Jump to content

430 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,446
[SYN]
Members
15,265 posts
11,938 battles

I just want to stop being bottom tier all the time as a T8 premium.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,662 posts
4,351 battles
1 hour ago, Phoenix_jz said:

To be honest, as funny as I find the citadel placement compared to choices made for certain lines that also have superheals, I'd agree that I'd rather have the armor. A 381mm belt (375mm + incline) is nothing to frown at, one of the best in-game, and you can angle that far more easily than the 307mm belts of USN fast BBs - not to mention anything that touches their citadel roofs will just overmatch. I've eaten a ton of damage in Alabama even at relatively extreme angles just short of autobounce, just because the belt wasn't enough. At the same angle your American Fast BB belt is almost 600mm effective thickness, Roma's belt is 700mm.

Roma's overall design makes me pretty hopeful for the Italian line as a whole, because it indicates that WG is giving at least some credit to the Italian armor design. Getting a BB with 450mm+ effective at T10 seems reasonable for the line as an extrapolation, and that will allow for some serious levels of tanking with any citadel configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles
25 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

I just want to stop being bottom tier all the time as a T8 premium.

Add about 5000 to the server pop and a way to incentivize people to return to lower tiers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,661
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,541 posts
2,090 battles

@SparvieroVV

Looking at the armor model in gm3d, it appears the the Pugliese's inner bulkhead is counted as part of the wall for the citadel.

 

It seems WG doesn't count ER plating by itself, much like with many USN ships, so we lose the 9mm citadel wall, as well as the 12mm deck between the main and upper decks.

 

Just 50mm armor:

qztbceb.png

40mm inner bulkhead (simplified for the 24mm + 36mm?):

SOojcaX.png

All armor plates enabled (view inside of citadel):

VYXNihD.png

 

To answer what you were referring to on discord; while the Puligese seems to take up the correct amount of volume, because the citadel walls are ignored, the citadel is much larger than it should be. Even if you ignored the actual citadel wall, and only went by the last splinter bulkhead, it's still too large because of the removal of the inner 24mm splinter bulkhead. It wouldn't change the height, but it does affect the width significantly, especially considering how many more shells that gap would eat after punching through the other layers of armor.

 

I don't have much material on Richelieu, so I really can't be certain exactly what was where for her armor scheme (or what was what, since there seems to be little known about French armor in that period except a lot of it wasn't very impressive). However, going by the description given on the navypedia and wikipedia pages for the ship, it seems mostly correct, given all the armor where it's supposed to be, unlike Roma. I'll try and show a diagram that compares Roma's protection in-game and irl, with the different volumes. Shouldn't take too long.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles

@Radar_X @SuperNikoPower @Pigeon_of_War

Any way to pass this on to the devs? I’m not saying the citadel or anything else is wrong. It would just be interesting to hear the choices in modeling the armor. Thanks!

 

@Phoenix_jz

 

Thanks. My brain has been nonfunctional the last few days so thanks for your patience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,662 posts
4,351 battles

It's worth remembering that Roma was constructed separately from Littorio and Vittorio Veneto. It's quite possible that the internal bulkhead arrangment was actually different from that of the earlier ships but that this isn't noted in more general sources or wasn't known to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,225
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,013 posts
4,848 battles
3 minutes ago, Aetreus said:

It's worth remembering that Roma was constructed separately from Littorio and Vittorio Veneto. It's quite possible that the internal bulkhead arrangment was actually different from that of the earlier ships but that this isn't noted in more general sources or wasn't known to them.

The issue is is that records might not reflect yard changes done to speed up construction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles

Impero and Roma where started immediately after Littorio and Vittorio Veneto where launched. They are not improved ships just follow on ships. Roma being the fourth ship was the least completed hence why it was able to receive the bow redesign. Impero slipped behind Roma due to parts being used as repairs for the first two ships. Given the changes in handling that much armor missing would cause I find it hard to believe. Especially when time and again the choice was made to repeat designs as originally done to avoid issues in training, supply. Etc. 

 

As always if I’m wrong I’m wrong. However I find this conclusion very dubious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,662 posts
4,351 battles
5 minutes ago, SparvieroVV said:

Impero and Roma where started immediately after Littorio and Vittorio Veneto where launched. They are not improved ships just follow on ships. Roma being the fourth ship was the least completed hence why it was able to receive the bow redesign. Impero slipped behind Roma due to parts being used as repairs for the first two ships. Given the changes in handling that much armor missing would cause I find it hard to believe. Especially when time and again the choice was made to repeat designs as originally done to avoid issues in training, supply. Etc. 

 

As always if I’m wrong I’m wrong. However I find this conclusion very dubious. 

That's a long time in terms of shipbuilding though. It's exactly the sort of change that other nations made within the same class of ships(i.e. Shinano shaved off armor versus Yamato/Musashi), and notably less major than a couple of big changes within a class, like the thickened fore bulkhead in the second pair of Iowa class ships. It'd need constructional plans for Imperio/Roma to really contradict WG. Public sources on the entire class is pretty slim, so there being internal layout as well as hull changes would be quite possible.

