Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
geser98

The old girl rocks!

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,030 posts
95 battles

I played through Furutaka over a year ago and loved her greatly, much more than Aoba that followed. I haven't played her since, but I recently started leveling my new RU account and got to the mighty Taco a few days back. Initially I thought I'd just have a few games just to get to Aoba, but I'm now almost 30 games in and, by Poseidon, she rocks so hard!

The revamped skill tree, cheaper CE and introduction of new squishy cruiser lines, as well as current epidemic of BBs shooting HE (and not only RN BBs too) all work in her favor. So, if you did like her before, I strongly recommend to have another go, because it's just so much fun. And if you struggled at earlier stage, it might be a good time to try again and maybe you'll get to love The Mighty Taco :cap_haloween:

 

ipVGlJj.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,367
[HINON]
[HINON]
Beta Testers
5,913 posts
5,207 battles

Even back in the day when the common knowledge was that Furutaka was a weak ship, the ship was actually really good. As is often the case, what everyone collectively knew to be true was false, but no one could gainsay it because everyone knew it was true... very frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,391
[O_O]
Members
4,333 posts
9,274 battles

Pre-buff, Furutaka had great guns but terribly slow traverse.  I couldn't keep my guns on a destroyer when I had them spotted, particularly if they were close in.  I was much better off turning the ship rather than trying to turn the guns.  I haven't played her since she was buffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles

I have yet to play the C-hull Furutaka myself, but even then she was powerful. 8 inch guns, at T5. No cruiser can defend against that, she overmatches all. Now, with her dual turrets, better AA, (better looking superstructure), and she has a faster reload too.

 

Furious taco is still beastly. Aoba is too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,030 posts
95 battles
2 hours ago, Captain_Dorja said:

Even back in the day when the common knowledge was that Furutaka was a weak ship, the ship was actually really good. As is often the case, what everyone collectively knew to be true was false, but no one could gainsay it because everyone knew it was true... very frustrating.

 

I think the biggest issue is that most people tend to think that all IJN cruisers are good HE-spammers, and if you play Taco or Aoba as such, they will definitely perform poorly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[CVA16]
Members
2,172 posts
9,622 battles
12 hours ago, geser98 said:

I think the biggest issue is that most people tend to think that all IJN cruisers are good HE-spammers, and if you play Taco or Aoba as such, they will definitely perform poorly.

For the Taco, you sometimes have to stick to HE since many of your targets are so soft that the 8"AP will over pen and you can get citadels with HE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,367
[HINON]
[HINON]
Beta Testers
5,913 posts
5,207 battles
10 hours ago, Sabot_100 said:

For the Taco, you sometimes have to stick to HE since many of your targets are so soft that the 8"AP will over pen and you can get citadels with HE.

 

I've never understood why people want to get an HE citadel. If a ship is that easy to citadel, hitting it with AP will get cits that deal triple the damage. Even factoring in overpens, AP > HE cits.

An HE citadel is just a wasted opportunity to have done real damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
On 9/18/2017 at 6:58 PM, Captain_Dorja said:

 

I've never understood why people want to get an HE citadel. If a ship is that easy to citadel, hitting it with AP will get cits that deal triple the damage. Even factoring in overpens, AP > HE cits.

An HE citadel is just a wasted opportunity to have done real damage.

If the ship you're shooting at can get Citadels from your HE fire, then you'll be overpenning like mad with AP.  With AP, figure you'll get 10+ overpens for every Citadel with the occasional pen thrown in.  So that's 10 shots for 10% damage, 1 shot for 100% damage, and maybe 2 for 33% damage, which means you average 20% damage per hit.

With HE, you're almost certainly getting mostly Pens, with the occasional Citadel, and virtually no overpens Even if you're getting half as many Citadels, that's 20 33% damage for 1 100% damage, or an average of 36% of damage per hit.

Not a lot of guns do twice as much damage for AP as HE, and with HE you get a better chance of fire and module damage.

And that doesn't even take into account that HE very seldom bounces on angled ships, and HE shatters rarely on weak-armor ships. AP has a tendency to bounce on angled ships even if they're weakly armored.

