14" Guns

[stockyy1994_]

In the last reddit Q&A, I asked Sub_Octavian what determines the krupp value for the AP shells ingame, as there was a lot of debate about this value, here is his answer:

 

 

So, the krupp value is used to give the shells as close to historic penetration as possible, as I believe that USN Emperical Formula is pretty accurate for US guns, but not other nations, krupp allows WG to correct the inaccuracies of the formula for other nations guns. 

 

After looking at the krupp values for the battleship shells ingame, the Japanese BB's (especially Fuso and Nagato guns) seem to have very high krupp, giving their shells very good penetration. Does anyone know of any sources backing this up? There doesn't seem to be a lot of information out there about Japanese BB guns (not that surprising), but from what I have seen (Nathan Okun's Facehard) and heard, their shells don't have good penetration. 

 

Finally, comparing the 14" guns on the KGV to those on the Fuso ingame using Mustanghx's penetration calculator gives this comparison graph:

 

 

The Fuso's shells have much higher krupp 2657 vs 2295, and better penetration at all ranges, I know the KGV's guns are not known for being very good, but I can't really believe that they are worse at all than the Fuso's, let alone this much worse.

 

Do KGV's guns deserve to be this bad?

[Rolkatsuki]

With KGV being at tier 7, it can be questionable on a penetration buff. It has 10 of those guns the most number of main guns on a BB at its tier, that reloads quicker than them unless its a Scharny with rather small guns.

 

Like the Scharny but with 14 instead of 11 inch guns, you can bring 6 of guns to bare on enemies ahead of you and angle, so you can present yourself a harder target to pen\hit, and its a British BB go mid range brawling so penetration is less of a concern and you got their national flavor speed repair party.

[SireneRacker]

You can compare the weapons quite easily by using navweaps.com

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_14-45_t41.php

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

 

Muzzle velocity is better on the IJN gun, but the RN gun has a little more shell weight. kinetic energy is 1/2 x m x v^2 meaning that the shell velocity will usually be more of a factor.

[Lert]

3 hours ago, Rolkatsuki said:

It has 10 of those guns the most number of main guns on a BB at its tier

Why do people keep repeating this like it's some sort of amazing feature? Fuso has 12 guns, a tier lower.

[Dunk_Master_Flex]

2 hours ago, Lert said:

Why do people keep repeating this like it's some sort of amazing feature? Fuso has 12 guns, a tier lower.

 

KGV does have a much better turret layout though. 

[Lert]

1 minute ago, xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx said:

KGV does have a much better turret layout though. 

Yeah but they don't mention that. They just keep on about "10 guns! 10 guns, in case you missed it! It has 10 guns! That's a lot!"

[Dunk_Master_Flex]

12 minutes ago, Lert said:

Yeah but they don't mention that. They just keep on about "10 guns! 10 guns, in case you missed it! It has 10 guns! That's a lot!"

 

I honestly don't see the big draw of having KGV at Tier 7, she's going to suffer more at Tier 7 that she would at Tier 8 with her ahistorical upgrades.

 

Nelson should have been Tier 7.....GG WG.

[Lert]

Just now, xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx said:

Nelson should have been Tier 7.....GG WG.

Nelson is tier 7.

As for KGV - I agree with the placement. I can't tell you why though. NDA.

[Dunk_Master_Flex]

Just now, Lert said:

Nelson is tier 7.

As for KGV - I agree with the placement. I can't tell you why though. NDA.

 

Let me rephrase that, Nelson should have been the tech tree Tier 7 instead of KGV. I'm still going to buy her with free XP however, that doesn't change the fact that I do not approve. 

 

I await the time you actually can tell us hahaha!

 

We currently have three extremely similar ships at Tier 7, 8 and 9. Monarch annoys me since it's literally KGV with a postwar cage mast, Nelson turrets and paper 15 inch guns. Lion is fine and Conqueror looks good to me.  They say Nelson is too much of a departure from regular gameplay when they throw a 14 inch ship into Tier 7 that cannot overmatch? Lol yeah WG, I bet you totally didn't do that to get everyone to sink their Free XP into Nelson.....

[Lert]

1 minute ago, xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx said:

Let me rephrase that, Nelson should have been the tech tree Tier 7 instead of KGV.

I can see why they chose to do it the way they did though. Nelson is such a different playstyle from anything before or after that having KGV, a much more conventional design, at that tier in the tech tree makes the progression a lot smoother.

1 minute ago, xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx said:

I await the time you actually can tell us hahaha!

Sorry, won't. NDA never lifts on things that happened during test periods and / or on the supertest server. Sorry.

[stockyy1994_]

8 hours ago, SireneRacker said:

You can compare the weapons quite easily by using navweaps.com

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_14-45_t41.php

http://navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_14-45_mk7.php

 

Muzzle velocity is better on the IJN gun, but the RN gun has a little more shell weight. kinetic energy is 1/2 x m x v^2 meaning that the shell velocity will usually be more of a factor.

 

You can't compare penetration though on navweaps though, the Fuso gun doesn't have a penetration chart, and the KGV's penetration chart is using a muzzle velocity of 732m/s not 757m/s. The KGV shell is 48kg heavier, and the muzzle velocity is 18m/s slower, and it is a more modern shell, at the very least, KGV's guns should have better penetration at range as it is a considerably heavier shell. 

