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

"Overconfident" Destroyer

61 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
314 posts
2,537 battles

If that was my ship all those shots wouldve dispersed multiple battleships lengths apart and landed about 3 miles away from where I aimed, but nice job either way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles

OK, meaning no disrespect to the OP, but how did his Missouri do 18,481 HP of damage on 3 pens and 1 overpen, when each AP shell from a Missouri does 13,500 HP of damage.  I don't remember if a regular penning shot does 30% or 33% damage, but either way, at worst, three 33% hits would be 13,500 HP plus 1 overpen would be 1,350 HP, which only comes to 14,850 of damage.  Where did the other 3,631 HP of damage come from?

  @ExplosiveDumpling  On your after action report, do you remember if you got credit for doing 18,481 HP of damage to that DD?  I'm curious because the only thing explanation that comes to mind other than a miscalculation of damage is that another ship hit the DD at the exact same time, and the UI displayed the combined total of damage.  But this could be verified or debunked, if you did 18,481 HP of damage or some lesser number.  Just curious.

 

Note that I personally have no problem with AP doing full penning damage to DD's, as I see it as the functional parallel of a citadel hit on large ships.  But there's something off here that should be addressed.

@Pigeon_of_War  Do you have any insight on why there's this apparent discrepancy between what seemingly should have been the damage and what was really taken?

 

 

Edited by Crucis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
37 minutes ago, Crucis said:

OK, meaning no disrespect to the OP, but how did his Missouri do 18,481 HP of damage on 3 pens and 1 overpen, when each AP shell from a Missouri does 13,500 HP of damage.  I don't remember if a regular penning shot does 30% or 33% damage, but either way, at worst, three 33% hits would be 13,500 HP plus 1 overpen would be 1,350 HP, which only comes to 14,850 of damage.  Where did the other 3,631 HP of damage come from?

  @ExplosiveDumpling  On your after action report, do you remember if you got credit for doing 18,481 HP of damage to that DD?  I'm curious because the only thing explanation that comes to mind other than a miscalculation of damage is that another ship hit the DD at the exact same time, and the UI displayed the combined total of damage.  But this could be verified or debunked, if you did 18,481 HP of damage or some lesser number.  Just curious.

 

Note that I personally have no problem with AP doing full penning damage to DD's, as I see it as the functional parallel of a citadel hit on large ships.  But there's something off here that should be addressed.

@Pigeon_of_War  Do you have any insight on why there's this apparent discrepancy between what seemingly should have been the damage and what was really taken?

 

 

It's the "superpen". Happens regularly, when the BB AP is given 40% damage. Just because. 

Basically, it's a pen + overpen in a single hit, which only shows as a pen. So you end up doing 43% or so.  It most often happens for end-on shots, but, realistically, it happens for shots coming in about 30 degrees to either side of both bow and stern. 

And I'm NOT OK with BB APs causing pens on DDs.  A BB HE shell already does the equivalent of a BB AP citadel's damage (relative to the DD's health pool). 

BB AP should never do anything other than overpen. If you're shooting at a DD, BBs should expect to use HE. Right now, you do BETTER hitting with AP then with HE. And that' FUBAR.  Not to mention that it encourages lazy BB play, since why would you switch to HE ever? Just nuke them with AP!  You never bounce (you always get the overmatch win), certainly don't ever shatter, so you don't have to worry about target angles with AP. And you'll get the superpen at least 20% of the time.

It's a mechanic that essentially just lets BB drivers blow away DDs with no aiming necessary, just hit the DD, and BOOM! 

On top of the ridiculous damage that BB secondaries due to DDs, it's one of the big reasons that DDs aren't much of a threat to BBs anymore.

Edited by EAnybody
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
603 posts
7,451 battles
45 minutes ago, Crucis said:

OK, meaning no disrespect to the OP, but how did his Missouri do 18,481 HP of damage on 3 pens and 1 overpen, when each AP shell from a Missouri does 13,500 HP of damage.  I don't remember if a regular penning shot does 30% or 33% damage, but either way, at worst, three 33% hits would be 13,500 HP plus 1 overpen would be 1,350 HP, which only comes to 14,850 of damage.  Where did the other 3,631 HP of damage come from?

