Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Pussnboats

Denotation

56 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

56
[AN2AC]
[AN2AC]
Members
153 posts

So getting instant killed by a single torpedo by t6 dd in a t8 bb.  Is this normal.  In every match this week my Bismark has been outright killed by a single torpedo.  Why is RNG deciding so much in a match?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,528
Members
4,274 posts
4,649 battles

Well, at least you have hydro as a bismarck. So the fact that you got hit by a torpedo in the first place...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,083
[NDA]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
5,746 posts
4,573 battles

Detonations are annoying, but they're certainly not normal, especially when you're detonated by a single torpedo as a high-HP BB. Seems like you're just on a bad luck streak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,631 battles

I NEVER see a thread in WoT about getting ammo racked.  No one ever complains about it there, and it is the exact same mechanic.  Deal with it.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,665 battles

I NEVER see a thread in WoT about getting ammo racked.  No one ever complains about it there, and it is the exact same mechanic.  Deal with it.

 

Based on all anecdotes I've heard, being ammo racked in WoT is a much more predictable event.

 

By that alone, detonations are not the same mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,090
[MAUS]
Members
13,698 posts

 

Based on all anecdotes I've heard, being ammo racked in WoT is a much more predictable event.

 

By that alone, detonations are not the same mechanic.

 

Detonation Mechanics in World of Tanks:

 
  • The penetrating shell / jet of molten copper's trajectory or the blast radius of an explosive shell must pass through the hit box of the tank's magazine (just like World of Warships).
  • A saving throw is immediately made.  If this is passed, the shell does no damage to the ammunition magazine (RNG -- uncertain if this is like World of Warships).  Nothing else happens.
  • If the saving throw is failed, the shell damage (which is +/- 25% of listed average damage -- more RNG) is applied to the magazine's hit point total.
  • Saving throw is 73% to avoid damage.  This can be improved with tank equipment and crew skills.
  • If this is sufficient to do a minimum of 50% damage, but not deplete the entire hit point total of the magazine, tank receives an "Ammo Storage Hit" penalty.  Until repaired, the tank suffers a 50% penalty to reload times.  (Not in World of Warships).  Doing less damage than this does not enact a penalty.
  • If the hit point total of the magazine is completely depleted, the tank explodes in one of two ways.  Both result in the complete removal of any remaining hit points.  One will eject the tank's turret out into the environment which can be used as an obstacle or even damage scenery or tanks that get struck by it. (Not in World of Warships).

 

Different tanks have different levels of protection on their ammunition storage.  The Tier 9 and Tier 10 German Leopard medium tanks are notorious for their vulnerable ammo racks, with the tanks usually getting hit in the racks from any frontal damaging hits.  Yeah.  Any shots from the front.  Chinese tanks typically have theirs stored on the front right hand side of the vehicle. My favourite tank, the A33 Excelsior had shells stored behind its lower glacis.  WWII era German tanks stow theirs at the back of the turret or just under the turret ring along the sides.  Knowing where these locations are is handy for trying to instant-pop vehicles, but there's still a strong RNG component due to:

 

  • Shell dispersion (just like in World of Warships)
  • Shell penetration values (these vary by +/- 25% of the listed value.  So if you shoot at an area with two shells and hit the exact same spot, one may penetrate and one might not).
  • Shell damage (like penetration, this varies by +/- 25%.  So a 200 damage shell could do 175 to 225hp depending).
  • The internal saving throw (73% of all hits to the ammo rack are ignored). 

 

It's just as RNG dependent as in World of Warships.

 

i44uup.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,106
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
10,906 posts
4,896 battles

 

 

It's just as RNG dependent as in World of Warships.

 

 

I find it funnier when most of the posters(i say 80%) here complain about getting detonated is from high tier players(+8 and up)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,434
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,209 posts
15,770 battles

I NEVER see a thread in WoT about getting ammo racked.  No one ever complains about it there, and it is the exact same mechanic.  Deal with it.

 

 

Based on all anecdotes I've heard, being ammo racked in WoT is a much more predictable event.

 

By that alone, detonations are not the same mechanic.