Both statistically and empirically, if your HE can citadel a given ship, shooting HE will produce significantly better average damage than AP against that ship, even if you actually citadel more often with AP.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,367
[HINON]
[HINON]
Beta Testers
5,913 posts
5,207 battles
11 hours ago, EAnybody said:

If the ship you're shooting at can get Citadels from your HE fire, then you'll be overpenning like mad with AP.  With AP, figure you'll get 10+ overpens for every Citadel with the occasional pen thrown in.  So that's 10 shots for 10% damage, 1 shot for 100% damage, and maybe 2 for 33% damage, which means you average 20% damage per hit.

With HE, you're almost certainly getting mostly Pens, with the occasional Citadel, and virtually no overpens Even if you're getting half as many Citadels, that's 20 33% damage for 1 100% damage, or an average of 36% of damage per hit.

Not a lot of guns do twice as much damage for AP as HE, and with HE you get a better chance of fire and module damage.

And that doesn't even take into account that HE very seldom bounces on angled ships, and HE shatters rarely on weak-armor ships. AP has a tendency to bounce on angled ships even if they're weakly armored.

Both statistically and empirically, if your HE can citadel a given ship, shooting HE will produce significantly better average damage than AP against that ship, even if you actually citadel more often with AP.

 

 

 

Percentages is a bad way to argue this case since AP shells often do in the range of 2-4 times more damage than an HE shell from the same gun. On most BBs, an HE citadel is barely more damage than a AP standard penetration. With smaller caliber guns it makes even less sense to me because with something like a Farragut shooting at a carrier, if you're close enough to score hits on the side of the ship, it's pretty easy to start knocking back salvos with mutlple cit hits per salvo. I've done well over 20,000 damage with 10 AP shells before. HE shells would be lucky to break 5k damage in 10 shells, and even with 10/10 HE cits, that would only be around 11000 damage. 20,000 in 10 shells is a greater number than 11,000.

In almost all cases in the game, if AP shells can penetrate the armor, they are the better ammo choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
3 hours ago, Captain_Dorja said:

 

Percentages is a bad way to argue this case since AP shells often do in the range of 2-4 times more damage than an HE shell from the same gun. On most BBs, an HE citadel is barely more damage than a AP standard penetration. With smaller caliber guns it makes even less sense to me because with something like a Farragut shooting at a carrier, if you're close enough to score hits on the side of the ship, it's pretty easy to start knocking back salvos with mutlple cit hits per salvo. I've done well over 20,000 damage with 10 AP shells before. HE shells would be lucky to break 5k damage in 10 shells, and even with 10/10 HE cits, that would only be around 11000 damage. 20,000 in 10 shells is a greater number than 11,000.

In almost all cases in the game, if AP shells can penetrate the armor, they are the better ammo choice.

You've got your numbers wrong. Virtually all ships have maximum AP damage of under 2x that of HE damage. For most, it tends to be maybe 50-75% more, while for DDs, it's seldom more than 25% more. In all those cases, an HE pen is better than an AP overpen. (That's 33% of X, vs 10% of 2X).  An HE citadel is X, while an AP pen is only 66% of X (33% of 2X) - and that's BEST case scenario for AP.   Your numbers are the "absolutely best case possible" ones, which is not what we're discussing - we're talking about average case, where "average" is what you NORMALLY score in 90% of the usage.

Normally, HE can't produce a citadel on most ships. BUT, on the limited selection of ships where the shells you shoot can citadel with HE (for instance, BB against an Omaha), HE is the better choice overall, for the "percentages" reasons I demonstrated - HE provides a better damage profile for all-around fire (that is, all angles, all distances), and all those shots which you would normally be scoring a citadel with a better-armored opponent will overpen instead, which turns your damage output into crap.

The reason is that if the armor is thin enough for HE to citadel, it's more than thin enough for AP to overpen at an *extremely* high rate. All those citadels you want from AP suddenly turn into overpens, and your inflicted damage tanks.

