Jump to content
Weikath

ST, New Ships

44 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

125
[TDR]
[TDR]
Members
394 posts
6,671 battles
1 minute ago, Aetreus said:

AP will ricochet off the DD's hull before the DD's plating is thick enough to arm it. arccos(19mm plating / 34mm arming threshold) = 56 degrees + 8 degrees normalization = 64 degrees > 60 degrees standard AP ricochet angle.

While I don’t know the calcs you refer to I do know that I have done good damage to dds using ap in other cruisers. It’s not as good as he but it still works so I’m not sure why it wouldn’t for Italian ap shells

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,346
[SIM]
Members
4,319 posts
7,329 battles

The line still looks god awful, still unable to perform the duties that their teams rely on cruisers to perform. We’ll have to see how they play in the actual game, because going by theory craft alone, this whole line looks to be dead on arrival. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,053 posts
5,394 battles
21 minutes ago, ditka_Fatdog said:

While I don’t know the calcs you refer to I do know that I have done good damage to dds using ap in other cruisers. It’s not as good as he but it still works so I’m not sure why it wouldn’t for Italian ap shells

10% overpen damage isn't bad damage, it's just less than HE damage. Also overpen damage never saturates, so you might be comparing 16.5% saturated HE damage with 10% overpen AP damage, where the AP shell typically does more damage. SAP never overpens, it just deals 10% damage(presumably to the hit section), making it the worst of both worlds.

Italian cruisers can use AP to get overpen damage the same way, the issue is their awful DPM makes them really bad at it compared to other cruisers. It really circles around to the same issue: even with a 15 gun broadside, firing only 45 shells a minute is really bad on an 8" cruiser. It's not just less than the other tier X cruisers, it's less than every 8" cruiser until tier VIII, and even then Hipper still has better AP DPM! The 36 shells a minute on the IX are pretty much a joke as well given the competition is 60, 49.5, 49.5, and 46.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
154
[DOG]
Members
775 posts
9,345 battles
4 hours ago, Weikath said:

Semi-armor piercing shells have the features of two types of shells at once:

  • Semi-armor piercing shells can ricochet, but the angles of the ricochet are more comfortable than those of armor piercing shells (60-85°);
  • For semi-armor piercing shells, the 14.3-caliber rule will apply;
  • If the ricochet does not happen, the mechanics of semi-armor piercing shells is similar to high explosive ones;
  • Semi-armor piercing shells don't have over penetrations;
  • Can't cause a fire;
  • Damage and penetration is better than high explosive shells;
  • Semi-armor piercing shells deal only 10% of their damage to destroyers

 

4 hours ago, Weikath said:

Italian cruiser Nino Bixio, tier II

Hit points – 16600. Plating - 6 mm.

Main battery - 8x1 120 mm. Firing range - 11.4 km. Maximum semi-AP shell damage - 2850. Maximum AP shell damage - 2100. Reload time - 13 s. 180 degree turn time - 22.5 s. Maximum dispersion - 111 m. Semi-AP initial velocity - 840 m/s. AP initial velocity - 850 m/s. Sigma – 2.00.

I'm trying to figure out why you'd ever load AP shells.  There is probably some game mechanic I'm not considering, but it looks like for SAP shells:

  • the damage is higher
  • the chance of a ricochet  is lower
  • the penetration is the same
  • there is no chance of an over penetration, and
  • they interact with DDs the same as AP

The only possible advantage I can see for AP, at least on the ship above, is 10 m/s difference in velocity.  Or am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,147
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,943 posts
7,885 battles
1 hour ago, Skuggsja said:

I just so happened to ask during the initial announcement stream of the new Italian line, "Would WG be adding SAP to Abruzzi and Asosta" 

The response was no, they are balanced the way they are now. Jump to the 30:36 mark.