 

Remember that all the ships got additional generation systems and pumps in order to correct the deficiencies in these systems on the initial design, that to me implies significant changes in the purposes of some rooms and possibly cutting out bulkheads to make room. We don't have plans of the ships as modified, so there could be major changes.

 

WRT the 7+9mm final bulkhead, this really shouldn't be treated as "armor" against shell fragments from any sort of gun. It wouldn't hold out anything past 5" if the shell detonates within 1-2 meters, and a major caliber gun(>10") would beat it anywhere within 15m+(there isn't 15m of spacing, so it hardly would matter). Of course, that criticism also applies to the 13mm roof on the UK BB's, and to a lesser degree the 19mm and 25mm plates on other ships. I personally would like less of this nonsense in the game, but the balance technicality is seemingly too seductive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles

I don’t believe large amounts of armor would be sacrificed to move the pumps. It wasn’t required for the previous ships. Meeting treaty weight limits was no longer concern and other changes could have been made and where not. Plus as I stated Italy did not exactly have the same practices as other nations. The sort of radical changes being made and not noted would fly in the face of practices and what is known. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,661
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,541 posts
2,090 battles

So, this is basically how WG models her citadel:

 

vQXPtCu.png

 

How her citadel was:

 

cDAOeVb.png

 

Screw ER plating citadel: 

 

nNEC05f.png

 

This is what happens if you overlay the ER citadel with the in-game cit:

Spoiler

zrAIDUM.png

This is what happens if you overlay the citadel, minus ER bulkheads, with the in-game citadel:

Spoiler

I3WyzvP.png

 

ER and other structural plating being counted seems very sporadic, however. For example, American BBs have large amounts of STS missing in many places, but it's present in other (ex, citadel roofs). The same applies for ER. Virtually all of the Pugliese is constructed with ER plating, which is obviously present in game. Likewise, all the plates the deck armor is laminated on exist as well. On the flip side, the middle bomb deck is nowhere to be found, as well as the main belt's backing, the citadel bulkhead, etc.

Nothing done would ever alter the citadel height, that much is a fact. The only hope we'd have, as Spud pointed out, is to chop off the tops of our boilers à la King George V and other RN BBs (who get that plus superheals, because balans™). However, that doesn't change the fact that the citadel is far wider than it should be, especially above the TDS, abreast the main belt. Just counting the splinter bulkhead, the citadel's an average of 8 meters wider than it should be (4m to port, 4m to starboard). If you go by the citadel bulkhead, than the citadel is 3 meters wider by the TDS (1.5m to either side, although this area is fairly inconsequential), but abreast the belt this leads to the citadel being an extra 11-12m wider, about 5.5-6m per side.

When it comes to fuse timers, after punching through a 381mm (equivalent) belt and a 36mm (40mm in-game) bulkhead, missing that other 5+ meters is a big deal. For example, let's say a German 380/52 takes a shot at you from 15 km (broadside), it'll penetrate your belt, and fly through your 40mm bulkhead as well, which is 1.4m behind the belt. Then it goes off in the citadel.

Even if we go with the 'screw ER' citadel, that would not happen. Why? Because after penetrating the main belt, the 380mm AP shell's fuse should run out about 2.5m later... aka, nowhere near the citadel. If use the citadel wall as the citadel wall, then even the American 16".50 Mk.7 would have it's fuse expire before reaching the citadel.

 

However, as Aetreus mentioned, the 7-9mm bulkhead really wouldn't do much in that case. Then again, nor would most of the citadel walls found on many BBs in-game.

 

As far as Roma/Impero's designs being altered... I highly doubt that. I highly doubt they would've bothered thickening the first splinter bulkhead by 4mm, and then removed the structurally important 24mm bulkhead.... I just don't see the rational, and something like that would've very likely been well documented, as it would be major, major changes that would affect many areas of the ship due to the fact some of the bulkheads were relied on to help support different areas. The fact Bagnasco's book doesn't mention it at all would be a significant hole in such a theory as well, considering how in-depth his book is. The only major deviation mentioned about Roma is her bow modifications, based on the sea trials of Littorio and Vittorio Veneto, and the fact they could not be done on the Impero as she was already too far along.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,661
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,541 posts
2,090 battles

Personally, while I'm fine with the absence of the citadel wall, because to be frank it's not going to do much against a shell or it's detonation...

I would rather see the 24mm bulkhead in place, at the cost of thinning the outer bulkhead by 4mm down to 36mm... that's historically accurate, and that also cuts out an enormous volume of ship that counts as citadel in-game while that was absolutely not the case in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,718
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,507 posts
11,498 battles
12 minutes ago, Phoenix_jz said:

So, this is basically how WG models her citadel:

What is the 'paratie parashegge'? (apologies, small text if I misread it).

I do generally concur with your assessment, for better or worse. I'd observe though that aside from the 60% vs. 50% repair on Monarch she has no more of a super heal, and is HE spam city.

