Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Eagl3

Terrible dispersion on Iowa

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

0
[SAA]
Members
6 posts
1,611 battles

Hello friends,

I recently got the iowa after a long grind, and the first thing I did was install the artillery plotting room 2 modules for that -11% bonus. However playing it in the past few games has been anything but accurate. I constantly struggle to get past 40k damage on average for a game with this ship. First I thought I was just bad, but I do very well with cruisers and even when I took out the New Mexico again for a spin.

I've seen videos from Noster, etc. on youtube playing with the Iowa and their shot groupings are very tight, however when I shoot most of the time my shots end up all over the place. I try to limit my engagement range between 13 to 16km so I should not be having these problems. Did something change in recent updates, why is the Iowa so bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
61
[SHAFT]
Members
166 posts
10,022 battles
2 minutes ago, Eagl3 said:

Hello friends,

I recently got the iowa after a long grind, and the first thing I did was install the artillery plotting room 2 modules for that -11% bonus. However playing it in the past few games has been anything but accurate. I constantly struggle to get past 40k damage on average for a game with this ship. First I thought I was just bad, but I do very well with cruisers and even when I took out the New Mexico again for a spin.

I've seen videos from Noster, etc. on youtube playing with the Iowa and their shot groupings are very tight, however when I shoot most of the time my shots end up all over the place. I try to limit my engagement range between 13 to 16km so I should not be having these problems. Did something change in recent updates, why is the Iowa so bad?

BB dispersion at over 12km is inconsistent. Iowa functions best for dispersion between 10 to 12km.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[RKLES]
Members
39 posts
1,615 battles

I just got Iowa last night. You can equip one more slot (I think third?) that has several effects that include -5% dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,774 posts

Iowa is a great ship.  Dont know why you are complaining about it.

Facepalm 没眼看 GIF - Facepalm 没眼看 GIFs
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[SAA]
Members
6 posts
1,611 battles
Just now, torpsRus said:

Iowa is a great ship.  Dont know why you are complaining about it.

Facepalm 没眼看 GIF - Facepalm 没眼看 GIFs
 

ah right. And when is the last time you took it out for a spin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,774 posts

I cant remember  probably right before I got my missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,340 battles
24 minutes ago, Rabin69 said:

BB dispersion at over 12km is inconsistent. Iowa functions best for dispersion between 10 to 12km.

This, Iowa sweet spot is 10-12km.  The shells are floaty and take some practice.  Honestly, with so few games and already at the Iowa, I feel like your issue is a combination of positioning and aim on your part, not the ship.  I would suggest going back down and playing low and mid-tiers more until you have a feel for leads, angles, how to position and angle your own ship, and where to shoot ships, because judging by your damage averages you're racing up the line without really learning how to play your ship.

Edited by Deviathan
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles

Sometimes I wonder if the "lock on" bug still occurs. Basically, when you're locked on to a target, your dispersion is halved. I think a few patches ago a bug was discovered where even after locking on, you didn't get the reduced dispersion. So I do wonder if this bug is responsible for the sometimes erratic shot pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[OPGS]
Beta Testers
3,260 posts
5,679 battles

It still bugs me that the Yamato has far more accurate guns. The MK-8 rangekeeper was the most advanced fire control system of the war, US battleships fitted with it would be far more accurate than the Yamato using optical rangefinders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[SAA]
Members
6 posts
1,611 battles
17 minutes ago, DeliciousFart said:

Sometimes I wonder if the "lock on" bug still occurs. Basically, when you're locked on to a target, your dispersion is halved. I think a few patches ago a bug was discovered where even after locking on, you didn't get the reduced dispersion. So I do wonder if this bug is responsible for the sometimes erratic shot pattern.

Interesting, so are you saying that if that bug exists, if I were to fire at targets without locking onto them then there would be better dispersion accuracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,604 posts
3,573 battles

Oh sweet, naive child.  Go have a run at German BBs and then we can talk about bad dispersion.  USN dispersion is actually really good...its those floaty shells that screw things up.  Even once you get the hang of judging the distance and leading the target,  said targets have ample time to change vector and throw off your shots.  But as other people have said,  inside of 12km those become much flatter arcs that are easier to manage.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles
4 minutes ago, Eagl3 said:

Interesting, so are you saying that if that bug exists, if I were to fire at targets without locking onto them then there would be better dispersion accuracy?

