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

Spreadsheet Science: T10 BB AAA edition, (Includes T10 RN BB Actual Data)

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

A recent argument around KGV's AAA effectiveness in late war configs got me to get off my backside this morning and spreadsheet out how effective any given ship in the games AAA was in more real world terms than prior attempts. I'm not quite ready to share the KGV data, want Amagi's numbers and need to wait for my client to update to get her top hull AAA values. But i did throw together a little one for the T10's including the new T10 RN BB unveiled. I'll talk a little bit more about how i derived her DPS/range values in a moment. But first let me cover the basics of what the sheets do to produce the results.

 

EDIT: Updated OP with new graphs based on the new T10 BB stats. You can see the old ones at the bottom to show just how much a 35 point drop in DP DPS had on the results in spite of a rise of about the same in bofors DPS.

 

Scroll down if you just want sweet pictures of the results.

 

The core concept is that the sheet calculates for each AA aura how many seconds a plane spends in it before it drops it's ordnance and then from that determines using the DPS number the total damage inflicted.

 

Time in aura is simply (aura rnage - drop distance, (bit more on this in a second))/Airspeed.

 

Airspeed is actually quite easy to determine. We've got both in game tests and Q&A statements saying that the in game speed factor is 5.2. That is the in game speed is 5.23 the listed tooltip speed. so a ship moving at 31 knots is actually pulling 162.13 knots!. By converting knots to m/s, (actually i'm using km/s, but w/e), we can get time to drop point.

 

That raises the question though, what is the drop distance? Well DB's drop on top of the ship, but do a little jig first which adds a bit to time before drop. I've chosen to assume this equates to an extra 200m of travel distance, may be a tad high, not too sure.

 

For TB';s it's even more complex, what is manual drop distance? Well it's going to vary a bit but Hood confirmed my prior feeling with even fulll AAA hoods not able to open fire on manual TB's before they dropped usually. Conversely it's rare the pom-poms don't get to fire, (i can confirm this from other pom-pom equipped ships i own, hood i'm taking on faith from mouse and others). SO i split the diffrance, unbuffed pom-poms are 2.5km, fully buffed UP's are 2.11 so i chose 2.3km as the drop distance.

 

 

 

Ok blabbering done, GRAPHS!

 

First here's the values using just base DPS at Base Ranges:

 

TB:

 

 GGjHlQT.png

 

DB:

 

 jHf2Xmz.png

 

A few points to note. Most of Conqueror's total comes from it's 40mm and most of Grobers comes from it's 55mm. That may sound a bit obvious, but it's critical to understanding the next set of screenshots.

 

The fact that Grober beats the others slightly vs TB's also goes to show just how important sheer freaking range is in some respects, (but see the next set of images for further notes on this). But the DB figures also show that when it's given enough work time sheer raw DPS counts too. That said not even the DB figures see much DPS come from the 20's. Their chaff in the wind vs aircraft to put it bluntly.

 

The DB figures also highlight just how wrong the lack of any serious disparity in DB vs TB HP is.

 

Set 2 is the same ships with AFT + AA mod 2. No DPS boosters in there, we've just opened the maximum rnages up:

 

TB:

 

 ei0PZdI.png

 

DB:

 

 JnGVBDs.png

 

The first thing you probably noticed is that a meagre 44% range increase produced a MUCH larger increase in received damage for the TB numbers whilst DB's increased by less. There's still a massive gap between DB's and TB's, but it's narrowed. This is quite simple to explain and it's also why Grober is falling off. The 40mm bofors which have a good chunk of DPS on them see a much larger increased (2.28 times), than the 5.0 and 5.2km gun on the various ships, notably Grober, (these see 1.81 times or less). This is because the standoff effect of TB's removes a much greater % of their possibble damage output from the equation than it does longer ranged guns. Still even for Grober the effect is enormous.

 

 

And now for the big one.

 

Public Health Service Mandatory Warning Notice: CV drivers are warned that the following images may produce reactions of extreme fear and distress. By hereby so warning you i devoid myself of resposibility any distress, heart attacks, involuntary voiding of bowels, or upsetting of children due to cruelty to small infossive present bearing flyfing floofs that may be implied herin!

 

With my bad humour out of the way, here we go:

 

TB:

 

 7zMxT2i.png

 

DB:

 

 MQJWn6E.png

 

Yikes. The numbers really outline in brutal terms just how powerful a full AAA build is. Some of the numbers are approaching 6 times the base unbuffed values vs TB's. The sheer power of MCFAA is also highlighted with Conqueror simply getting pasted by everyone but Yamato who is nipping at he, (Montana gets just she of 60% her damage output vs TB's from her DP battery). It's a testament to the sheer obscenity inducing levels of raw DPS< (1104) in Conqueror's 40mm's that she's able to hang so close in spite of her awful DP battery.

 

 

Honestly the single biggest takeaway from this is that DP batteries are far, far, far, far more important than i'd ever realised before, it takes shocking levels of non-MCFAA affected DPS to even hold a candle to a good DP battery ship. I have a nasty feeling minnie and neptune may be even better than we'd assumed too.