 

I posted this in the historical section to see if anyone has any sources on the penetration of the Fuso 14" gun, and why WG gave it such high krupp, does anyone know if this is historically accurate?

 

The only source I can find is Nathan Okun's Facehard, and that shows the Japanese 14" shell as having poor penetration, and the British 14" shell having much better penetration.

[SireneRacker]

2 hours ago, stockyy1994_ said:

You can't compare penetration though on navweaps though, the Fuso gun doesn't have a penetration chart, and the KGV's penetration chart is using a muzzle velocity of 732m/s not 757m/s. The KGV shell is 48kg heavier, and the muzzle velocity is 18m/s slower, and it is a more modern shell, at the very least, KGV's guns should have better penetration at range as it is a considerably heavier shell. 

 

I posted this in the historical section to see if anyone has any sources on the penetration of the Fuso 14" gun, and why WG gave it such high krupp, does anyone know if this is historically accurate?

 

The only source I can find is Nathan Okun's Facehard, and that shows the Japanese 14" shell as having poor penetration, and the British 14" shell having much better penetration.

I guess they used the slower muzzle velocity to visualize average performance, not the performance of a brand new gun.

[SireneRacker]

5 hours ago, xX_Critical_ClopOut69_Xx said:

KGV does have a much better turret layout though. 

 

As long as the turrets work that is. Imagine having a quad turret knocked out.

[Phoenix_jz]

Just for reference, here's comparing the EFF & Deck pen of the respective 14" guns against USN armor:

 

 

As a side note, the 38.6k yd number applies only to the British 14" guns, at that column it should be 38k yards for the Japanese rifle. The charts don't translate exactly into the game, however, the point is these charts show that the Japanese gun is much weaker than the British gun, behind in belt pen by as much as 6" at some ranges.

 

I remember reading somewhere someone saying that the IJN Krupp buff was an arbitrary buff from a long time ago to keep Fuso competitive with New Mexico, but I don't know how true that is.

 

They should be much better than Fuso's guns. I don't know if this is Fuso's guns being better than they should be, KGV's guns being worse than they should be, or perhaps a little bit of both?

[mofton]

On 8/13/2017 at 10:18 AM, Lert said:

Yeah but they don't mention that. They just keep on about "10 guns! 10 guns, in case you missed it! It has 10 guns! That's a lot!"

Ha, quite. I always thought the 'ooh 10 guns at T8 argument' was pretty off, Amagi's up there with 10 much better ones.

On 8/13/2017 at 10:39 AM, Lert said:

I can see why they chose to do it the way they did though. Nelson is such a different playstyle from anything before or after that having KGV, a much more conventional design, at that tier in the tech tree makes the progression a lot smoother.

Well, I've not played Nelson so I can't make an informed comment. I have only seen a couple of CC reviews.

However, playstyle/progression is something which has been sacrificed if needed. Some of the most recent lines have been very inconsistent, my poster child would be another T7 - Gneisenau, the only German BB with torpedoes, a drop down to 6 guns from 8 while she doesn't get hydro to work close-in like the later ships, and has better than average AA. Z-23 jumping back to 150mm guns at T8 is another.

It's also very subjective as to how much people struggle with 'bumps', Pensacola and Furutaka are commonly cited examples but Furutaka at least now performs pretty solidly.

 

It just feels like WG are going to make a quick buck on Nelson, while copy/pasting in Monarch. Trust the playerbase to deal with a bit of a diversion (and Nelson's a 24kt 9x 16in ship a tier above a 23.5kt 8x15in ship) or go premium? Premium it is.

[Lert]

Just now, mofton said:

However, playstyle/progression is something which has been sacrificed if needed.

Yes, but it isn't needed. There's a perfectly good historical ship to fit in the T7 slot. One that would've gathered just as much salt if it were made a premium as Nelson is.

[mofton]

Just now, Lert said:

Yes, but it isn't needed. There's a perfectly good historical ship to fit in the T7 slot. One that would've gathered just as much salt if it were made a premium as Nelson is.

If they'd called (and modeled) Nelson 'Rodney' instead I'd be 30-40% less salty.

There were seemingly T8 built-ship, have cake/eat cake options, KGV was apparently tested in various guises, then there's Vanguard.

 

All options might lead to different tunnels in the salt mine, but copy/paste KGV for T7 and T8 and premium-erize a Class Leader? Down the darkest, saltiest one it is.

[Monty9185]

It's the copy and paste nature of Monarch that troubles me, the model is identical to the KGV hull with the addition of oversized post war lattice masts and triple turrets in a very lazy attempt to make them visually different. If War Gaming were committed to doing a 'true' 15C design study it would of resulted in a larger ship with a better secondary battery (the design proposed 20x5.25" over KGV's 16x5.25").

[BrentD15]

1 hour ago, mofton said:

If they'd called (and modeled) Nelson 'Rodney' instead I'd be 30-40% less salty.

There were seemingly T8 built-ship, have cake/eat cake options, KGV was apparently tested in various guises, then there's Vanguard.

 

All options might lead to different tunnels in the salt mine, but copy/paste KGV for T7 and T8 and premium-erize a Class Leader? Down the darkest, saltiest one it is.

May I join you in the salt mines?

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

Next harbor a pond in Wieliczka salt mines?