I agree with their response, and at the same time disagree. At the moment they both are balanced, that is very much true. But when the IFHE change comes, and assuming WG doesn't pull some radical 180°, this is gonna change. D'Aosta would take a minor hit by it. She works right now even without IFHE due to her tiering, but Abruzzi is a whole different story. Her Tier and the way T7 would interact with T8+ would mean she'd get a drastic hit, and I do not think that her current gameplay which I love would be preserved, even if WG came around to buff her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[UFFA]
Members
1,915 posts
73 battles

Why are Italian cruisers from tier VII-X all using the same de-rated 203/53 rifle from what i can surmise?

 

@Weikath @Kami @Radar_X

Ok I get you like your names now explain Paolo Emilio. This ship is not a Capitani Romani class cruiser yet uses a name from this line of ships. Any way to expound upon the development process and why this name was chosen?

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
230
[SUCIT]
Members
654 posts
15,859 battles

Fairly long wall of text incoming

1.  that SAP only doing 10% of damage to DDs is understandable considering their alpha, but when compared to every other cruiser, their alpha with HE doing full 33% damage makes even medicore HE like German light cruisers do far better than the Italians at damaging DDs. If you want to reduce their damage done to DDs so they can't really one shot many of them, buff this to around 20-25% damage.

2. I am aware you say low DPM and high Alpha, but the light cruisers (T3, 4, and 5 respectively) may have too little DPM, the heavy cruisers (except Milano and Torino) not an impressive alpha strike, as well as the only reload time that seems alright is Trento, because 15secs for 8in guns at T6 appears reasonable, but Pensacola exists at this tier with 10 guns on the same reload, so Trento doesn't even win the alpha strike contest at T6. It's also interesting that all the SAP shells except Taranto do more damage.

            Two ways to possibly mitigate the issues is either chop 2 secs off the reload of all the heavy cruisers, and 3 secs off the light cruisers. Option 2 is make the normal AP shells the best Cruiser AP shells in the game, with pen on par with Moskva and Henri and give them about 2000 more damage per citadel (6700 for Genova and Trento, 6800 for Zara, 6900 for Verona, Torino, Milano) and don't change the reload times, or only change it by no more than a second if needed on certain ships. Also, give Guissano and Montcuccoli another 1k damage per citadel (for 4k per citadel).

3. Why does Trento get the highest range of any T6 cruiser and then no Italian cruiser after her gets more range until T10, by 200m? It doesn't make sense that the line goes from best range, to worst among heavy cruisers at that tier 7, to absolute worst in tier at T8, then back to 300m below average at T9 and 10.

4. Staying with Trento, how does that thing somehow have worse stealth than Pensacola? It doesn't appear to have anything sticking out that makes its detection really bad, it almost sits about as high as something like a Myoko or Aoba, and there're about a kilometer stealthier. If that wasn't bad enough, Trento not only gives Pepsi a run for its money in being spotted first, it also gives Pepsi a real run for the title of "Easiest Mid Tier Cruiser to Dev Strike" because Trento's armor is somehow worse than Pensacola's armor belt (70mm versus 76 and I'm pretty sure more of Trento's belt sticks out above the waterline than Pensacola's.

5. Yes, I know its a Heavy cruiser, and yes its T5 with 8 8in guns, and yes, how this thing was decided as the premium for an Italian cruiser line while options like Pola and Bolzano exist is one of life's greatest mysteries, but 20sec reload feels like too much. lowering that to 18secs and my above stated AP changes (maybe not quite Moskva level pen at T5, because having a cruiser be capable of citadeling most if not every BB it can face with 6700 damage citadels at ranges above 10km would be stupendously broken and Cesare would be mad that something has encroached her power level at T5, but might be somewhat alright with it seeing its another Italian ship doing it.)

That's all I got for now, if I think of anything else, I might go back and edit this, and also people so far these ships are WiP and could (and from the stats probably will) change before going into the hands of CCs on the live servers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,483
[DEV_X]
Supertester
2,208 posts
20,951 battles
1 hour ago, SireneRacker said:

I agree with their response, and at the same time disagree. At the moment they both are balanced, that is very much true. But when the IFHE change comes, and assuming WG doesn't pull some radical 180°, this is gonna change. D'Aosta would take a minor hit by it. She works right now even without IFHE due to her tiering, but Abruzzi is a whole different story. Her Tier and the way T7 would interact with T8+ would mean she'd get a drastic hit, and I do not think that her current gameplay which I love would be preserved, even if WG came around to buff her.