  @ExplosiveDumpling  On your after action report, do you remember if you got credit for doing 18,481 HP of damage to that DD?  I'm curious because the only thing explanation that comes to mind other than a miscalculation of damage is that another ship hit the DD at the exact same time, and the UI displayed the combined total of damage.  But this could be verified or debunked, if you did 18,481 HP of damage or some lesser number.  Just curious.

 

Note that I personally have no problem with AP doing full penning damage to DD's, as I see it as the functional parallel of a citadel hit on large ships.  But there's something off here that should be addressed.

@Pigeon_of_War  Do you have any insight on why there's this apparent discrepancy between what seemingly should have been the damage and what was really taken?

 

 

ya...the [edited] double pen. which allows BB AP shell to do 33%+10% damage in a single hit. god know when WG will address on this issue (or confirm work as intented)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles
24 minutes ago, EAnybody said:

It's the "superpen". Happens regularly, when the BB AP is given 40% damage. Just because.  (basically, it's a pen + overpen)

And I'm NOT OK with BB APs causing pens on DDs.  A BB HE shell already does the equivalent of a BB AP citadel's damage (relative to the DD's health pool). 

BB AP should never do anything other than overpen. If you're shooting at a DD, BBs should expect to use HE. Right now, you do BETTER hitting with AP then with HE. And that' FUBAR.  Not to mention that it encourages lazy BB play, since why would you switch to HE ever? Just nuke them with AP!

You should never HAVE to switch ammo types in BBs.  And IMO it is NOT FUBAR.  It takes too friggin' long to switch ammo types.  And I will never ever EVER take that goddamned Expert Loader skill that so obscenely unrealistic that I would touch it with a 10 light-year long pole!!!   In the time it takes to switch ammo types, a DD can either close to suicide torp range or disappear into concealment.   And in my experience, you rarely get more than a single volley off against a DD with decent concealment, because they just disappear into smoke or behind an island or just back into concealment in the time it takes to load a second volley.

And I profoundly disagree that it encourages lazy BB play.  That's pure bovine fecal matter!!!  Lazy BB play was created by the devs when they created the entire RN HE spamming line BB line!!!  

As for "superpen", I don't know if you're being serious or sarcastic, so I'll just ignore that for now.

Back to BB AP pens.  IMO they're just the functional parallel of AP citadels on larger ships.  And again IMO people who whine about them are the same people who whined about citadels on DDs in the first place.  When will it stop?  No.  It should stop here and now.  You whiners got citadels removed from DDs, no more (except if "super-pens" are a thing, and I'm ok with removing that).  You don't want to be penned by BB's, then don't get hit.  Dodge better.

 

 

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles
11 minutes ago, SkyRail said:

ya...the [edited] double pen. which allows BB AP shell to do 33%+10% damage in a single hit. god know when WG will address on this issue (or confirm work as intented)

Skyrail, when was this ever a thing?  It's the first I've heard of it.  Regular 33% pens should be enough.  double pens or super pens or whatever, are they a DD only thing?  or are they some flaw in the game?  Not necessarily a design flaw, though it could be.  Maybe an unintended flaw in the program?  If they're "working as intended", what's the intent? (More of a rhetorical question.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
On 14/01/2018 at 9:04 AM, Crucis said:

You should never HAVE to switch ammo types in BBs.  And IMO it is NOT FUBAR.  It takes too friggin' long to switch ammo types.  And I will never ever EVER take that goddamned Expert Loader skill that so obscenely unrealistic that I would touch it with a 10 light-year long pole!!!   In the time it takes to switch ammo types, a DD can either close to suicide torp range or disappear into concealment.   And in my experience, you rarely get more than a single volley off against a DD with decent concealment, because they just disappear into smoke or behind an island or just back into concealment in the time it takes to load a second volley.

