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

Torp Accuracy Stats on WOWs/WW2 Pacific Torp Stats

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

-Members-
1,187 posts
26,928 battles

 

I've heard some folks commenting in battle chat on their horrible torpedo accuracy stats....so I did some research.  One of the most talked about scandals of WW2 involved torpedo problems in the United States Navy, especially the torpedo's used in submarines.  It took 23 months to fix the torpedo problem in the Bureau of Ordinance.  The statistics are horrible with 1,314 ships sunk using 14,748 torpedo's in the Pacific.   That's hovers around a 9% success rate. 

 

Now look at your torpedo accuracy stats on WoWs.....I'll bet anything most of you run an accuracy of between 5 and 10%.  I'd say we are very close to the real thing.  Of course, WoWs does not have dud torpedo's.  It certainly seems like some of them are duds at times.  I shudder to think what would happen on the forums if we did have duds. 

 

So when your looking at your stats thinking you have a bad torpedo accuracy stat.........not so bad when compared to WW2 in the Pacific.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SCCC]
Members
3,181 posts
17,490 battles

In reality torpedoes had extremely short range, ships had to get in extremely close to even be able to use their torpedoes.  They did not have the LG tips like we do today and if I'm not mistaken some torpedoes were guided by wire.

 

Also, in WoWs everyone is in a battle scenario and almost always changing course and speed, whereas submarines could get targets sailing in perfectly straight lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

And guns are 5-10 times more accurate in this game than they were in ww2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

 

Also, in WoWs everyone is in a battle scenario and almost always changing course and speed, whereas submarines could get targets sailing in perfectly straight lines.

 

Real Life OP, pls nerf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,709
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
6,051 posts

German doctrine for submarines was to get within 4 km to 2 km of the target before attacking.  Their manual is on line.

Edited by Quaffer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40
[77ARC]
Beta Testers
263 posts

Keep in mind that torpedoes here run straight and true when launched.  

Their accuracy rests solely with the brain and finger connected to the fire button.

Any complaints of bad accuracy is someone trying to place blame on anything other than their own judgement on where to aim and when to fire.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-Members-
1,187 posts
26,928 battles

German doctrine for submarines was to get within 4 km to 2 km of the target before attacking.  Their manual is on line.

 

​Interestingly enough, US sub commanders were told to get that close to fire theirs by the Bureau of Ordinance to shut them all up about the problems.  It didn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22
[B-TX]
Members
360 posts
3,256 battles

Not to mention the U-boats had a problem with their torpedos that they were very failiure prone.  Some would launch and the gyro would throw it off course in a few cases U boats actually sunk themselves when a torpedo`s gyro put it in a giant 360 circle that came back and hit the Uboat sinking it.  Others were anything more than about a 80* impact resulted in a dud as the impact fuse on the tip of the torpedo just didn't always work.  Magnetic impacts were available early war but they were usually disconnected as that work around resulted in even worse success rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
457
[GOAT]
Beta Testers
1,523 posts
7,150 battles

Whats with all the comparisons with submarine tactics, they were drastically different situations.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,264
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,112 posts
30,874 battles

For all the talk about Japanese "Long Lance" Torpedoes, Capt Hara Tameichi, the man who rewrote the book on IJN torpedo doctrine before WWII and got it accepted by higher leadership... preferred to drop torpedoes at 5km.  Long range salvos were problematic, wasteful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,005
[FML]
Members
4,323 posts
16,682 battles

I think WoWS torp hit rates would be higher if they counted Torps that hit after the target had died - how many times have ships eaten a full salvo but only needed one to pop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,380 posts
4,100 battles

 

I'm curious why you think it's important that faulty torpedoes (damage vs no damage) from USN subs should correlate to torpedo accuracy (hit vs miss) of all nations in an arcade game.

 

 

I often wonder why BB guns do not have 5% accuracy like real life.  Or why the time/speed of ships seems so compressed.  Then I realize it is a computer game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-Members-
1,187 posts
26,928 battles

 

I'm curious why you think it's important that faulty torpedoes (damage vs no damage) from USN subs should correlate to torpedo accuracy (hit vs miss) of all nations in an arcade game.

 

 

I often wonder why BB guns do not have 5% accuracy like real life.  Or why the time/speed of ships seems so compressed.  Then I realize it is a computer game.

