Why Was Conqueror Changed From 457mm To 419mm

[MrShermanTanker]

I was kinda excited for a ship that could at least compare a little to the 460mm of Yamato... why are they changing it to another Montana with the 419mm 4x3? It is a little boring, Montana already has a 4x3 Turret companion: Grosser Kurfurst, can we give Yamato one too?

 

I'm aware its in beta testing but in almost all games the values in beta tests ALWAYS becomes the fixed value in the actual update...

[InclinedToRun]

It has both

[Goose21891]

4X3 419mm Stock, 4x2 457mm upgrade

[MajorRenegade]

try checking in game tech tree, she have both

[Admiral_Franz_von_Hipper]

54 minutes ago, MajorRenegade said:

try checking in game tech tree, she have both

Last I checked, the tech tree had a typo or something that said 4x3 457mm stock and 4x2 457mm upgraded.

[HazeGrayUnderway]

If she indeed gets to keep the options of the 2 types of main battery, that'd be even more amazing.  You can have the mass of fire of 12 guns or the power of fewer 457mm guns.  No other BB in the game gives the player that kind of wildly different main battery choices.  Not even the Tier IX-X German ones with 406-420 rifles differ to this same degree.  FFS, people still wonder what's really the difference between 406-420 

 

[Admiral_Franz_von_Hipper]

2 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 FFS, people still wonder what's really the difference between 406-420 

 

A longer reload.

[MrShermanTanker]

1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 people still wonder what's really the difference between 406-420 

 

1000 damage more? I'm not sure

[mous1]

So perfect (Lets just add another lolpen tier 10 battleship)

[MrShermanTanker]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Franz_von_Hipper said:

Last I checked, the tech tree had a typo or something that said 4x3 457mm stock and 4x2 457mm upgraded.

O damn imagine Conqueror with 4x3 457mm with no more gun upgrades that would be amazing its firepower would be the most powerful of any ship in game

[HazeGrayUnderway]

16 hours ago, MrShermanTanker said:

1000 damage more? I'm not sure

 

In the grand scheme of things, no real big difference.  Contrast this to the vastly different gunnery of Conqueror having 12 16" guns or fewer 8, but larger 18" guns.

[Xlap]

It has both. But i dont think that the 457 mm can be compared to Yamatos 460mm. The 457mm wont be able to overmatch 32 mm, so you cant bow pen as Yamato can.

[Helstrem]

On 8/11/2017 at 10:25 PM, mous1 said:

So perfect (Lets just add another lolpen tier 10 battleship)

457mm is not "lolpen" as it cannot overmatch 32mm of armor like 460mm can.

[GunnzMann]

gimmee the 12 guns every time.....

 

[MrShermanTanker]

27 minutes ago, GunBoatz said:

gimmee the 12 guns every time.....

 

4x3 x 457mm = ?

[MrShermanTanker]

5 hours ago, Helstrem said:

457mm is not "lolpen" as it cannot overmatch 32mm of armor like 460mm can.

Don't yell at me if this is a dumb question since I'm fairly new but why would a gun that's 457mm in diameter have trouble with just 32mm of armour? Even a 50mm Tank Gun from a Panzer III can punch through that, so I don't see why a British Ship Gun that's twice as large as the largest field artillery (T92 Howitzer) will have any trouble with that...

[Kunra_1]

The big thing is going to be how dispersion is on both sets of guns aswell. Also the top tier RN BBs are supposed to be more hit and run ships then tanking alot of firepower according to what they said. I'll be pushing through the line though when they launch.

I am curious how this build would work out. 

Especially the IFHE/DE combo will work out though you probably could just drop the DE and go for [edited] instead since they already have great fire chance as it stands.

[Kunra_1]

Basics of Survival I got edited lol.

[Helstrem]

1 hour ago, MrShermanTanker said:

Don't yell at me if this is a dumb question since I'm fairly new but why would a gun that's 457mm in diameter have trouble with just 32mm of armour? Even a 50mm Tank Gun from a Panzer III can punch through that, so I don't see why a British Ship Gun that's twice as large as the largest field artillery (T92 Howitzer) will have any trouble with that...

No dumb questions.

 

I don't recall the exact angle the overmatch mechanic becomes relevant at, 30 degrees or shallower impact if I recall, but basically when a round strikes at a very shallow angle it will skip off like a stone on water.  The overmatch mechanic defines the limits of the size of the round that can be bounced this way.  In order for 32mm of armor, the thickness found on the extremities of Tier VIII, IX and X battleships, to bounce rounds hitting at very shallow angles the rounds must be less than 460mm.  What this means is that in now on tanking a 406mm, or even 457mm, round will bounce off the angled hull of a battleship'sbow, but the 460mm rounds from Yamato will ignore the auto bounce mechanic and punch right through.  Hence why Yamato is referred to as having "lolpen" guns.

