Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Kombat_W0MBAT

iChase Dispersion Vid (Good Info!)

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,309
[-K-]
Supertester
5,138 posts
8,913 battles

All of iChase's content is excellent. Just saw this posted, so I thought it worth giving him a plug here on the forum.

Knowledge is power.

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,431
[HINON]
Supertester
18,902 posts
12,435 battles

Yep, very good stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
[RMRGD]
Members
173 posts
16,704 battles

he has tons of great points...  love iChase the issue is a lot of it isn't shown in game.   Unless you play say 100+ games with a ship, you wont learn its pattern very well.   Also most players won't seek this out unless you are a true veteran.    I think its why a lot of us say a good player will have 3000+ games under them.     I just think most players say "lower dispersion so more accurate" and that's not at all true.   So it makes me dislike this stat so much.      WG in game should show a dispersion elispe from a few key ranges so players have an idea how the guns handle.   In the shipyard like you can see the armor viewer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
269
[PT8TO]
Members
1,402 posts
12,810 battles

 Yeah chase really puts in the time and research into his material.

 He does not just copy paste and put his own spin on material like most people do.

It feels more original when he puts it out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[QAPLA]
Beta Testers
1,186 posts
3,495 battles
5 hours ago, LegendaryAdmiral said:

I just realize Warspite is a good ship. I wonder why when it just came out the review wasn't that good

Because she was quite a bit different than the USN and IJN offerings (only other nations available) at the time. It was hard to see her strengths compared with ships that outranged, out protected and out armoured her.

I remember how disappointed I was with her range when I got her. But then I learned her a bit better. Then she kept her obscenely good turn radius when other BBs (as a type) were enlarged, which gave her an uncommon edge.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,305
[PNG]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,027 posts
6,030 battles

:D thanks guys, appreciate the positive comments! :cap_like:

  • Cool 4

Share this post


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

You did a great job here, iChase. I love it when CCs spend time discussing the minutiae of in game mechanics and strategy rather than just saying she feels good or doesn't feel good. Moar info is moar better. No surprise you posted this vid right after Roma's release, mind you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,938
[SYN]
Members
14,357 posts
10,224 battles

You gave me an idea to explain this far easier with sticks and Plasticine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,503
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,027 posts
7,609 battles
8 hours ago, LegendaryAdmiral said:

I just realize Warspite is a good ship. I wonder why when it just came out the review wasn't that good

Funny you should mention it.  I was just looking up some old posts and stumbled upon one of my own.

Quote

If I've come to recognize any bias among the player base for evaluating the strengths of weaknesses of given battleships, it's the priority upon broadside weight, weapon range, and ship speed.  These three, considered in combination, must all be present for a ship to be considered "good", with particular emphasis on weapon range and broadside weight.  The reasons are simple enough.  Broadside weight gives an indication of the average damage one can expect from the ship -- the higher the maximum, the higher the average (or so the line of thinking goes).  But just having big guns or lots of them isn't enough.  The weapon range of the ship should preferably outstrip any cruisers it may face to give it an advantage over these feared potential flamethrowers.  Lastly, the ship should have sufficient speed to be able to get from Cap A to Cap B, which will also facilitate it keeping enemies at the desired range to pound them senselessly with it's (ideally) long ranged guns.

Back then, we had little to no information on penetration values or even a reasonable understanding of dispersion.  What we cared most about was DPM and range -- getting the most guns on target more often.  Warspite thus seemed like a bit of a lame duck.  She was slow (23.5 knots), short ranged (16.3km), with only eight guns (compared to the twelve found on New Mexico and Fuso at tier 6).  New Mexico was slow but she could outrange and out damage Warspite.  Fuso was faster, longer ranged and with more guns, so clearly she was better.

There was a small group of Warspite players, like myself, that enjoyed Warspite a lot and saw a lot of success with her.  We'd later learn and appreciate her bonuses more, including her agility, healing, accuracy and overmatching ability.  She'd also become more commonly available in the Spring of 2016 which really made her more accessible and accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
192
[AR15]
Members
393 posts
2,779 battles

Also warspite used to sit higher in the water making her easy to cit as you could litterly fire under her belt, and her turrets turned much slower. *scurries back under his rock*

Edited by JToney3449
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
15 posts
4,379 battles
9 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Funny you should mention it.  I was just looking up some old posts and stumbled upon one of my own.

