Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Miproyq

How to reliably citadel battleships?

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
33 posts
23 battles

In 1 game, I deleted a Wyoming with 4 citadels with my New York but couldn't citadel a broadside Myogi at 5km away later on in the game (all I got was a bunch of overpens). So, is there a way to reliably citadel battleships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[PLPTV]
Members
1,457 posts
9,077 battles

Every ship has a different citadel, which has armor of varying thickness, that's angled at different inclinations. Best way is just to learn how long the citadel is in respect to the length of the ship (spans from turret B->X on most ships with A-B-X-Y configuration), and then just aiming at the waterline hoping for the best.

Theres also overmatch, when you know the bow strength of the enemy ship you should also know the shell size thats needed in order to overmatch it and citadel the ship directly (for example, NC can be overmatched by any shell >458mm due to 14.3 overmatch modifier).

Edited by Ulthwey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[RUST]
Beta Testers
931 posts
10,345 battles

Use the armor viewer and learn where the citadel hitboxes are and the armor angles protected said volumes (hint: some citadel areas are completely under the waterline). Learn how range, angling, and shell arc changes your shell impact angle and what that does to the effective thickness of the armor. Once you learn all of these things, you can reliably citadel baring bag RNG rolls on dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[RUST]
Beta Testers
931 posts
10,345 battles
16 minutes ago, Jarink said:

If you're in close, shoot at the waterline (usually).

 

Doesn't work if citadel areas are completely below the waterline, or have turtle back armor protecting them like in KM BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
691
[DRACS]
Members
3,350 posts

As a general rule, the more your shells plunge, the more reliably you'll citadel. Most battleships now have citadels below the waterline (with some exceptions), so firing straight at it's side from close range might miss the machinery spaces entirely. And if you aim too high, the AP shell might pass entirely through and through before detonating. But if your shells are plunging a bit, it'll drop down into those spaces. USN battleships are especially good at this and it's the reason why despite having very floaty shells, North Carolinas hit like trucks.

 

So if you are REALLY up close where your shells aren't arcing at all, you might want to aim a few millimetre *below* the waterline. Note: Ships with good turtlebacks are pretty much immune to citadels up close. For those, keep aiming just above the waterline to get loads of regular pens instead. Even if you can't one shot them, taking over 15k damage from regular pens in a single salvo still hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles

Reliably get lucky.

 

At high tier only the IJN BB's have vulnerable citadels anymore.  WG hates Japan.

Edited by LastSamurai714

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
14 minutes ago, LastSamurai714 said:

Reliably get lucky.

 

At high tier only the IJN BB's have vulnerable citadels anymore.  WG hates Japan.

 

Bullcrap. Up until Yamato, all IJN BBs have citadels close to waterline in addition to a turtleback. Yamato is currently the only BB with a raised citadel alongside Nelson, but it has a much shorter citadel than the old Montana and it can reliably overmatch the bows of non-German BBs.

 

Generally USN and IJN BBs are about the same when it comes to how easy it is to citadel them, except for Yamato which has raised citadel. Germans get their turtleback armor that makes them extraordinarily difficult to citadel in most cases, the British BBs are extremely hard to citadel from tier 7 and up because they're flat out cutting off the boiler rooms which should be above the waterline. At least German BBs generally have poor main guns to somewhat justify their tankiness.

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles
On 11/28/2017 at 8:21 PM, DeliciousFart said:

 

Bullcrap. Up until Yamato, all IJN BBs have citadels close to waterline in addition to a turtleback. Yamato is currently the only BB with a raised citadel alongside Nelson, but it has a much shorter citadel than the old Montana and it can reliably overmatch the bows of non-German BBs.

 

Generally USN and IJN BBs are about the same when it comes to how easy it is to citadel them, except for Yamato which has raised citadel. Germans get their turtleback armor that makes them extraordinarily difficult to citadel in most cases, the British BBs are extremely hard to citadel from tier 7 and up because they're flat out cutting off the boiler rooms which should be above the waterline. At least German BBs generally have poor main guns to somewhat justify their tankiness.