 

Basically the mechanic is a crude simulation of rounds striking at angles where the armor piercing tip is not able to dig into the surface being struck and the shell's mass' ability to punch through anyways, or not as the case may be.  WoWS simplified it and used shell diameter as a quick and dirty substitute for mass.

 

Thinner armor is overmatched by smaller shells.  The 25mm of extremity armor carried by Tier VI and VII battleships is overmatched by shells of 380mm or more, so Bayern, Gneisenau, Colorado, Mutsu, Nagato, Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Hood and all Tier VIII and higher battleships will overmatch 25mm but not Fuso, New Mexico, Arizona, Dunkerque, Scharnhorst or King George V.

[MrShermanTanker]

5 hours ago, Helstrem said:

No dumb questions.

 

I don't recall the exact angle the overmatch mechanic becomes relevant at, 30 degrees or shallower impact if I recall, but basically when a round strikes at a very shallow angle it will skip off like a stone on water.  The overmatch mechanic defines the limits of the size of the round that can be bounced this way.  In order for 32mm of armor, the thickness found on the extremities of Tier VIII, IX and X battleships, to bounce rounds hitting at very shallow angles the rounds must be less than 460mm.  What this means is that in now on tanking a 406mm, or even 457mm, round will bounce off the angled hull of a battleship'sbow, but the 460mm rounds from Yamato will ignore the auto bounce mechanic and punch right through.  Hence why Yamato is referred to as having "lolpen" guns.

 

Basically the mechanic is a crude simulation of rounds striking at angles where the armor piercing tip is not able to dig into the surface being struck and the shell's mass' ability to punch through anyways, or not as the case may be.  WoWS simplified it and used shell diameter as a quick and dirty substitute for mass.

 

Thinner armor is overmatched by smaller shells.  The 25mm of extremity armor carried by Tier VI and VII battleships is overmatched by shells of 380mm or more, so Bayern, Gneisenau, Colorado, Mutsu, Nagato, Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Hood and all Tier VIII and higher battleships will overmatch 25mm but not Fuso, New Mexico, Arizona, Dunkerque, Scharnhorst or King George V.

Ah, thanks :)

 

 

 

I was confused until you said that diameter was used in place of mass, since if mass was used the 457mm would penetrate (or "overmatch"? Whatever its called) the 30mm of Bow Armour even better than the 460mm as the shells of the 457 is surprisingly heavier than those of the 460 

[Middcore]

The short answer is it's an arbitrary choice to ensure that Yamato's guns are always the strongest in the game. 

[Cruiser_Chicago]

In her current state, the HMS Montana looks like a better option than "upgrading" to the 457mm guns anyway. You lose out on DPM, alpha strike, and fire starting potential per salvo if you switch to the 457mm guns. The only significant advantage to the 457mm guns is the ability to overmatch the 30mm armor sections on the Zao, Hindenburg, Henri IV, and Des Moines.

[MrShermanTanker]

1 hour ago, Cruiser_Chicago said:

In her current state, the HMS Montana looks like a better option than "upgrading" to the 457mm guns anyway. You lose out on DPM, alpha strike, and fire starting potential per salvo if you switch to the 457mm guns. The only significant advantage to the 457mm guns is the ability to overmatch the 30mm armor sections on the Zao, Hindenburg, Henri IV, and Des Moines.

HMS Montana xd

 

 

 

But I hope they remove the 12 419mm it isn't fun or unique for every max battleship to be another Montana plus Montana already has Kurfurst now its Yamatos turn for a companion ship

 

BUT, I would love it if it got 12 457mm in the final release xd it would be OP

[CaptainStevieX]

43 minutes ago, MrShermanTanker said:

HMS Montana xd

 

 

 

But I hope they remove the 12 419mm it isn't fun or unique for every max battleship to be another Montana plus Montana already has Kurfurst now its Yamatos turn for a companion ship

 

BUT, I would love it if it got 12 457mm in the final release xd it would be OP

It may as well be HMS Montana from what community contributors are saying in testing. The increased gun performance of the 457s, and their inability to overmatch 32mm of bow armor (Yamato's still the only one that can with her 460s) seems to be outweighed by the performance of the 419s, and the fact that she has 12 of them. That, plus the heal is absolutely ridiculous, and just makes the Conqueror look incredibly broken, especially since the armor is just as good as the Montana. I'm hoping a thing or two gets changed along those lines that the survivability gets nerfed a tad, and the 457s become relevant.

[SmokinCAT]

13 hours ago, MrShermanTanker said:

HMS Montana xd

 

 

 

But I hope they remove the 12 419mm it isn't fun or unique for every max battleship to be another Montana plus Montana already has Kurfurst now its Yamatos turn for a companion ship

 

BUT, I would love it if it got 12 457mm in the final release xd it would be OP

People that complain about the montanas 12 gun broadside will be in for a rude awakening, better accuracy and 26.4s reload means she is more powerful than montana could ever dream of being even with 500 less alpha per shell.