 

In discord I observed that Roma looks a lot like a T8 Hood in many ways, LWM said that was fairly apt. Opinion on Hood is fairly divided, I expect Roma to go the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,775
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
5,738 posts
8,634 battles
On 1/12/2018 at 4:38 PM, LittleWhiteMouse said:

j4k5Vlx.jpg

that superstructure
perforated-paper-towel-rolls-2-ply-11-x-  seriously, it really does look like a roll of paper towels, at least from this angle

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,661
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,541 posts
2,090 battles
3 minutes ago, mofton said:

What is the 'paratie parashegge'? (apologies, small text if I misread it).

I do generally concur with your assessment, for better or worse. I'd observe though that aside from the 60% vs. 50% repair on Monarch she has no more of a super heal, and is HE spam city.

 

In discord I observed that Roma looks a lot like a T8 Hood in many ways, LWM said that was fairly apt. Opinion on Hood is fairly divided, I expect Roma to go the same way.

Splinter bulkheads.

I can definitely see where the Hood assessment comes from, although certainly in different ways, as their strengths and weaknesses lie in very separate areas XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles
6 minutes ago, mofton said:

What is the 'paratie parashegge'? (apologies, small text if I misread it).

I do generally concur with your assessment, for better or worse. I'd observe though that aside from the 60% vs. 50% repair on Monarch she has no more of a super heal, and is HE spam city.

 

In discord I observed that Roma looks a lot like a T8 Hood in many ways, LWM said that was fairly apt. Opinion on Hood is fairly divided, I expect Roma to go the same way.

Splinter bulkheads basically. Paraschegge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,718
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,507 posts
11,498 battles
1 minute ago, Phoenix_jz said:

Splinter bulkheads.

I can definitely see where the Hood assessment comes from, although certainly in different ways, as their strengths and weaknesses lie in very separate areas XD

Ah cool, and thanks @SparvieroVV too.

I misread the diagram, I didn't see it was labelling the bulkhead I thought it was a name for that compartment/space. Do you know what was kept in there?

 

Hood's similar in being fast, very tanky when angled and to HE, reasonable stealth, poor AA overall, good traverse, and with guns which don't quite behave. Hood's thanks to dispersion, pen issues and short fuses. Roma's apparently due to overmatch, overpenetration and similarly dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[UFFA]
Beta Testers
3,749 posts
4,245 battles
12 minutes ago, mofton said:

Ah cool, and thanks @SparvieroVV too.

I misread the diagram, I didn't see it was labelling the bulkhead I thought it was a name for that compartment/space. Do you know what was kept in there?

 

Hood's similar in being fast, very tanky when angled and to HE, reasonable stealth, poor AA overall, good traverse, and with guns which don't quite behave. Hood's thanks to dispersion, pen issues and short fuses. Roma's apparently due to overmatch, overpenetration and similarly dispersion.

I've only the google version of the book that lists all the compartments and I've yet to find a way to make the pictures zoom out and legible. Phoenix or Deamon probably could tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,662 posts
4,351 battles
1 hour ago, SparvieroVV said:

I don’t believe large amounts of armor would be sacrificed to move the pumps. It wasn’t required for the previous ships. Meeting treaty weight limits was no longer concern and other changes could have been made and where not. Plus as I stated Italy did not exactly have the same practices as other nations. The sort of radical changes being made and not noted would fly in the face of practices and what is known. 

The pumps, probably not. The additional generation rooms that were fitted might have required space taken up by that bulkhead, IDK where exactly they went. It was historically a big advantage for the ships(and very desired after Tarnato), so major work to fit them would have been justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,661
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,541 posts
2,090 battles
1 hour ago, mofton said:

Ah cool, and thanks @SparvieroVV too.

I misread the diagram, I didn't see it was labelling the bulkhead I thought it was a name for that compartment/space. Do you know what was kept in there?

 

Hood's similar in being fast, very tanky when angled and to HE, reasonable stealth, poor AA overall, good traverse, and with guns which don't quite behave. Hood's thanks to dispersion, pen issues and short fuses. Roma's apparently due to overmatch, overpenetration and similarly dispersion.

Depends on where you are in the hull. At some frames there is stuff (ammo handling where the barbettes for the 152's drop down into the hull, and some stuff abreast some of the main battery turrets), but the vast majority are just labeled 'empty'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,818
[WOLF9]
Members
8,738 posts
4,135 battles
21 hours ago, SparvieroVV said:

 

b7b0fa67113c0d518e612d8059ba25ef--cutawa

 

 

 

Great drawing!  Where's it from?

 

Edited by iDuckman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,808
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,923 posts
8,379 battles

THIS IS A MOUSE NEWS FLASH:
efZcuoV.jpg

With patch 0.7.0, Makoto Kobayashi's Roma skin is available for 7,000 doubloons ($31.88 USD equivalent).  We'll see if that carries through when the ship is made available.

Edited by LittleWhiteMouse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,032
[SIM]
Members
3,407 posts
5,241 battles

Thanks for the headline, MNN. Apparently battleship sized hats aren't cheap to make. :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×