Back then, we had little to no information on penetration values or even a reasonable understanding of dispersion.  What we cared most about was DPM and range -- getting the most guns on target more often.  Warspite thus seemed like a bit of a lame duck.  She was slow (23.5 knots), short ranged (16.3km), with only eight guns (compared to the twelve found on New Mexico and Fuso at tier 6).  New Mexico was slow but she could outrange and out damage Warspite.  Fuso was faster, longer ranged and with more guns, so clearly she was better.

There was a small group of Warspite players, like myself, that enjoyed Warspite a lot and saw a lot of success with her.  We'd later learn and appreciate her bonuses more, including her agility, healing, accuracy and overmatching ability.  She'd also become more commonly available in the Spring of 2016 which really made her more accessible and accepted.

I wonder maybe next big discovery is the Void Space armour scheme that often happen on French cruiser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,468
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,034 posts
12,514 battles

@iChase @LittleWhiteMouse I thought the current thinking on vertical dispersion was that it was done using a "standing upright" ellipse rather than a "laying flat on the water" ellipse. The upright ellipse model was able to explain both the asymmetrical elongation of the ellipse and the uneven clustering of splashes on the near end of salvos that were fired at flat trajectories, while a laying-flat ellipse was not.

This would not change the explanation of shots intersecting the ship model on their way to the aimpoint, but it does seem to explain some previously observed splash data better. Alternatively, if your testing has shown that there is no fanning/oblong-ing or vertical density asymmetry even when firing "flat", that would be very helpful to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[RUST]
Beta Testers
929 posts
10,345 battles
18 hours ago, LegendaryAdmiral said:

I just realize Warspite is a good ship. I wonder why when it just came out the review wasn't that good

 

10 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Funny you should mention it.  I was just looking up some old posts and stumbled upon one of my own.

Back then, we had little to no information on penetration values or even a reasonable understanding of dispersion.  What we cared most about was DPM and range -- getting the most guns on target more often.  Warspite thus seemed like a bit of a lame duck.  She was slow (23.5 knots), short ranged (16.3km), with only eight guns (compared to the twelve found on New Mexico and Fuso at tier 6).  New Mexico was slow but she could outrange and out damage Warspite.  Fuso was faster, longer ranged and with more guns, so clearly she was better.

There was a small group of Warspite players, like myself, that enjoyed Warspite a lot and saw a lot of success with her.  We'd later learn and appreciate her bonuses more, including her agility, healing, accuracy and overmatching ability.  She'd also become more commonly available in the Spring of 2016 which really made her more accessible and accepted.

People also didn't appreciate the better concealment values on battleships that Warspite has at the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,938
[SYN]
Members
14,357 posts
10,224 battles
2 minutes ago, NCC81701 said:

People also didn't appreciate the better concealment values on battleships that Warspite has at the time. 

15pt captains weren't exactly in abundance at the time and Warspite's concealment was comparable to New Mexico.

Share this post


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

Yeah and people ridicule the NM as much as they did to the Warspite back then because people can't see pass the "advantages" of 20+km range on the Fuso. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles

hmmmm got a fee questions, hope if someone can give me an answer:

1) is "raw" vertical dispersion proportional to horizontal? raw as in before shell arc interference

could 2 guns of identical shell/hor disp have different vertical disp?

 

2) is σ a unified value that affects vertical and horizontal the same way?

 

***********

some personal thought

im wondering if there is only 1 dispersion value that affects both xy axis, and 1 σ value that also affects both xy axis, but shell arc make it seem like there is a horizontal and a vertical dispersion value, but when you fire your gun, WG only rolls an "offset value" value and an "offset direction"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,342
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,175 posts
2,029 battles
1 minute ago, jason199506 said:

hmmmm got a fee questions, hope if someone can give me an answer:

1) is "raw" vertical dispersion proportional to horizontal? raw as in before shell arc interference

could 2 guns of identical shell/hor disp have different vertical disp?

 

2) is σ a unified value that affects vertical and horizontal the same way?

 

***********

some personal thought

im wondering if there is only 1 dispersion value that affects both xy axis, and 1 σ value that also affects both xy axis, but shell arc make it seem like there is a horizontal and a vertical dispersion value, but when you fire your gun, WG only rolls an "offset value" value and an "offset direction"

 

1) Unfortunately we just don't know enough about vertical dispersion. There are values given for vertical dispersion on gamesmodels3d.com, but unfortunately we don't have a way to translate the value into anything, well, valuable.