I hadn't even thought about the IFHE change and its effect on Abruzzi. Maybe they will end up switching to SAP.

My primary thought was that I simply hate having ships that "train commanders" but need separate skills from their tech line counter parts to be most effective. For instance, Belfast. Great ship, has a lot of similarities to the tech line but in the end works better with IFHE and/or DE. That's a heavy investment to waste or not have on any of the ships you would generally use to train captians on, say Fiji. You could also go the other way and use your Fiji captian but not hit the DPM you could with the right skills. Less damage means less experience as we all know.

I'm ok with outside the box type of ships that have an established tech line but only if there is another ship inside the box or the difference in ships isnt drastic. For instance Kagero and Asashio. Though Asashio may not be able to hit destroyers or cruisers with its torpedoes, the skill set still works within the confines of the tech tree.

Edited by Skuggsja

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,147
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,943 posts
7,885 battles
6 minutes ago, Skuggsja said:

I hadn't even thought about the IFHE change and its effect on Abruzzi. Maybe they will end up switching to SAP.

My primary thought was that I simply hate having ships that "train commanders" but need separate skills from their tech line counter parts to be most effective. For instance, Belfast. Great ship, has a lot of similarities to the tech line but in the end works better with IFHE and/or DE. That's a heavy investment to waste or not have on any of the ships you would generally use to train captians on, say Fiji. You could also go the other way and use your Fiji captian but not hit the DPM you could with the right skills. Less damage means less experience as we all know.

I'm ok with outside the box type of ships that have an established tech line but only if there is another ship inside the box or the difference in ships isnt drastic. For instance Kagero and Asashio. Though Asashio may not be able to hit destroyers or cruisers with its torpedoes, the skill set still works within the confines of the tech tree.

Regardless of what happens, if the IFHE change goes through Abruzzi will be a ruined ship even if they compensate her with their typical buffs (meaning an additional consumable charge, .5s less reload, better firing angles. And while she would be different from the tech tree, imo I would not mind that with her. Simply because she offers a gameplay that is not present on any other ship.

Abruzzi right now is infamous for being a floating citadel, hitting weakly and being in the eyes of a lot of players an underwhelming ship at best. And that I think is because she is one of the least forgiving T7 Cruisers which at the same time has to be played ridiculously close (for a cruiser) for the best effect. And this balance between vulnerable citadel but at the same time closer engagements makes her very difficult for most players, while at the same time scaling ridiculously with player skill. You can fight BBs at 8km and tank their shells reliably, you can be a DD nightmare as long as you have a DD spotting for you, you can be a real pita for basically anyone that's not a CV and decide the match for your team. But at the same time, those things are not fed to the player on a silver spoon. You have to earn them.

She is a fresh experience when compared with some of the more dull T7 premium cruisers, like Lazo or Belfast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,483
[DEV_X]
Supertester
2,208 posts
20,951 battles
6 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Regardless of what happens, if the IFHE change goes through Abruzzi will be a ruined ship even if they compensate her with their typical buffs (meaning an additional consumable charge, .5s less reload, better firing angles. And while she would be different from the tech tree, imo I would not mind that with her. Simply because she offers a gameplay that is not present on any other ship.

Abruzzi right now is infamous for being a floating citadel, hitting weakly and being in the eyes of a lot of players an underwhelming ship at best. And that I think is because she is one of the least forgiving T7 Cruisers which at the same time has to be played ridiculously close (for a cruiser) for the best effect. And this balance between vulnerable citadel but at the same time closer engagements makes her very difficult for most players, while at the same time scaling ridiculously with player skill. You can fight BBs at 8km and tank their shells reliably, you can be a DD nightmare as long as you have a DD spotting for you, you can be a real pita for basically anyone that's not a CV and decide the match for your team. But at the same time, those things are not fed to the player on a silver spoon. You have to earn them.