And I profoundly disagree that it encourages lazy BB play.  That's pure bovine fecal matter!!!  Lazy BB play was created by the devs when they created the entire RN HE spamming line BB line!!!  

As for "superpen", I don't know if you're being serious or sarcastic, so I'll just ignore that for now.

Back to BB AP pens.  IMO they're just the functional parallel of AP citadels on larger ships.  And again IMO people who whine about them are the same people who whined about citadels on DDs in the first place.  When will it stop?  No.  It should stop here and now.  You whiners got citadels removed from DDs, no more (except if "super-pens" are a thing, and I'm ok with removing that).  You don't want to be penned by BB's, then don't get hit.  Dodge better.

 

 

The superpen is real, it's not documented, but there's been regular forum questions about it for almost a year now. It's not a bug, it's WG's "working as intended" [edited] again.  It's the fact that citadels weren't really removed from DDs, just replaced with special hitbox locations.

Awwww, you mean you might have to actually pay attention to see where the DDs might be?  That you might have to plan ahead and have the correct HE selected if you suspect a DD around? THAT'S why AP is lazy.  You can just derp around the playing field, and not have to worry that a DD might - if the stars align and Radar/Hydro/Planes/everythingUnderTheSunThatSpots doesn't manage to point out the DD - it MIGHT get to have a shot at putting torps into that BB.

If you're [edited] up enough that a DD can get into a distance that you don't get more than one salvo off before they can torp you, YOU DESERVE TO DIE. That's the proper reward for the DD driver skill.  Having the AP pen mechanism is yet another way (secondaries, Radar, Hydro, etc.) that WG allows LAZY BB DRIVERS to bail themselves out of situations where the PROPER, GAME-BALANCED OUTCOME is that the BB dies to the DD.

BBs already have secondaries for close in fighting, and they ludicrous amounts of damage automatically, not to mention cause fire, cripple modules, knock out engines, etc, ALL WITHOUT LIFTING A BB'S FINGER.

An AP pen on a DD does MORE damage (as a percent of the HP pool) than a AP pen on a Cruiser (let alone another BB) - a typical T10 AP pen does about 35% (depending on the DD) of a T10 DD's HP pool.  That's FAR in excess of anything else. For CA's, it's doing barely 30%. For BB, citadels (as incredibly hard as they are to score these days), it's doing barely 15%. 

When your typical BB can now unload 6+ shots without being broadside, and 9-12 if so, landing 2-3 on a DD is trivial at under 8km.  Which, in and of itself, it ludicrous.

BB AP pens are just another way to make it easy for BB plays to not have to pay attention, and bail themselves out of a jam at the cost of screwing over DD players who've bothered to put the time and effort into making a good attack run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles
3 minutes ago, EAnybody said:

The superpen is real, it's not documented, but there's been regular forum questions about it for almost a year now. It's not a bug, it's WG's "working as intended" [edited] again.  It's the fact that citadels weren't really removed from DDs, just replaced with special hitbox locations.

Awwww, you mean you might have to actually pay attention to see where the DDs might be?  That you might have to plan ahead and have the correct HE selected if you suspect a DD around? THAT'S why AP is lazy.  You can just derp around the playing field, and not have to worry that a DD might - if the stars align and Radar/Hydro/Planes/everythingUnderTheSunThatSpots doesn't manage to point out the DD - it MIGHT get to have a shot at putting torps into that BB.

If you're F*Ked up enough that a DD can get into a distance that you don't get more than one salvo off before they can torp you, YOU DESERVE TO DIE. That's the proper reward for the DD driver skill.  Having the AP pen mechanism is yet another way (secondaries, Radar, Hydro, etc.) that WG allows LAZY BB DRIVERS to bail themselves out of situations where the PROPER, GAME-BALANCED OUTCOME is that the BB dies to the DD.