No, if you fire at targets without locking on, your accuracy would be worse, since your dispersion is doubled. The bug I was talking about was discovered in one of the recent public test servers, where even after locking on, the dispersion is still double what it should be. I don't know if this bug ever existed in the normal game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[SAA]
Members
6 posts
1,611 battles
29 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

This, Iowa sweet spot is 10-12km.  The shells are floaty and take some practice.  Honestly, with so few games and already at the Iowa, I feel like your issue is a combination of positioning and aim on your part, not the ship.  I would suggest going back down and playing low and mid-tiers more until you have a feel for leads, angles, how to position and angle your own ship, and where to shoot ships, because judging by your damage averages you're racing up the line without really learning how to play your ship.

If this is the case then the iowa is even worse than I thought. Having to get that close up to someone in a high tier match in a vessel as slow and easy to detect as this ship is a death sentence. The only way would possibly be if you had a good team or people dedicated to watching your flanks (but in random battles let's be real), but with how exposed the iowa citadel is even a t8 cruiser could cause massive damage in a few salvos if they're positioned as little as 15-20 degrees to the side of my bow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,340 battles
11 minutes ago, Eagl3 said:

If this is the case then the iowa is even worse than I thought. Having to get that close up to someone in a high tier match in a vessel as slow and easy to detect as this ship is a death sentence. The only way would possibly be if you had a good team or people dedicated to watching your flanks (but in random battles let's be real), but with how exposed the iowa citadel is even a t8 cruiser could cause massive damage in a few salvos if they're positioned as little as 15-20 degrees to the side of my bow

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying.  It's not the ship, it's you, you've gone into high tiers too quickly.  If you play it right, the Iowa can be a monster.  If you only care about rolling up the line fast and not really doing well with your ships, then carry on, but if you're actually trying to learn and play them well, then my advice is to go back and play T5-T7 until you understand more of the game mechanics, such as angling your armor, positioning your ship and proper leads/angles when you're shooting.  The Iowa experience is better when you are able to actually function at T8/9/10.

Edited by Deviathan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[SAA]
Members
6 posts
1,611 battles
6 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying.  It's not the ship, it's you, you've gone into high tiers too quickly.  If you play it right, the Iowa can be a monster.  If you only care about rolling up the line fast and not really doing well with your ships, then carry on, but if you're actually trying to learn and play them well, then my advice is to go back and play T5-T7 until you understand more of the game mechanics, such as angling your armor and proper leads/angles when you're shooting.

I think we both are misunderstanding each other. What you say is partially true in the sense that my survivability and in turn damage output is less because of my inability to position and play the ship correctly, and I can agree to that. However, what I am mainly complaining about in my original post is the fact that shooting at a  ship from 14km away has about as much distance in between each shell by the time they land to comfortably fit 2 north carolinas side by side in that gap. Not to mentioned vertical ( from the shooter's perpective) deviation from where I aim and where the shell groupings land. I am not talking about lead time, that's offsetting where I aim in anticipation of where the target will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,340 battles
9 minutes ago, Eagl3 said:

I think we both are misunderstanding each other. What you say is partially true in the sense that my survivability and in turn damage output is less because of my inability to position and play the ship correctly, and I can agree to that. However, what I am mainly complaining about in my original post is the fact that shooting at a  ship from 14km away has about as much distance in between each shell by the time they land to comfortably fit 2 north carolinas side by side in that gap. Not to mentioned vertical ( from the shooter's perpective) deviation from where I aim and where the shell groupings land. I am not talking about lead time, that's offsetting where I aim in anticipation of where the target will be.

I am not misunderstanding you at all, I understand completely well what your gripe is, but I also am saying it is not the ship.  You should still be able to hit things at 14-15km even if that's not the ideal range for you to be engaging at, and if you're not then something is wrong (and by extension, if you can't survive getting closer than 13km then that's a bad sign for playing high tiers).  You will definitely have games where your aim is good but you're just not hitting things, but if it's a consistent experience then it's a pretty good sign that something you're doing is wrong.

