Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Ascinius

On the Nature of AP Bombs

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

15
[PS1HD]
Members
55 posts
1,490 battles

Hello, 

I do not think that I have seen this discussion anywhere before so I figured I should start it. I think that we can agree that AP bombs are WG's attempt to make DB's just as viable as TB's. Personally, I think that theya re on the right path except that AP DBs become the only option without a DOT chance. I am not saying that this would be balanced which is why I am trying to get the community's opinion,  but how would you feel if there was a possibility for flooding? What if, for example, a DB had a 3% chance to cause flooding if all 6 bombs hit a target ship. This condition would decrease the chance of smaller targets from recieving flooding, but would open up damage oportunities against larger targets and would add advantage to the cv player who waits to send in all of his squadrons. Furthermore I think it would make the bomb drop delay more reasonable where HE gives lower damage but almost gaurantees the hit, AP gives higher damage but demands perfect to near perfect play and timing.

 

Just a few thoughts and I would love to hear yours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[XBRTC]
Members
148 posts
7,297 battles

I'd say no, because the citadel damage from AP bombs is 90% permanent, non-healable damage, that is the designed advantage of the type.

Edited to reflect correction from Grathew.

Edited by SteveStevenson
accuracy of statement corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[M_L]
[M_L]
Beta Testers
321 posts
8,831 battles
13 hours ago, SteveStevenson said:

I'd say no, because the citadel damage from AP bombs is permanent, non-healable damage, that is the designed advantage of the type.

British ships can repair Citadel Damage. Also a good number of battleships can also heal some of the damage to the citadel. Not a lot but it's some of it. 

 

As for flooding on AP bombs, if AP shells got flooding as well then I would say sure. But as that would break battleships it probably won't happen. Well it might, but the AP bombs won't get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[XBRTC]
Members
148 posts
7,297 battles
3 hours ago, Grathew said:

British ships can repair Citadel Damage. Also a good number of battleships can also heal some of the damage to the citadel. Not a lot but it's some of it. 

It's 10% of citadel damage that's repairable, and I don't believe UK BBs have any bonuses to that figure. So it's 90% permanent, non-healable damage.

No need to implement flooding for AP bombs.

Sources:
http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Consumables#Repair_Party
 

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
688
[DRACS]
Members
3,339 posts

The problem with AP bombs is their extremes. They either fail against all DDs, nearly all cruisers, and most BBs other than German ones. BUT the German BBs and low tier RN BBs take stoooooopid damage from them.

I'd rather see lower but more consistent damage. Drop the alpha by 33%, but also significantly drop the armor fuse trigger to something like 30 or 40mm so that it'll affect all BBs and most cruisers. 70mm is waaaay too thick to reliably trigger on deck pens. At least that is what it is on Enterprise. Not sure what it is on GZ.

 

EDIT: ***No flooding***! They apparently tried that with AP shells during alpha testing and ruled it a horrible terribad idea. Leave flooding a strictly torpedo mechanic.

Edited by KaptainKaybe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
265
[RKN]
Beta Testers
933 posts
8,739 battles

I say have the ability to switch between AP and HE bombs in game when the aircraft land. That should give those carriers more flexibility and shore up some of AP bombs weaknesses.

  • Cool 1

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.

×