 

CQ, Current Montana, GK and Yammy...Name the easiest to citadel.  Yamato.  No question.

 

IJN "turtleback" is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
50 minutes ago, LastSamurai714 said:

 

CQ, Current Montana, GK and Yammy...Name the easiest to citadel.  Yamato.  No question.

 

IJN "turtleback" is a joke.

 

You only listed tier 10 battleships, of which only the Yamato has a raised citadel, and it also doesn't have a turtleback, unlike every previous IJN BB. Every IJN BB other than Yamato has citadel roughly at the waterline with at least a full or partial turtleback. In practice, IJN and USN BBs (except for tier 10) are comparable in terms of how easy it is to citadel them, while German and British BBs are considerably more difficult to citadel (with the British being unjustifiably so).

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles
41 minutes ago, DeliciousFart said:

 

You only listed tier 10 battleships, of which only the Yamato has a raised citadel, and it also doesn't have a turtleback, unlike every precious IJN BB. Every IJN BB other than Yamato has citadel roughly at the waterline with at least a full or partial turtleback. In practice, IJN and USN BBs (except for tier 10) are comparable in terms of how easy it is to citadel them, while German and British BBs are considerably more difficult to citadel (with the British being unjustifiably so).

 

Pretty sure I said "at high tier." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
4 minutes ago, LastSamurai714 said:

 

Pretty sure I said "at high tier." 

As far as I know, "high" tier generally means tier 8+. In terms of ease of hitting their citadels, at tier 8 the Amagi and NC are comparable with the Amagi being arguably slightly more difficult. At tier 9 the Iowa and Izumo are also comparable. At tier 10 the Yamato is noticeably easier to citadel than Montana, though it has other factors that keep it competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,588
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,598 posts
14,017 battles

Waterline aiming is the general rule to bag citadels, most especially if the target is turning with the ship rolling a tad bit and showing some interesting views of their hull.

 

German BBs?  Turtlebacks make them extremely hard to citadel the closer the range is.  You have better luck citadeling them from long range gunfire, in particular by USN BBs Tier VIII+ with their arcing and very, very heavy American Piercing shells.  So with German BBs, aim for their upper hull which has nowhere near the protection that the waterline does.  You will back penetrations.  Cruiser AP, RN BB AP, try the superstructure of these ships.

 

Also, some BBs have waterline or even below waterline citadels.  KGV, Iowa, North Carolina, etc. are examples.  Go in the Armor Viewer and check.  Those ships I listed for example, not all ships of their respective lines have that characteristic.  So it pays to learn which ones are like this.  Still, with some range you can citadel them though it can be hard.  But you still can bag lots of penetrations.  KGV for example has a waterline citadel and very tough belt protection.  However, everywhere else she's armored poorly and eats penetrations left and right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles
21 hours ago, DeliciousFart said:

As far as I know, "high" tier generally means tier 8+. In terms of ease of hitting their citadels, at tier 8 the Amagi and NC are comparable with the Amagi being arguably slightly more difficult. At tier 9 the Iowa and Izumo are also comparable. At tier 10 the Yamato is noticeably easier to citadel than Montana, though it has other factors that keep it competitive.

 

So...

 

Tier 8 is a wash.

Tier 9 is debatable but Izumo has far greater issues than just the citadel.  For that reason alone I would say advantage USN.

TIer 10 is advantage USN.

 

So what have we come to?  The IJN BB's have the weakest overall BB armor at high tiers.  Don't see 3-4 IJN BB's in a match at a time.  Wonder why...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
586
[SWOB]
Members
2,705 posts
15,516 battles
11 minutes ago, LastSamurai714 said:

 

So...

 

Tier 8 is a wash.

Tier 9 is debatable but Izumo has far greater issues than just the citadel.  For that reason alone I would say advantage USN.

TIer 10 is advantage USN.

 

So what have we come to?  The IJN BB's have the weakest overall BB armor at high tiers.  Don't see 3-4 IJN BB's in a match at a time.  Wonder why...

 

This. It's sad really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
3 hours ago, LastSamurai714 said:

 

So...