 

Getting ammo racked in WoT is actually much more common but is almost always "just" a good sized chunk of health along with a huge increase in reload time. The full on boom is actually quite rare. Taking a page out of the WoT playbook and doing the same thing would reduce the number of deletions from magazine hits but people might actually whine even more over the inability to effectively fight because of the suddenly slower reloads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,665 battles

Detonation Mechanics in World of Tanks:

 
  • The penetrating shell / jet of molten copper's trajectory or the blast radius of an explosive shell must pass through the hit box of the tank's magazine (just like World of Warships).
  • A saving throw is immediately made.  If this is passed, the shell does no damage to the ammunition magazine (RNG -- uncertain if this is like World of Warships).  Nothing else happens.
  • If the saving throw is failed, the shell damage (which is +/- 25% of listed average damage -- more RNG) is applied to the magazine's hit point total.
  • Saving throw is 73% to avoid damage.  This can be improved with tank equipment and crew skills.
  • If this is sufficient to do a minimum of 50% damage, but not deplete the entire hit point total of the magazine, tank receives an "Ammo Storage Hit" penalty.  Until repaired, the tank suffers a 50% penalty to reload times.  (Not in World of Warships).  Doing less damage than this does not enact a penalty.
  • If the hit point total of the magazine is completely depleted, the tank explodes in one of two ways.  Both result in the complete removal of any remaining hit points.  One will eject the tank's turret out into the environment which can be used as an obstacle or even damage scenery or tanks that get struck by it. (Not in World of Warships).

 

Different tanks have different levels of protection on their ammunition storage.  The Tier 9 and Tier 10 German Leopard medium tanks are notorious for their vulnerable ammo racks, with the tanks usually getting hit in the racks from any frontal damaging hits.  Yeah.  Any shots from the front.  Chinese tanks typically have theirs stored on the front right hand side of the vehicle. My favourite tank, the A33 Excelsior had shells stored behind its lower glacis.  WWII era German tanks stow theirs at the back of the turret or just under the turret ring along the sides.  Knowing where these locations are is handy for trying to instant-pop vehicles, but there's still a strong RNG component due to:

 

  • Shell dispersion (just like in World of Warships)
  • Shell penetration values (these vary by +/- 25% of the listed value.  So if you shoot at an area with two shells and hit the exact same spot, one may penetrate and one might not).
  • Shell damage (like penetration, this varies by +/- 25%.  So a 200 damage shell could do 175 to 225hp depending).
  • The internal saving throw (73% of all hits to the ammo rack are ignored). 

 

It's just as RNG dependent as in World of Warships.

 

Just based on this explanation, I can think of 2 important differences between WoWS and WoT that make the ammo rack argument an invalid comparison.

 

1) Based on your example, the vulnerable areas for tanks are much, MUCH smaller than on ships. Furthermore, while with tanks, the ammo rack is typically restricted to some small particular section of the tank, based on your description. With tanks, if you wanted to defend your ammo rack, and you had a rough idea where the enemy was going to be, you could just position your ammo rack on the other side.

 

In WoWS, your "ammo rack" is a giant section right under your guns. 

 

Furthermore, while in WoT, the ammo rack NOT being a giant hunk of vehicle that can't be hidden means that it's a lot easier to conceal them not only from a direct penetration, but also from HE splash damage. Ammo rack in the back of the turret? Keep front of turret pointed at threats.

 

2) Based on the description "Knowing where these locations are is handy for trying to instant-pop vehicles" alone, it definitely sounds like it's a lot more reliable than in WoWS. Almost no one in WoWS will aim at an enemy ship specifically in an attempt to detonate it. Based on your description of the mechanic, this is precisely what happens in WoT.

 

To be perfectly honest, ammo racking sounds more analogous to an enhanced multicitadel hit than a detonation.

 

In terms of gameplay, an ammo rack is a special shot you can take to deal massive damage to the target, and incapacitate it. Depending on RNG, you get to instantly kill it.

 

In WoWS, a citadel shot is a special shot that deals massive damage, damage, with the possibility of incapacitating your target, and if you get good RNG rolls, you get to instantly kill it.

 

- Both games have dispersion affecting the shot.

- Penetration in WoWS may fail if you hit armour at a bad angle, or it simply fails to penetrate, or you hit an overpen. WoT has the +/- 25% penetration crap going on.

- WoT has variable shell damage, while WoWS has variable numbers of shells hitting the aim point.

  - The damage of a single shell in WoT in comparison to the average HP of ships of that tier is much higher than in WoWS. The WoWS model of multiple guns firing shells that individually deal less relative damage is mechanically analogous to RNG modifying damage dealt by a single more damaging shell

 

I'm not really familiar enough with WoT to analyse every mechanic, but i seems to me that based on your comment, as well as what Brushwolf said, that scoring an ammo rack is much more similar in terms of gameplay purpose to scoring a multicitadel hit.

 

It typically hurts like hell, but only rarely causes an instagib.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,631 battles

 

Based on all anecdotes I've heard, being ammo racked in WoT is a much more predictable event.

 

By that alone, detonations are not the same mechanic.