 

For the curious the spreadsheets on my google drive so you can breakdown the math more or use them to make your own comparisons:

 

Standard Range

 

Extended Range

 

Full AAA Build

 

Old Graphs:

 

Note Conqueror values used for these are:

 

100DPS @ 5.2km

515DPS @3.5km

61DPS @ 2.0km

 

Base Range:

 

Vs TB's

 

k1QomJn.png

 

 

Vs DB's

 

IpurjCl.png

 

 

Extended Range:

 

TB:

 

lXcqt5e.png

 

 

DB:

 

ykmtrYe.png

 

 

Full AAA Build:

 

TB:

 

V00aynB.png

 

 

DB:

 

Bqd80xG.png

 

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Minor note: T10 RN BB stats where done prior to me seeing the latest leaks on her. I'll update the charts and sheets in the morning, but TLDR the situation vs DB's is significantly worse but she only loses a bit vs TB in the first two comparison. With full AAA build shes languishing with yamato across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
648 posts
15,736 battles

Your over-estimated long range AA of Conqueror. According to leaked stats: it has 68 DPS at 5.2 km(134mm DP gun) and 532 DPS at 3.5km(40 mm Bofors).

 

Otherwise good work:great:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Your over-estimated long range AA of Conqueror. According to leaked stats: it has 68 DPS at 5.2 km(134mm DP gun) and 532 DPS at 3.5km(40 mm Bofors).

 

Otherwise good work:great:

 

 

See my second post in the thread.

 

p.s if anyone can get me DPS and range numbers for Amagi i would be most pleased. crappy net emans games still updating.

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,905 battles

T10 numbers seem all over the place, her Mk II 5.25in turrets give her 68 DPS, while the Mk. I on KGV give 65 DPS?

 

A) Those are pretty terrible compared to the USN 5in/38 at either 8.125 or 8.5 DPS (vs. 15.1 for the 5in/38).

B) Why even bother with such a miserly increase of DPS from 8.125 to 8.5 at T10... it's not unprecedented as Montana's 5in/54's are little better but still unwarranted

 

I hope there would be some kind of shift, long range DPS less than half that of North Carolina?

 

Neptune's 4.5in generates 17.67 DPS - if you're going to a hobble a ship with only 8 DP turrets, can we get that at least?

 

Belfast with 4in + radar TTM gives 17.75 DPS - can we upgrade to 4in guns?!

Edited by mofton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

T10 numbers seem all over the place, her Mk II 5.25in turrets give her 68 DPS, while the Mk. I on KGV give 65 DPS?

 

They're not MkII's thy're MK I RP10's. Which was what howe actually carried and was planned for lion. The MKII is a seperate thing. Yes i know, they used visuals of MKIII but they've got stats and name listing of older mount.

 

Also KGV's are 4.5km range. KGV has worse TB defences than a new mex.

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
648 posts
15,736 battles

 

See my second post in the thread.

 

p.s if anyone can get me DPS and range numbers for Amagi i would be most pleased. crappy net emans games still updating.

Amagi upgraded hull AA:

80 DPS at 5km (127mm DP guns)/75 DPS at 3.1km(25mm AA gun)/58 DPS at 1.2km(13mm AA gun)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,905 battles

They're not MkII's thy're MK I RP10's. Which was what howe actually carried and was planned for lion. The MKII is a seperate thing. Yes i know, they used visuals of MKIII but they've got stats and name listing of older mount.

 

Also KGV's are 4.5km range. KGV has worse TB defences than a new mex.

 

They're a bag of balls whatever exactly they are!

 

No reason for KGV's heavier projectiles with a higher range and ceiling to get 4.5km while North Carolina's guns get 5km.

 

Lots of time to change things up and this SEA stuff looks super dubious all-around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Amagi upgraded hull AA:

80 DPS at 5km (127mm DP guns)/75 DPS at 3.1km(25mm AA gun)/58 DPS at 1.2km(13mm AA gun)

 

Thats the stock hull ;). I can tell that because thats what the wiki lists, and they allways list stock hulls, so unless the ship only has one hull it's allways wrong. Thanks for trying though:great:.

 

 

They're a bag of balls whatever exactly they are!

 

No reason for KGV's heavier projectiles with a higher range and ceiling to get 4.5km while North Carolina's guns get 5km.

 

Lots of time to change things up and this SEA stuff looks super dubious all-around.

 

Totally, the reload is bunk too,. Well sort of sustained was 8rpm, but most engagements, (and nearly all AAA missions), where short enough 10rpm as normal, (i can even source a quote showing this). The MKII mount had so many loading improvements it;s not funny, they where basically using the same loading system as montana's guns with similar weight shells. I can buy minor procedure differences might have knocked the RoF down some. But 9rpm is just nutz levels of wrong.
Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
554
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Members
1,982 posts
3,253 battles

I'm about 9,000 EXP away from upgrading my Amagi hull, so I could get it tonight if I want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

The range for KGV seems low. Thanks for taking time to make this Carl. 

