Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
SireneRacker

Armor models from 3rd party websites

6 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,268
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,083 posts
7,978 battles

Heyo,

 

been looking at some armor models, both in-game and on GM3D, and there a noticable difference occured.

According to the armor viewer in the client the barbette armor for Stalingrad is a flat 220mm everywhere:

shot-19_03.10_07_49.18-0751.thumb.jpg.0863fc47c1f60ba0b7fdc180754ce8c9.jpg

GM3D however lowers the value for the majority of the barbette to 185mm:

screen3.thumb.png.cfcc67873161d06a7b2521e833040129.png

Now the question is: Which of the two is true?

Looking through the armor penetration values on wowsft, what is needed is a ship that can penetrate 185mm while not being capable of penetrating 220mm. If the ship in question is then capable of penetrating the barbette GM3D would be correct, whereas if shatters occur the barbette would be 220mm, and the 3rd party website would be incorrect.

The candidate is Kagerou, which has the following penetration curve:

screen4.thumb.png.d0166fc82fbf242a1a9e7a41053046f3.png

So the range we are looking at is a bit below 1km, where the impact angle can go up to 20° without affecting the results. Training Room set, and the results are (this time in a spoiler, too many pics):

Spoiler

screen1.thumb.png.288355821685aa14371b6845dc5683ee.png

screen2.thumb.png.ad55b51c8688c8929a1ebe661db1bbea.png

(the seven penetrations were on the hull, as the replay will prove in case of doubts)

Edit: an accidential HE salvo was fired at first, which resulted in two HE hits which were shatters and a fire. Whoopsie~

20190309_144239_PJSD208-Kagero_33_new_tierra.wowsreplay

Of course I do have to mention that this goes under the assumption that the penetration curves given by wowsft are correct. But from the results that were obtained, it stands to reason that the armor values given by GM3D are incorrect.

What can we take from this? What we should always do, which is taking information with a good grain of salt.

 

Cheers~

Edited by SireneRacker
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,268
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,083 posts
7,978 battles
Just now, TheLastSterling said:

Forgot to mention the acidental HE salvo and fire at the start.:Smile_facepalm:

I didn't want to shame you, and it is obvious when looking at the second screenshot :p

But I will amend

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,268
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,083 posts
7,978 battles
13 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Could it be GM3D uses an older iteration of pre release  Stalingrad? That could explain the difference.

I checked, GM3D says it's from version 0.8.1.1. I do not recall Stalingrad ever having her barbette armor altered throughout testing, what was changed was her bow and stern plating, as well as an inner bulkhead whic hwas removed when the upper part of her citadel was widened.

  • Cool 1

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.

×