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

A bug in the Alaska armor?

70 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,151
[SYN]
Members
5,809 posts
13,201 battles

Does your post make sense?  No.  It doesn't.

Specifically, what are you asking?

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
316
[A-CUP]
Members
1,023 posts
8,232 battles

If you are talking about citadel. It was raised during the testing. 

If your talking about armor thickness then its normal for that cruiser.

if anything else, specify what your talking about and not just say "Make sense?"

Edited by Poisonous_Lily
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
3 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

Does your post make sense?  No.  It doesn't.

Specifically, what are you asking?

 

1 minute ago, Poisonous_Lily said:

If you are talking about citadel. It was raised during the testing. 

If your talking about armor thickness then its normal for that cruiser.

Compare the upper citadel deck armor with the others american cruisers.

Baltimore:     65 mm

Buffalo:         76mm

Des Moines: 90mm

 

Alaska: 19mm????????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,238
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,970 battles
5 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

 

Compare the upper citadel deck armor with the others american cruisers.

Baltimore:     65 mm

Buffalo:         76mm

Des Moines: 90mm

 

Alaska: 19mm????????????????

because you are not looking at Alaska's casemate deck, which is somewhere in the three digits.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31,035
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
23,350 posts
17,564 battles
5 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

Alaska: 19mm????????????????

 

96mm-Gif.gif

Source.

Alaska has better horizontal protection than the other cruisers you mentioned.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
818
[KIA-A]
Beta Testers
3,386 posts
5,639 battles
29 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

image.thumb.jpeg.c1b38d7a339387727a792c8b8f6498fe.jpeg

Makes sense?

uh yes it makes sense. because its artificially buffed from 16mm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
24 minutes ago, Lert said:

 

96mm-Gif.gif

Source.

Alaska has better horizontal protection than the other cruisers you mentioned.

If that is the case ok.

16 minutes ago, Helmut__Kohl said:

 

This. OP has failed hard. 

Wrong. What failed is the armor layout in wows to show that info.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
818
[KIA-A]
Beta Testers
3,386 posts
5,639 battles
Just now, _no_one_ said:

If that is the case ok.

Wrong. What failed is the armor layout in wows to show that info.

ok now this is just straight up ignorant.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,721
[--K--]
Members
6,623 posts
14,409 battles
4 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

Omg this idiots. Tell me moron if someone gets misleading information his is fault to make wrong assumptions?

Turn the casemate armor back on and look for yourself. 

Leaving it off and calling everyone else names gets you nowhere but looking like the fool

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[HKA]
Members
88 posts
10,388 battles

The armor viewer in game is very misleading.   

The casemate deck shows a thickness of 36 mm.   

The citadel deck shows a thickness of 19 mm.  

No where in game does it show the sandwiched upper deck plate of 96 mm.   

So with out @Lert, @LittleWhiteMouse. and gamemodels3d.com to point this out, many people would think this is a bug, or just plain wrong.   

 

 

Edited by _Fr0g_
Giving proper credit to individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
4 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Turn the casemate armor back on and look for yourself

image.thumb.jpeg.d91dcea556bc29f1ce27e11ce1b96b83.jpeg

Where? Show me fool.

Edited by _no_one_
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
1 minute ago, _Fr0g_ said:

The armor viewer in game is very misleading.   

The casemate deck shows a thickness of 36 mm.   

The citadel deck shows a thickness of 19 mm.  

No where in game does it show the sandwiched upper deck plate of 96 mm.   

So with out @Lert to point this out, many people would think this is a bug, or just plain wrong.   

Thank you.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
818
[KIA-A]
Beta Testers
3,386 posts
5,639 battles
6 minutes ago, _Fr0g_ said:

The armor viewer in game is very misleading.   

The casemate deck shows a thickness of 36 mm.   

The citadel deck shows a thickness of 19 mm.  

No where in game does it show the sandwiched upper deck plate of 96 mm.   

So with out @Lert to point this out, many people would think this is a bug, or just plain wrong.   

you can see the deck though. you cant see the thickness, but you can see the deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114
[ADAPT]
Members
938 posts
16,048 battles

I thought Alaska can bow tank BB shells especially with Musashi. Well I thought wrong. So I don't do it anymore. Just spam HE from max  or safe and advanced slow with other ships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
818
[KIA-A]
Beta Testers
3,386 posts
5,639 battles
1 minute ago, bandits86 said:

I thought Alaska can bow tank BB shells especially with Musashi. Well I thought wrong. So I don't do it anymore. Just spam HE from max  or safe and advanced slow with other ships. 

lol thats a no. only sub caliber BB guns like JB or Bismark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,238
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,970 battles
20 minutes ago, _no_one_ said:

Wrong. What failed is the armor layout in wows to show that info.

The armor viewer did not give you any false data. It told you precisely what is there. Not more, not less. If you go to any of the USN fast BBs, or any T7+ British BB in the Tech Tree, you will find similar results.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,536
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,090 posts
18,050 battles
6 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

The armor viewer did not give you any false data. It told you precisely what is there. Not more, not less. If you go to any of the USN fast BBs, or any T7+ British BB in the Tech Tree, you will find similar results.

While he could do without the freakout antics, the OP is correct that the in-game model viewer is doing a poor job of showing the actual effective protection. The 96mm layer is not visible without paid third-party tools (gamemodels3d), even though it is the thickest and most relevant to plunging fire and AP bomb arming and penetration. Thus, it is indeed showing less than the full truth about Alaska's horizontal armor protection.

Edited by Edgecase
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,550
[PVE]
Members
19,835 posts
12,005 battles

To be fair to the OP, the 96mm upper deck plate is hidden in the casemate armor, so the only values you see are the 36mm deck and the 19mm citadel roof.

ziXfP7U.jpg

bHH1opB.jpg

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,238
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,970 battles
1 minute ago, Edgecase said:

While he could do without the freakout antics, the OP is correct that the in-game model viewer is doing a poor job of showing the actual effective protection. The 96mm layer is not visible without paid third-party tools (gamemodels3d), even though it is the most important in this case. Thus, it is indeed showing less than the full truth about Alaska's horizontal armor protection.

No doubt the armor viewer could be better, but it is not lying either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[SFOR]
Members
996 posts
7,846 battles
5 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

The armor viewer did not give you any false data. It told you precisely what is there. Not more, not less. If you go to any of the USN fast BBs, or any T7+ British BB in the Tech Tree, you will find similar results.

Really? It told me precisely what is there? Very good show me in the wows armour layout that 96mm casemate armor.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×