BBs already have secondaries for close in fighting, and they ludicrous amounts of damage automatically, not to mention cause fire, cripple modules, knock out engines, etc, ALL WITHOUT LIFTING A BB'S FINGER.

An AP pen on a DD does MORE damage (as a percent of the HP pool) than a AP pen on a Cruiser (let alone another BB) - a typical T10 AP pen does about 35% (depending on the DD) of a T10 DD's HP pool.  That's FAR in excess of anything else. For CA's, it's doing barely 30%. For BB, citadels (as incredibly hard as they are to score these days), it's doing barely 15%. 

When your typical BB can now unload 6+ shots without being broadside, and 9-12 if so, landing 2-3 on a DD is trivial at under 8km.  Which, in and of itself, it ludicrous.

BB AP pens are just another way to make it easy for BB plays to not have to pay attention, and bail themselves out of a jam at the cost of screwing over DD players who've bothered to put the time and effort into making a good attack run.

100% pure unadulterated bullfeathers.

  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,042
[USCC2]
Members
4,548 posts
12 minutes ago, Crucis said:

You should never HAVE to switch ammo types in BBs.  And IMO it is NOT FUBAR.  It takes too friggin' long to switch ammo types.  And I will never ever EVER take that goddamned Expert Loader skill that so obscenely unrealistic that I would touch it with a 10 light-year long pole!!!   In the time it takes to switch ammo types, a DD can either close to suicide torp range or disappear into concealment.   And in my experience, you rarely get more than a single volley off against a DD with decent concealment, because they just disappear into smoke or behind an island or just back into concealment in the time it takes to load a second volley.

And I profoundly disagree that it encourages lazy BB play.  That's pure bovine fecal matter!!!  Lazy BB play was created by the devs when they created the entire RN HE spamming line BB line!!!  

As for "superpen", I don't know if you're being serious or sarcastic, so I'll just ignore that for now.

Back to BB AP pens.  IMO they're just the functional parallel of AP citadels on larger ships.  And again IMO people who whine about them are the same people who whined about citadels on DDs in the first place.  When will it stop?  No.  It should stop here and now.  You whiners got citadels removed from DDs, no more (except if "super-pens" are a thing, and I'm ok with removing that).  You don't want to be penned by BB's, then don't get hit.  Dodge better.

 

 

You sound like a person that complains about fire but takes no anti-fire skills or complains of aircraft but doesn't use AA measures.

This isn't real life so there will be elements in game that will be different: radar, torpedoes always being visable, DD and CA fire time being different to that of BBs.

So yes, I believe the intention of WG was to make AP and HE act differently regarding damage to DDs and the need to swap to get the best result. That you choose not to swap or take skills is your choice but you seem to be blaming DD players for whining and therefore getting citadels removed - yet at the same time you are crying so hard about the HE spam and the ammo swap situation.

As you state - dodge better! Take anti-fire builds.

Unfortunately your post wins the biggest whiner prize for me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles
4 hours ago, _WaveRider_ said:

You sound like a person that complains about fire but takes no anti-fire skills or complains of aircraft but doesn't use AA measures.

This isn't real life so there will be elements in game that will be different: radar, torpedoes always being visable, DD and CA fire time being different to that of BBs.

So yes, I believe the intention of WG was to make AP and HE act differently regarding damage to DDs and the need to swap to get the best result. That you choose not to swap or take skills is your choice but you seem to be blaming DD players for whining and therefore getting citadels removed - yet at the same time you are crying so hard about the HE spam and the ammo swap situation.

As you state - dodge better! Take anti-fire builds.

Unfortunately your post wins the biggest whiner prize for me.

 

No, the whiners are those who b itch and complain about AP pens on their precious DDs.  The people who would take no anti-fire skills are the same people who would whine about AP pens on their precious DDs.

 

And as a matter of fact, I do take anti-fire skills.  And would take AA skills if I thought that it was necessary.  But there's no way in hell that I'll EVER take that pure BULL-BLEEP "Expert Loader" "skill".  Never ever.