 

On the contrary; it is the exact same mechanic.  You can get ammo racked with a shot to the turret or chassis ammo storage and it's a one-shot.  You can carefully aim at the exact spot where the ammo would be and not get the visual and indications.  RNG controls it, just like in this game.  Go play WoT and observe it first hand before you start quoting anecdotes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,490
[---]
Banned
6,739 posts
10,146 battles

I NEVER see a thread in WoT about getting ammo racked.  No one ever complains about it there, and it is the exact same mechanic.  Deal with it.

 

No, not really. You have to aim for the ammo to blow it out in WoT, however in warships you can have a 16 inch HE shell land on the very tip of a myoko's bow and blow it up with the very first shell (which implies a shell fragment/spall going through all the deck armor, any metal between rooms and through the magazine bulkhead from the very tip of the bow). 
Edited by Raptor_alcor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,631 battles

 

Just based on this explanation, I can think of 2 important differences between WoWS and WoT that make the ammo rack argument an invalid comparison.

 

1) Based on your example, the vulnerable areas for tanks are much, MUCH smaller than on ships. Furthermore, while with tanks, the ammo rack is typically restricted to some small particular section of the tank, based on your description. With tanks, if you wanted to defend your ammo rack, and you had a rough idea where the enemy was going to be, you could just position your ammo rack on the other side.

 

In WoWS, your "ammo rack" is a giant section right under your guns. 

 

Furthermore, while in WoT, the ammo rack NOT being a giant hunk of vehicle that can't be hidden means that it's a lot easier to conceal them not only from a direct penetration, but also from HE splash damage. Ammo rack in the back of the turret? Keep front of turret pointed at threats.

 

2) Based on the description "Knowing where these locations are is handy for trying to instant-pop vehicles" alone, it definitely sounds like it's a lot more reliable than in WoWS. Almost no one in WoWS will aim at an enemy ship specifically in an attempt to detonate it. Based on your description of the mechanic, this is precisely what happens in WoT.

 

To be perfectly honest, ammo racking sounds more analogous to an enhanced multicitadel hit than a detonation.

 

In terms of gameplay, an ammo rack is a special shot you can take to deal massive damage to the target, and incapacitate it. Depending on RNG, you get to instantly kill it.

 

In WoWS, a citadel shot is a special shot that deals massive damage, damage, with the possibility of incapacitating your target, and if you get good RNG rolls, you get to instantly kill it.

 

- Both games have dispersion affecting the shot.

- Penetration in WoWS may fail if you hit armour at a bad angle, or it simply fails to penetrate, or you hit an overpen. WoT has the +/- 25% penetration crap going on.

- WoT has variable shell damage, while WoWS has variable numbers of shells hitting the aim point.

  - The damage of a single shell in WoT in comparison to the average HP of ships of that tier is much higher than in WoWS. The WoWS model of multiple guns firing shells that individually deal less relative damage is mechanically analogous to RNG modifying damage dealt by a single more damaging shell

 

I'm not really familiar enough with WoT to analyse every mechanic, but i seems to me that based on your comment, as well as what Brushwolf said, that scoring an ammo rack is much more similar in terms of gameplay purpose to scoring a multicitadel hit.

 

It typically hurts like hell, but only rarely causes an instagib.

 

Regardless of all this, when you ammo rack an enemy or get ammo racked, your tank explodes in a brilliant and energetic detonation that takes off your turret and the words 'ammo rack' appear above the kill.  The only difference between this game and WOT is that we don't see 'detonation' displayed above the detonated ship.  Same mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,631 battles

 

 

Getting ammo racked in WoT is actually much more common but is almost always "just" a good sized chunk of health along with a huge increase in reload time. The full on boom is actually quite rare. Taking a page out of the WoT playbook and doing the same thing would reduce the number of deletions from magazine hits but people might actually whine even more over the inability to effectively fight because of the suddenly slower reloads.

 

The ammo rack I'm talking about is the one where your entire magazine is detonated, blowing the turret off the tank in a brilliant explosion.  I think your referring to the typical 'ammo rack damaged' call where the reload time doubles unless repaired.  There is a difference, but the result is the same in both games:  Get ammo racked and you're going back to the garage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,631 battles

 

Detonation Mechanics in World of Tanks:

 
  • The penetrating shell / jet of molten copper's trajectory or the blast radius of an explosive shell must pass through the hit box of the tank's magazine (just like World of Warships).
  • A saving throw is immediately made.  If this is passed, the shell does no damage to the ammunition magazine (RNG -- uncertain if this is like World of Warships).  Nothing else happens.
  • If the saving throw is failed, the shell damage (which is +/- 25% of listed average damage -- more RNG) is applied to the magazine's hit point total.
  • Saving throw is 73% to avoid damage.  This can be improved with tank equipment and crew skills.
  • If this is sufficient to do a minimum of 50% damage, but not deplete the entire hit point total of the magazine, tank receives an "Ammo Storage Hit" penalty.  Until repaired, the tank suffers a 50% penalty to reload times.  (Not in World of Warships).  Doing less damage than this does not enact a penalty.
  • If the hit point total of the magazine is completely depleted, the tank explodes in one of two ways.  Both result in the complete removal of any remaining hit points.  One will eject the tank's turret out into the environment which can be used as an obstacle or even damage scenery or tanks that get struck by it. (Not in World of Warships).