She is a fresh experience when compared with some of the more dull T7 premium cruisers, like Lazo or Belfast.

Abruzzi is actually one of my favorite ships and the thought of her potentially becoming worse really sucks. You do have to work very hard for anything you achieve in the ship. I was honestly hoping that she would be the basis for the line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[UFFA]
Members
1,915 posts
73 battles
9 minutes ago, Skuggsja said:

Abruzzi is actually one of my favorite ships and the thought of her potentially becoming worse really sucks. You do have to work very hard for anything you achieve in the ship. I was honestly hoping that she would be the basis for the line. 

That's been my complaint. I like the ship but the work rate versus other premiums is obnoxious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
561
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
3,196 posts
10,670 battles

WG, i don't mean to but, isn't reducing th e effectiveness of SAP against destroyers a little bit too much? Without access to conventional Cruiser utility and DoTs, i find it unfair for DDs to recieve a double protection buff from yet annother class that is supposed to make life cautious for them. 203mm guns are already becoming a small caliber as far as cruisers are concerned; and while not the ideal defense against DDs, Cruisers, with or without radar or hydro are still the first line of defense against destroyers. 

The absence of fires from SAP rounds is already a buff to DDs. Destroyers don't need any more protection from the game they already play with dictateable levels of success.

If SAP did/does not receive a damage penalty against one of the more prevent classes in the game, even without dfaa or hydro Italian cruisers and destroyers would be hot stuff.

Yours truly 

Crokodone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
399 posts
14 battles

I really don't like T3. It is quite unprecedented to have a captured/seized ship as tech tree one. Didn't italians had anything that would fit in that tier? I would definitely prefer even paper design over captured ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[UFFA]
Members
1,915 posts
73 battles
2 hours ago, puxflacet said:

I really don't like T3. It is quite unprecedented to have a captured/seized ship as tech tree one. Didn't italians had anything that would fit in that tier? I would definitely prefer even paper design over captured ship.

There was an ocean explorer found in one of the history magazines. 

Bdx40bk.png

 

Quote

Story

//(to be updated)

 

Technical data

Standard displacement: //

Full load displacement: 4750 tons

Length: 130 m(overall length)

Beam: 14.6 m

Draught: 4.8 m

Installed power: 42070 hp

Maximum speed: 29 knots

Protection: 50 mm(belt), 25 mm(deck),

Armament: 6x1 152/50, 5x1 40/39, 10x533 mm torpedo tubes(2x3 and, from what I can gather from the image, 4x1)

Refits: //

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/5453-fan-made-italian-tech-tree/?tab=comments#comment-87825

Taranto is in an interesting configuration as it is. It is actually an odd interpretation of the ww2 configuartion.

I appear incorrect it went to 7 rifles in German service it looks like.

As of 1940:
7 - 149/43 main rifles.
2 - 76/40 AA rifles.
2 x 2 13.2mm 
Later
8 20/65 & 6 13.2mm

 

In Italian service it only achieved 20 knots as the machinery was changed a bit.

Edited by Sparviero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
373
[KAPPA]
Members
1,278 posts
6,996 battles
1 hour ago, Sparviero said:

There was an ocean explorer found in one of the history magazines. 

Bdx40bk.png

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/5453-fan-made-italian-tech-tree/?tab=comments#comment-87825

Taranto is in an interesting configuration as it is. It is actually an odd interpretation of the ww2 configuartion.

I appear incorrect it went to 7 rifles in German service it looks like.

As of 1940:
7 - 149/43 main rifles.
2 - 76/40 AA rifles.
2 x 2 13.2mm 
Later
8 20/65 & 6 13.2mm

 

In Italian service it only achieved 20 knots as the machinery was changed a bit.

I also find Taranto's speed interesting considering it's faster than the Karlsruhe, which was supposed to be a bigger, faster Magdeburg (the class that Taranto belongs to, in case anyone didn't know). I guess this is another one of those oddities of WG using trials speeds as the 'absolute rule' of what a ship's speed can be. Karlsruhe's trial speed was low because it was done in shallow waters due to wartime constraints, just like Iowa and Shimakaze in WWII. I remember how long it took to convince them that Iowa could make 33 kts instead of merely 30 kts.