 

5 hours ago, EAnybody said:

Eloquent riposte.

Your post wasn't worthy of anything more than bovine fertilizer because that's all it was.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PRNA]
Members
294 posts
2,860 battles

Just to let everyone know. This picture is from a redditor who loves the Missouri so much he worships it. In no way do I own a Missouri because I just don't have the time to farm that much free xp.

I am a DD player, a Russian DD player to be exact that loves his Udaloi very very much. I keep my distance most of the time but every now and then, I unfortunately get deleted from 15km away by battleship AP even when using WASD hax.

Edited by ExplosiveDumpling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,992
[TBW]
Members
7,093 posts
13,055 battles
2 hours ago, Crucis said:

I'll EVER take that pure BULL-BLEEP "Expert Loader" "skill".  Never ever.

I hear what you are saying, and I always wondered about the ridiculousness of the skill, but it's there and I will use it. I really only use it with the even more ridiculous minus 75% reload that Seagal has. It's there so I use it. I also took advantage of the just as ridiculous invisa fire when it was a part of the game. I agree that it is preposterous though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,042
[USCC2]
Members
4,548 posts
2 hours ago, Crucis said:

No, the whiners are those who b itch and complain about AP pens on their precious DDs.  The people who would take no anti-fire skills are the same people who would whine about AP pens on their precious DDs.

 

And as a matter of fact, I do take anti-fire skills.  And would take AA skills if I thought that it was necessary.  But there's no way in hell that I'll EVER take that pure BULL-BLEEP "Expert Loader" "skill".  Never ever.

 

Your post wasn't worthy of anything more than bovine fertilizer because that's all it was.

Ahh so you categorise whiners as those who complain about AP pens on their precious DDs - some would say the real whiners are those that cry about "Lazy BB play was created by the devs when they created the entire RN HE spamming line BB line!!!" when really all that is needed is to take stock of the ships you face, the mini-map and keep away from them if they hurt you too much - like DDs have to do with radar ships.

 

But yes,  I can imagine you facing the terrible RN HE spamming line and your reaction:

 

 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
548
[CUTIE]
Members
1,568 posts
6,790 battles
11 hours ago, EAnybody said:

The superpen is real, it's not documented, but there's been regular forum questions about it for almost a year now. It's not a bug, it's WG's "working as intended" [edited] again.  It's the fact that citadels weren't really removed from DDs, just replaced with special hitbox locations.

It has nothing to do with citadels or special hitboxes.  When a destroyer is angled relative to the BBs guns (bow-on being the worst), the AP shell overpens one or more compartments before exploding inside another...it's the same mechanic in use when the DD is broadside to the battleship, except instead of exploding over open water on the other side of the destroyer it's now exploding inside the ship.

Which is not to say that it's bad to go bow- or stern-on to a nearby battleship, as the benefit of presenting a smaller target generally outweighs the risk of taking a full pen hit.  Just bear in mind that the risk is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
603 posts
7,451 battles
13 hours ago, Crucis said:

Skyrail, when was this ever a thing?  It's the first I've heard of it.  Regular 33% pens should be enough.  double pens or super pens or whatever, are they a DD only thing?  or are they some flaw in the game?  Not necessarily a design flaw, though it could be.  Maybe an unintended flaw in the program?  If they're "working as intended", what's the intent? (More of a rhetorical question.)

 

 

I think its here for quite a long time, but no one actually pay attention to it. I myself didn't know it until very recent.

and this normal only happen to DD when the 1st hit is super light armor that the shell can still keep on going and stuck on the 2nd hit box causing 43% damage of the shell. 