2) Pretty much. Sigma is best described as the tendency of your shells to land closer to where you aimed them as opposed to what the dispersion of your guns would allow at a given range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,503
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,027 posts
7,609 battles
1 minute ago, Phoenix_jz said:

 

1) Unfortunately we just don't know enough about vertical dispersion. There are values given for vertical dispersion on gamesmodels3d.com, but unfortunately we don't have a way to translate the value into anything, well, valuable.

2) Pretty much. Sigma is best described as the tendency of your shells to land closer to where you aimed them as opposed to what the dispersion of your guns would allow at a given range.

  1. I'm working on aligning the datamined vertical dispersion value to something workable.  My guess is that it's the value on how much the gun itself wiggles -- so a constant that's later applied to the ballistic formula to dictate how much deviation you should normally see.  I've got some plans to try and isolate this; said plans require a minimum of 16 hours of data gathering, so I'm not exactly in a hurry on this one.
  2. Sigma affects both axis equally.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
359
[DAY]
Members
1,154 posts
11,500 battles
8 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:
  1. I'm working on aligning the datamined vertical dispersion value to something workable.  My guess is that it's the value on how much the gun itself wiggles -- so a constant that's later applied to the ballistic formula to dictate how much deviation you should normally see.  I've got some plans to try and isolate this; said plans require a minimum of 16 hours of data gathering, so I'm not exactly in a hurry on this one.
  2. Sigma affects both axis equally.

so the vertical values dont linearly correspond to horizontal ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,342
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,175 posts
2,029 battles
9 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:
  1. I'm working on aligning the datamined vertical dispersion value to something workable.  My guess is that it's the value on how much the gun itself wiggles -- so a constant that's later applied to the ballistic formula to dictate how much deviation you should normally see.  I've got some plans to try and isolate this; said plans require a minimum of 16 hours of data gathering, so I'm not exactly in a hurry on this one.

 

How much the gun wiggles... so, if I'm understanding you properly, the game trying to take into account elevation corrections? I suppose that could make sense given there are set speeds gun elevate at... but then ships don't really roll in-game, do they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52
[IXM]
Members
191 posts
3,330 battles
8 minutes ago, Phoenix_jz said:

How much the gun wiggles... so, if I'm understanding you properly, the game trying to take into account elevation corrections? I suppose that could make sense given there are set speeds gun elevate at... but then ships don't really roll in-game, do they?

There are a lot of things the game doesn't model.  When ships turn the guns do not change angles, when a single gun fires in a turret the other guns are not affected(mostly because you can't fire a single gun in the game), superfiring turrets do not affect each other when they fire, crew fatigue affecting reload speeds, barrel wear, powder and projectile quality.  I am sure there are lots of other factors I am not including here.

The dispersion and sigma values are used somewhat to simulate some of those things.  They are also used to balance a ship.  The line between historical accuracy and ship balance has been blurred for some time, and here lately it seems like just a suggestion at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
265
[RKN]
Beta Testers
933 posts
8,739 battles
19 minutes ago, Phoenix_jz said:

 

How much the gun wiggles... so, if I'm understanding you properly, the game trying to take into account elevation corrections? I suppose that could make sense given there are set speeds gun elevate at... but then ships don't really roll in-game, do they?

Not really sure what your asking, but most naval guns of the era had to have some sort of stabilization. If they didn’t it would be virtually impossible to hit anything beyond a few thousand yards. Ships are going to have some pitch and roll in even calm seas, because the ocean is never flat. This “wiggle” mouse is talking about is probably the variable set to model the lag of the stabilization system to compensate for the modeled roll and pitch. No matter how good the system is, it’s going to have some oscillation because there is so much force and interia involved in moving those long heavy guns.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
687 posts
3,667 battles

It's no surprise that WatchMojo listed WoWS (#9) in their top 10 Hardest Multiplayer Games to Learn, published Jan 5, 2018.  There is a ton of detail to pick up in this game.  Which is why I'm grateful to (and support) our knowledgeable CC's ... doing all the hard work so the rest of us can just enjoy playing the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×