×