 

It was meant to be a stat to have a little fun with....OF COURSE there are huge differences.....my god...I am so sorry that having a lil fun with something on the forum upsets people.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SCCC]
Members
3,181 posts
17,490 battles

Not to mention the U-boats had a problem with their torpedos that they were very failiure prone.  Some would launch and the gyro would throw it off course in a few cases U boats actually sunk themselves when a torpedo`s gyro put it in a giant 360 circle that came back and hit the Uboat sinking it.  Others were anything more than about a 80* impact resulted in a dud as the impact fuse on the tip of the torpedo just didn't always work.  Magnetic impacts were available early war but they were usually disconnected as that work around resulted in even worse success rates.

 

You know, an interesting idea just popped into my head...

 

Reduce torpedo detection distances (make DD players happy) but make it possible to bounce torpedoes (keep it balanced and make others happy that they don't take damage from a torp that barely scrapes their hull).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,264
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,112 posts
30,874 battles

 

You know, an interesting idea just popped into my head...

 

Reduce torpedo detection distances (make DD players happy) but make it possible to bounce torpedoes (keep it balanced and make others happy that they don't take damage from a torp that barely scrapes their hull).

 

How do torpedoes bounce off hulls?  They're not armor piercing projectiles that rely on angle of impact to punch through armor, they are simply something jam packed with a huge amount of explosives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
522 posts

 

How do torpedoes bounce off hulls?  They're not armor piercing projectiles that rely on angle of impact to punch through armor, they are simply something jam packed with a huge amount of explosives.

 

Torpedoes have inertia pistols that depended on the torpedoes striking at 45 or more degrees. At more glancing angles detonation is problematic. There is also the chance of torpedoes exploding in the wake or passing underneath. The idea was for torpedoes was to hit as low as possible on the hull so that is often a risk. 

 

As a side note the RN destroyer accuracy in WWII was 16%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,264
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,112 posts
30,874 battles

 

Torpedoes have inertia pistols that depended on the torpedoes striking at 45 or more degrees. At more glancing angles detonation is problematic. There is also the chance of torpedoes exploding in the wake or passing underneath. The idea was for torpedoes was to hit as low as possible on the hull so that is often a risk. 

 

As a side note the RN destroyer accuracy in WWII was 16%.

 

So we're going for faulty torpedoes now while there were also dud shells with main and secondary batteries, i.e. the 356mm that was a dud from Kirishima that hit South Dakota?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
331 posts
5,457 battles

In reality torpedoes had extremely short range, ships had to get in extremely close to even be able to use their torpedoes.  They did not have the LG tips like we do today and if I'm not mistaken some torpedoes were guided by wire.

 

With the exception of the Type 93 with its 20 km max range

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
621 posts
7,383 battles

 

How do torpedoes bounce off hulls?  They're not armor piercing projectiles that rely on angle of impact to punch through armor, they are simply something jam packed with a huge amount of explosives.

 

As said, they need to impact at a certain angle. Tried to find a video i remember of a demo of this from WWII, but alas no luck. They need to be slowed rather significantly to set off the Pistol, and a glancing hit was not enough, so it would either bounce off at a angle, or slide down the side of the ship.

 

TBH, i would be fine with torpedo ricochets if that was paired with reduced detection. If DD players want reduced detection back, they need to give something for it, either give ships back their pre-nerf turning circle and rudder shift, or this could also work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

 

So we're going for faulty torpedoes now while there were also dud shells with main and secondary batteries, i.e. the 356mm that was a dud from Kirishima that hit South Dakota?

 

Was that a dud?

I thought it was a type 3 incindiary round with fuse timers set for bombardment, rather than <10km brawl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,264
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,112 posts
30,874 battles

 

Was that a dud?

I thought it was a type 3 incindiary round with fuse timers set for bombardment, rather than <10km brawl

 

It was a Type 91 AP round

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-092.htm

I do need to correct myself, it wasn't a dud, more of a "non pen" in game terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,515 posts
3,255 battles

In reality torpedoes had extremely short range, ships had to get in extremely close to even be able to use their torpedoes.  They did not have the LG tips like we do today and if I'm not mistaken some torpedoes were guided by wire.

 

Long Lance torpedoes had a 15km range. 

 

the Mark 14 torpedo had a range of 4 km high speed, and 8 km low speed. The mk 29 torpedo had a 12k range. So only close for high speed on the dud torpedoes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[BOTES]
Members
2,394 posts
10,556 battles

I would be fine with realistic torpedoes if that meant no auto detection without hydro, flooding that you can't just press R to negate, and blasting ship hulls in half before your technical health pool reaches zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

it seems torps were more accurate than guns (hitrate of which was like 3℅ or so)

 

wish it was the case in the game

 

Couldnt imagine any game issues if DDs where the premier damage dealer in the game from stealth no less. Especially if you got your wish and could spam torps from 20 km away. 

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.

×