At least based on the reload times we see in this stuff, I'm slightly less concerned about my Zao being put even further behind by that 15 gun monstrosity. It's bad enough that ships with bigger guns beat Zao's reload (HIV, Moskva), on top of having the slowest loading 8 inchers at T10 (until now). Hopefully this Italian thing at least gets a reload no faster than Zao's if it needs it for balancing, otherwise I might try and start a revolt.

Edited by CaptHarlock_222

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[ALLY]
Members
137 posts
15,908 battles

To all:

I have seen a lot of questioning regarding the effectiveness with what they are starting with on these ships compared to what is out there.  Am I mistaken, or is this just what they are starting to test.  Did I not see similar discussion regarding other ships such as Georgia?  They did things to make sure they would be balanced and I am sure the same can be said for these ships.  Now we may not like them or not want to play them when they are done, but this is the developer diaries and these are in development.  I will save my comments until I can actually play them.  Which I suspect will be a long time from now.

C130 signing out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
582
[UFFA]
Members
1,915 posts
73 battles
7 minutes ago, Hercules_C130 said:

To all:

I have seen a lot of questioning regarding the effectiveness with what they are starting with on these ships compared to what is out there.  Am I mistaken, or is this just what they are starting to test.  Did I not see similar discussion regarding other ships such as Georgia?  They did things to make sure they would be balanced and I am sure the same can be said for these ships.  Now we may not like them or not want to play them when they are done, but this is the developer diaries and these are in development.  I will save my comments until I can actually play them.  Which I suspect will be a long time from now.

C130 signing out

As with the French cruisers the starting point seems low. 

There is room for improvement on the main rifle basic stats, range and RoF. As well as the action zones for the AA. As well as module balance. 

The sustained DPM or lack there of when coupled with possible firing angle issues for Milano will probably be addressed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,813
[HINON]
Privateers, In AlfaTesters
7,735 posts
2,129 battles
On 7/23/2019 at 3:13 PM, SireneRacker said:

Regardless of what happens, if the IFHE change goes through Abruzzi will be a ruined ship even if they compensate her with their typical buffs (meaning an additional consumable charge, .5s less reload, better firing angles. And while she would be different from the tech tree, imo I would not mind that with her. Simply because she offers a gameplay that is not present on any other ship.

Abruzzi right now is infamous for being a floating citadel, hitting weakly and being in the eyes of a lot of players an underwhelming ship at best. And that I think is because she is one of the least forgiving T7 Cruisers which at the same time has to be played ridiculously close (for a cruiser) for the best effect. And this balance between vulnerable citadel but at the same time closer engagements makes her very difficult for most players, while at the same time scaling ridiculously with player skill. You can fight BBs at 8km and tank their shells reliably, you can be a DD nightmare as long as you have a DD spotting for you, you can be a real pita for basically anyone that's not a CV and decide the match for your team. But at the same time, those things are not fed to the player on a silver spoon. You have to earn them.

She is a fresh experience when compared with some of the more dull T7 premium cruisers, like Lazo or Belfast.

Call me crazy, but perhaps the better theme here is 'don't design a premium ship around the abuse of a single skill' ?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,147
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,943 posts
7,885 battles
13 minutes ago, Phoenix_jz said:

Call me crazy, but perhaps the better theme here is 'don't design a premium ship around the abuse of a single skill' ?

Granted, for Abruzzi IFHE was never as much of a deal as it was for say Helena, Belfast or Schors, all some ridiculous dpm monsters where IFHE makes or breaks them. The IFHE is a side thing. IFHE or not Abruzzi's raw damage output sucks, there is no way around that.

But as she is, Abruzzi is imo perfectly balanced as a ship that is about as punishing as it could be while at the same time rewarding good play. This balance however is not something rock solid. It's fragile balance, and even a small whack can throw her into either direction. Going now and nerfing her damage output, directly or indirectly, and thus making it harder to get reliable damage totals means that the risk vs reward would no longer be given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×