I wanted to believe it is a flaw rather than intended mechanic. as we do not see 110% shell damage for BB bow on citedal.

and I know I say this in other post, but once again, I don't think 43% shell damage is Okay. (1 43% Iowa shell can take almost 50% of most DD health at T7 and T8)

we should really start asking WG for clearification and see if this is intented or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,492
[SALVO]
Members
18,991 posts
19,215 battles
4 hours ago, SkyRail said:

I think its here for quite a long time, but no one actually pay attention to it. I myself didn't know it until very recent.

and this normal only happen to DD when the 1st hit is super light armor that the shell can still keep on going and stuck on the 2nd hit box causing 43% damage of the shell. 

I wanted to believe it is a flaw rather than intended mechanic. as we do not see 110% shell damage for BB bow on citedal.

and I know I say this in other post, but once again, I don't think 43% shell damage is Okay. (1 43% Iowa shell can take almost 50% of most DD health at T7 and T8)

we should really start asking WG for clearification and see if this is intented or not.

As I've said above, I have no problem with full AP pens.  But I do have a problem with this "super pen" thing.  It's too much of a good thing, as it were.

 

9 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

I hear what you are saying, and I always wondered about the ridiculousness of the skill, but it's there and I will use it. I really only use it with the even more ridiculous minus 75% reload that Seagal has. It's there so I use it. I also took advantage of the just as ridiculous invisa fire when it was a part of the game. I agree that it is preposterous though.

I hear what you're saying too.  But Expert Loader is a bridge too far for me.  There's no way in hell that you can clear the chamber of a gun faster by pulling out the powder bags then the shell, as opposed to just firing the frickin' gun!  And it's an insult to people's intelligence to claim otherwise.

A proper "expert loader" skill should just be a straight up reduction in reload time.   It would be fine if the reload time reduction was relative to gun size, since lighter shells are a) lighter and b) are a single unit, rather than a powder bag and a shell.  And of course, b) large guns use separate powder bags and shells.  Personally, I'd prefer to see 3 size groupings.  One for small guns, at about the current size range.  A mid range for cruiser grade guns, say around 6-8" guns or so.  And a large caliber gun size, meant to include all guns from, say, 10" or larger.  This would be a nice little help for cruisers.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[VNES]
Members
454 posts
6,238 battles
On 14/01/2018 at 10:38 PM, Crucis said:

No, the whiners are those who b itch and complain about AP pens on their precious DDs.  The people who would take no anti-fire skills are the same people who would whine about AP pens on their precious DDs.

 

And as a matter of fact, I do take anti-fire skills.  And would take AA skills if I thought that it was necessary.  But there's no way in hell that I'll EVER take that pure BULL-BLEEP "Expert Loader" "skill".  Never ever.

 

Your post wasn't worthy of anything more than bovine fertilizer because that's all it was.

I am sick and tired of hearing BB players defend for the broken mechanic that benefits them. BBs are the easiest class to play, all you have to do is bow on and aim and look at the minimap to find good camping spot. Just imagine this DD pen mechanics applied to DD torps as well (and it's realistic, mind you) so if a torpedo manage to hit capital ships in bow or stern, due to lack of torpedo belt, it will 100% blow up your front guns or rear guns. So you are faced with a rock and a hard place, be boardsided and receive a full salvo or minimize damage to HP at risk of losing your guns. Would that mechanic be acceptable to you? Answer that first and then talk about pens/superpens on DDs. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[G_S]
Members
255 posts
On 1/14/2018 at 12:55 AM, SkyRail said:

ya...the [edited] double pen. which allows BB AP shell to do 33%+10% damage in a single hit. god know when WG will address on this issue (or confirm work as intented)

It's working as intended, which is to keep BB players happy because they are the cash cows of WOW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[WOLF9]
Members
743 posts
5,238 battles
On 1/23/2018 at 9:24 PM, nhf said:

It's working as intended, which is to keep BB players happy because they are the cash cows of WOW.

Now that's just cynical. Plus, you forgot "whining". :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,434 posts
11,601 battles
On 1/23/2018 at 10:24 PM, nhf said:

It's working as intended, which is to keep Whiny BB players happy because they are the cash cows of WOW.

FTFY

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.

×