In your case, a Farragut vs CV (let's say a Ryujo) is going to score LOTS of overpens using AP, and is even going to bounce a lot unless it's literally right next to the side of the CV, and it's AP shells do only 16% more max Alpha than HE. So unless that Farragut is sailing along parallel to the CV at like 4km AND you're careful with your aim, you absolutely should be shooting HE; deviate from that optimal situation, and the HE shell performance totally dominates that of AP. It's gonna be a EXTRAORDINARILY rare case where you can manage a 50% citadel hit rate with AP, and that's mostly luck. More typically, you're gonna have a 50% or worse AP overpen rate vs these targets, and that, my friend, is why HE (which pens in the situations where AP overpens) will produce a massively higher actual damage in normal use.

Note that also, for most ships, if we ignore fires, HE provides a more consistent damage profile.  That is, shoot 100 shells at a target, and HE will cause more damage (fire excluded) than AP will.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,367
[HINON]
[HINON]
Beta Testers
5,913 posts
5,207 battles

Whatever. You keep Christmas in your way, and I'll kill things faster with AP. It really doesn't matter. I've pretty well reconciled myself to the fact that has player base increases about half of meta gets more stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[CVA16]
Members
2,172 posts
9,622 battles

I would agree that HE is the round of choice IF the chance of overpens or bounces are very high. If you have a good chance of penetration but a low chance of overpen or bounce, then by all means use AP. The 8" Taco when facing most T4-5 and even some T6 cruisers is a bit too good. Especially at ranges where hitting a citadel is very RNG dependant and many of your shots will end up hitting superstructure anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,030 posts
95 battles
On 9/25/2017 at 10:15 AM, EAnybody said:

Normally, HE can't produce a citadel on most ships. BUT, on the limited selection of ships where the shells you shoot can citadel with HE (for instance, BB against an Omaha), HE is the better choice overall, for the "percentages" reasons I demonstrated - HE provides a better damage profile for all-around fire (that is, all angles, all distances), and all those shots which you would normally be scoring a citadel with a better-armored opponent will overpen instead, which turns your damage output into crap.

The reason is that if the armor is thin enough for HE to citadel, it's more than thin enough for AP to overpen at an *extremely* high rate. All those citadels you want from AP suddenly turn into overpens, and your inflicted damage tanks.

 

I see your point, but why are you bringing this up in this discussion? 203mm HE of Furutaka has 33mm penetration. There are very few targets out there that a) have a citadel, b) have less than 33mm citadel armor and c) have main armor belt thin enough that a HE shell doesn't detonate on impact. Even if you use IFHE, which gives Taco HE 45mm of pen, there are still only a handful of ships you can citadel with HE, essentially only tier 4 and 5 CVs and maybe Ryujo if you're lucky. And you may occasionally get plunging fire HE citadels on cruisers, but generally Furutaka has too flat shell arcs and to short range to get a decent angle of impact.

 

Quote

Note that also, for most ships, if we ignore fires, HE provides a more consistent damage profile.  That is, shoot 100 shells at a target, and HE will cause more damage (fire excluded) than AP will.

This assumes we just shoot continuously at a single target without prioritising those that we can deal more damage to. If you prioritise those ships showing broadside, it's not quite the same. In situation where you are one of the stealthiest ships on the battlefield and can pick and choose your engagements, AP gets even more props. 

Also, you assume that you're able to bring all your guns to bear without any regard for survivability implications. In case you can only bring, say, 4 front guns on target without showing too much side, higher alpha per shell is more important and since we generally disregard HE citadels with Furutaka, AP can produce significantly higher damage.

Finally, HE shatters very often on battleships. Yes, even the 203mm HE of Furutaka. Main belt armor, gun casings, deck armor (at mid-low ranges) are all but impenetrable with 33 mm of HE pen. Hitting torpedo bulge on a BB often results in a zero-damage pen, when torp bulge acts as spaced armor. So even when facing a BB, especially one showing a broadside, it's better to use AP on upper belt armor for higher average output.

Oh, even on something like a USN DD with 127 mm guns it's highly advisable to utilise the power of AP to pump damage numbers even with fires included.

 

 

Edited by geser98

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.

×