 

Different tanks have different levels of protection on their ammunition storage.  The Tier 9 and Tier 10 German Leopard medium tanks are notorious for their vulnerable ammo racks, with the tanks usually getting hit in the racks from any frontal damaging hits.  Yeah.  Any shots from the front.  Chinese tanks typically have theirs stored on the front right hand side of the vehicle. My favourite tank, the A33 Excelsior had shells stored behind its lower glacis.  WWII era German tanks stow theirs at the back of the turret or just under the turret ring along the sides.  Knowing where these locations are is handy for trying to instant-pop vehicles, but there's still a strong RNG component due to:

 

  • Shell dispersion (just like in World of Warships)
  • Shell penetration values (these vary by +/- 25% of the listed value.  So if you shoot at an area with two shells and hit the exact same spot, one may penetrate and one might not).
  • Shell damage (like penetration, this varies by +/- 25%.  So a 200 damage shell could do 175 to 225hp depending).
  • The internal saving throw (73% of all hits to the ammo rack are ignored). 

 

It's just as RNG dependent as in World of Warships.

 

i44uup.jpg

 

And this can happen with a full-health tank, just like in warships.  Same, same, same...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,090
[MAUS]
Members
13,698 posts

I'm not really familiar enough with WoT to analyse every mechanic, but i seems to me that based on your comment, as well as what Brushwolf said, that scoring an ammo rack is much more similar in terms of gameplay purpose to scoring a multicitadel hit.

 

It typically hurts like hell, but only rarely causes an instagib.

 

Ammo Racks are like Detonations.  Because of how armour works, you can't aim at ammo racks except in select circumstances.  Your shells will simply bounce off.  The ammo rack of my A33 Excelsior is behind its thickest armour unless you can flank her (good luck on that).  At ranges beyond 100m to 200m (depending on tank accuracy), you're not able to aim for modules.  You might not even be able to hit weak spots to make sure your shells penetrate.  RNG dispersion can be downright punitive at times.

 

Fires are the closest analogue to citadel hits as they cause extra damage and are caused by hitting the machine spaces in the vehicle.  Any engine strike has a chance to set the vehicle ablaze.  Destroying the vehicles fuel tanks will automatically set it ablaze.  To hit these areas, you need to flanks of a vehicle and aim ~generally~ well.  Engines and fuel tanks are large, obviously.  Once a tank is set ablaze, they start by taking a lot of damage but this rate of hp decline goes down quickly as the crew tries to put out the fire.  You can put it out immediately with a fire extinguisher consumable (one-use per game).  Subsequent fires will burn until the crew extinguishes it, giving you a meaty damage bonus for flanking & aiming well.  Fires also do all sorts of module damage and can knock out some of the crew (tanks have a minimum of 2 crew members and a maximum of 6 or 7 depending on type -- most have 4 to 5).  This means that a tank that's been set on fire doesn't work very well after the fact as the fire will hamper performance thereafter.

 

You should really give World of Tanks a try.  It's quite a well polished game at this stage.

 

mwz3wg.jpg

Where to shoot a Soviet tier 5 KV-1 tank to set it ablaze when you get the flank.  The red area are its fuel tanks, the green is its engine.  Fires stack bonus damage and are the closest analogue to citadel hits from World of Warships in World of Tanks.  They require you to aim properly at the machine spaces and can be downright catastrophic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,110
[KSF]
-Members-
5,295 posts
9,253 battles

1) Based on your example, the vulnerable areas for tanks are much, MUCH smaller than on ships. Furthermore, while with tanks, the ammo rack is typically restricted to some small particular section of the tank, based on your description. With tanks, if you wanted to defend your ammo rack, and you had a rough idea where the enemy was going to be, you could just position your ammo rack on the other side.

I've never played WoT, but I have played a lot of War Thunder.  With a few exceptions, it is incredibly easy to consistently hit the ammo rack at will.  And if you have the raw penetration there is often very little the enemy can do to hide his ammo rack.  I would think it would be similar in WoT, but I honestly don't know.  The point being, in general the magazines in ships are often much much harder to hit given how low in the water they are.  

 

My biggest problem with the detonation mechanic, is for some reason splash damage can set it off.  I don't like the fact you can detonate it a ship with out even directly hitting it.

Edited by yashma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×