 

Your Welcome :).

 

Not got the main 6 shots updated but for everyone's perusal. Here's the KGV and Nelson vs the other T7 and T8 BB's with New Mex and Kongo thrown in to show the lowball and Montana to show the highball. Assumed airspeeds are 135 knots, which is lower than the 165 of the T10 sheets, so montana's numbers are slightly higher than there:

 

TB:

 

 

 

HEN7Oju.png

 

 

 

DB:

 

 

 

pFdZnmH.png

 

 

 

 

The core of what is happening is that the awful range and DPS of the DP batteries coupled with just how short ranged the pom-poms are is making the various aura's do very little DPS to TB's because they barely get into range. This is shown strongly by the DB figures which whilst still quite bad are a lot better, they're still pretty bad, (though KGV at least barely leap frogs amagi and Bismark, but the nubers still aen;t great), but they're not being outclassed by ships two tiers lower anymore. Of course those same bad DP aura's mean a full AAA build comparison will almost certainly disadvantage them even worse.

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

I'm about 9,000 EXP away from upgrading my Amagi hull, so I could get it tonight if I want to.

 

Thanks but i got the numbers, found a site at last that has them. I only needed someone to select the top hull and read the numbers from the side panel anyway :).

 

For anyone else who's missed this like me, the site i used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Note, minor edit to Nelson/KGV charts, should be easier to read too :).

 

Late so probably going to bed shortly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
234 posts
12 battles

Nice. :great:

 

Here's an example of full probability calcs. Belfast vs Aichi D3A1 bombers (or maybe it's 1,481 HP Douglas SBD-5s, these are a little old)

 

Belfast (IFHE build) Range (km) Probability per second Aichi D3A1 bombing run
102 mm/45 QF RP51 Mk XVIV* 5 6.95% 31.29%
40 mm Bofors Mk V RP50 3.5 20.48% 212.96%

 

It takes the Aichi D3A1 (129 knots) almost 15 seconds to travel 5km. The Hiryu player should expect to loose 2 planes in a drop agasint a typical Belfast, but they've got some scope to mess around.

 

Belfast (AA build) Range (km) Probability per second Aichi D3A1 bombing run
102 mm/45 QF RP51 Mk XVIV* 7.2 10.78% 70.41%
40 mm Bofors Mk V RP50 5 24.39% 362.27%

 

Against a AA spec Belfast the Hiryu should expect to loose at least 3 planes before a drop. If the Belfast's moving away and the squad has been spotted at 7km then there's a possibility they'll loose all planes before they can drop.

 

Calcs from http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Aerial_Combat and http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Torpedoes_(WoWS) (I've used the 2.61 torp speed conversion for aircraft, it seems to match up when you time it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Thats outdated info. Sub Octavion gave a newer version in his Q&A, it's a bit different now. the chance of a shootdown on any given tick is based on a combo of the time since last shootdown, (this prevent two shootdowns too close together, it functions as a cap on odds of shootdown but cannot improve them), and total damage applied by all prior ticks since a shootdown, (this steadily increases the odds, prevent excessive time between shootdowns). Unfortunately many precise factors in that are undisclosed at this time. Also all AAA now ticks every 144ms.

Edited by Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

OP Updated with new up to date graphs and spreadsheets. Actual revealed T10 RN BB stats used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Nice work Carl.

 

If you're open to making any more of these graphs, it'd be interesting to see how well Jean Bart's highly touted AA suite stacks up.

 

Borrowing Phoenix_jz's calculations for her expected base values:

177.6 dps @ 5.01 km <-- 100mm/55

357 dps @ 4.5 km <-- 57mm/60

72 dps @ 2.01 km <-- 20mm/70

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Got all the T9's allready done so i can throw her in for you, give me say 10 minutes. 1 to put numbers in 9 to generate screenshots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Ok, had to re-do this as she so thoroughly outdoes the T9's the comparison is pointless, had to use the T10's as a comparison point, and she effortlessly trounced them too. This totally shows the advantage of long range and MCFAAA DPS in producing good actual real world AAA.

 

Base TB:

 

 fUhV5VH.png

 

Base DB:

 

 dt01pgz.png

 

Extended TB:

 

 irD0S2Y.png

 

Extended DB:

 

 MFwrPOX.png

 

Full AAA TB:

 

 3i7CzdR.png

 

Full AAA DB:

 

 onnkyz9.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
3,985 posts
2,373 battles

Awesome, +1 whenever my upvote supply replenishes. :great:

 

If the rework is successful in making high tier CVs a common sight once again, JB's virtual immunity to air strikes will indeed make her a viable T9 premium.  (would still rather see a less modernized Alsace N3 for the tech tree)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Shouldn;t have as i noted waaay up thread sorted it out 3-4 days ago. But i appreciate the thought. Besides you could have pulled the number without researching the hull, just click on the top hul and the side bar numbers update.

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.

×