Edited by Deviathan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,221 posts
7,556 battles
24 minutes ago, Eagl3 said:

I think we both are misunderstanding each other. What you say is partially true in the sense that my survivability and in turn damage output is less because of my inability to position and play the ship correctly, and I can agree to that. However, what I am mainly complaining about in my original post is the fact that shooting at a  ship from 14km away has about as much distance in between each shell by the time they land to comfortably fit 2 north carolinas side by side in that gap. Not to mentioned vertical ( from the shooter's perpective) deviation from where I aim and where the shell groupings land. I am not talking about lead time, that's offsetting where I aim in anticipation of where the target will be.

That isn't dispersion, that's bad aim. In fact, 99% of the complaints about shots missed due to "dispersion" on this forum are in fact just terrible aim. Unlike these others, I think Iowa works best at 15-20km, and if you're struggling, it's due to a lack of familiarity with the fundamentals of the game. Based on the discussion, it's actually probably your vertical aim that is off.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
274
[NGA-B]
Members
1,229 posts
7,662 battles

No he's right. The Iowa's can barely hit the broad side of a Grosser Kurfurst. Aiming is an exercise in futility at best. Which is in considerable contrast to the Montana which just seems to always nail something when it shoots. I felt NC sometimes had a similar problem, but I chalk my low-damage in that thing up to piss-poor penetration. When broadside Moskva superstructure bounces you, it's really tempting to just skip it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,340 battles
1 minute ago, JediMasterDraco said:

No he's right. The Iowa's can barely hit the broad side of a Grosser Kurfurst. Aiming is an exercise in futility at best. Which is in considerable contrast to the Montana which just seems to always nail something when it shoots. I felt NC sometimes had a similar problem, but I chalk my low-damage in that thing up to piss-poor penetration. When broadside Moskva superstructure bounces you, it's really tempting to just skip it.

I feel like I'm going to have to round you and the OP up and go to the training room to teach you guys how to shoot....

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,623
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,677 posts
14,045 battles

"WG nerfed Missouri's accuracy!" all over again :Smile_teethhappy:

 

You guys need to make more of those threads again, I had a great laugh from the last time.  Especially when WG said, "We did nothing to the guns, and for the hell of it, we tested them knowing we did nothing to them, and still found nothing out of the ordinary."

 

Anyways.  Dispersion isn't the issue for High Tier USN BBs.  They're very reliable in dispersion.  North Carolina and VIII USN BBs are the ones that have float to their shells.  The shells for IX-X USN BBs don't float like the VIII ones do.  Matter of fact, the USN 16"/50 guns of Tier IX-X are tier for tier, among the best battleship guns in the game.  Only IJN 460mm is better.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
918 posts
2,449 battles
2 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

"WG nerfed Missouri's accuracy!" all over again :Smile_teethhappy:

 

You guys need to make more of those threads again, I had a great laugh from the last time.  Especially when WG said, "We did nothing to the guns, and for the hell of it, we tested them knowing we did nothing to them, and still found nothing out of the ordinary."

Funny. Remember that Montana thread from earlier?

Sounds like people are zipping up the tier trees too fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,623
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,677 posts
14,045 battles
1 minute ago, xalmgrey said:

Funny. Remember that Montana thread from earlier?

Sounds like people are zipping up the tier trees too fast.

Which Montana thread?  I'm always down for a few laughs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,472
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,040 posts
12,536 battles

Iowa has good accuracy for a battleship. All BBs sometimes get troll dispersion, some just get them less often than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,360
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,199 posts
2,029 battles
5 hours ago, Belthorian said:

It still bugs me that the Yamato has far more accurate guns. The MK-8 rangekeeper was the most advanced fire control system of the war, US battleships fitted with it would be far more accurate than the Yamato using optical rangefinders.

Keep in mind; you're talking about fire control, not dispersion. In this game, Fire Control is equalized between all ships by the god-tier combination that is the Mk.I eyeball + Hand + Mouse system.

 

That being said, I don't have much in the way of (WWII) dispersion numbers for the Iowa's, or numbers on general for Yamato in general, so I can't really compare their raw dispersion.

 

That being said, Yamato's working at tier X with nine guns with crap turret traverse. She needs the accuracy at tier X to be effective and match the 12-gun ships she ends up facing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×