 

Tier 8 is a wash.

Tier 9 is debatable but Izumo has far greater issues than just the citadel.  For that reason alone I would say advantage USN.

TIer 10 is advantage USN.

 

So what have we come to?  The IJN BB's have the weakest overall BB armor at high tiers.  Don't see 3-4 IJN BB's in a match at a time.  Wonder why...

 

I'm well aware that Izumo has a ton of survivability issues in spite of being comparably easy/difficult to citadel (compared to Iowa at least, FDG and Lion are completely different in that regard), but the topic at hand is how to reliably citadel these ships.

 

The Izumo simply needs the concealment knocked down to 17 km base or so (or around that of Yamato) and have the center part of her weather deck increased to 38 mm so that she isn't completely wrecked by cruiser HE. These two adjustments would likely solve 80% of the balancing problems of Izumo (other than how fugly she is). Izumo has very nasty high velocity main guns with decent accuracy and turret traverse that lets her take reload module and accuracy module simultaneously, it's just that her stupidly high concealment makes her the focused target before she can do anything useful. In any case, right now I consider the current Iowa to be the gold standard of what a well balanced tier 9 battleship should be and what other tier 9 BBs should measure up to.

 

Yamato is still a competitive ship, as it has a distinct edge in able to overmatch tier 8+ battleship bows and sterns and tier 10 cruiser decks (except for Moskva), but I agree that at the moment the Montana holds the title of being the most versatile and flexible ship. I wouldn't be opposed to slightly raising Montana's citadel over the machinery spaces, while also slightly reducing her rudder shift, to make her more balanced and raise both the skill floor and skill ceiling. The Yamato can also have its few missing 25 mm AA guns for whatever good that would do.

 

WG doesn't "hate" Japan. In fact, upon release the game was pretty unbalanced in favor of Japan, as at that time there was the ahistorically thin Montana weather decks, pre-nerf Zao, Yamato's super heal, skyscraper citadels on high tier USN BBs, and so on. But the IJN line has suffered the most from power creep as new lines and gimmicks were introduced, as well as the original unbalanced aspects being patched out.

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
319 posts
4,388 battles

I play Izumo every day and I will say that it takes citadels fairly often.  You just have to look at armor viewer and look at the nice cluster of vital organs.  So full circle...find a Japanese BB...know where to aim and get lucky.  Most USN BB's sit bow on anyway so it's easier to find a vulnerable IJN BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
2 hours ago, LastSamurai714 said:

I play Izumo every day and I will say that it takes citadels fairly often.  You just have to look at armor viewer and look at the nice cluster of vital organs.  So full circle...find a Japanese BB...know where to aim and get lucky.  Most USN BB's sit bow on anyway so it's easier to find a vulnerable IJN BB.

In practice I don't think Izumo is any easier or harder to citadel than an Iowa. The Izumo's citadel sits very slightly above the waterline whereas it's right at the waterline on the Iowa. The forward turrets has a 127 mm turtleback angled back at 45 degrees that makes it very difficult to citadel in that area even at modest angles off broadside; conversely the machinery spaces has no turtleback and is easier to citadel, but that area is also much shorter than the Iowa's citadel, which doesn't have any kind of angled turtleback.

 

I will also say that its slower speed also means that it reacts to the rudder slower which makes it harder to dynamically angle.

 

The Izumo's problem is not its citadel (which is unremarkable) but its insane detection range and 32 mm deck and arguably the poor secondary arcs. If you address those problems in the manner that I described in my previous post, then you would have a ship that's reasonably competitive with Iowa. Ideally, I'd like to see the surface detection dropped to 17 km (the air detection dropped some as well), and the weather deck over the turrets and machinery increased to 38 mm. I'd also aesthetically rework the superstructure because it looks completely hideous and lazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
457 posts

use a carrier and AP bomb them, [edited]crapis such a joy when you are in a T6 BB. Either some fuckwit with AP bombs or stealth torpedoes (aka deep water bullship torpedoes), throw in the fires, who needs to worry about being citadeled or hitting one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×