Will The Maps Be Big Enough For 20 Inch Gun Battleships

[tm63au]

I remember playing on Strait in my Fuso and Kongo loading into game waiting till guns loaded then firing at my opposite number and both ships were more or less stationary.

Maybe the map size might have to be enlarged 5 rows both ways so to the O line and the 15 line. 

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

You're really overthinking this. It's nearly impossible to hit moving ships at greater than about 23k in WoWs. Moreover, no matter where you are on the map, you CANNOT hit ships with plunging fire. That's the big overmatch advantage that 20" guns have, and it isn't possible to take advantage of it in this game.

[Admiral_Thrawn_1]

2 minutes ago, tm63au said:

I remember playing on Strait in my Fuso and Kongo loading into game waiting till guns loaded then firing at my opposite number and both ships were more or less stationary.

Maybe the map size might have to be enlarged 5 rows both ways so to the O line and the 15 line. 

Considering the camping that goes on I am quite certain 20” guns will have time to get loaded... 

[Taichunger]

Why not? They are big enough for three aircraft carriers.

[BrushWolf]

Just now, Taichunger said:

Why not? They are big enough for three aircraft carriers.

That is only seen regularly but not all the time with tier 4 CV's.

[SteelRain_Rifleman]

2 hours ago, Battlecruiser_Repulse said:

You're really overthinking this. It's nearly impossible to hit moving ships at greater than about 23k in WoWs. Moreover, no matter where you are on the map, you CANNOT hit ships with plunging fire. That's the big overmatch advantage that 20" guns have, and it isn't possible to take advantage of it in this game.

I hate to break this news to you but I have dropped 457mm Ohio shells on a GK at 22-23km and the shell did plunge in and I got a citadel.

It's rare but the plunging fire is possible with any battleship.

It depends on the arc of the shell, velocity, weight of the shell, and thickness of the deck armor.

I did it from a Mutsu at Max range of Mutsu with spotter up and hit that Mutsu through the deck in to turret 1 and I got the citadel and detonation.

With Ohio, fired at above stated range in to the deck before turret 2. That one might have bounced off the casemate of the turret and down.

In a failed division, in my Colorado in to the funnel of Yamato to citadel, detonate and get the Achievement lucky shot.

That shell sailed in at max of Colorado range about 1 year in after open beta.

The shell came at Yamato stern, and dropped just at the swept angle of the funnel. It was two AP shells that went down the funnel.

When I saw that from spotter view it looked like the proton torpedoes going down the exhaust port on the Death Star.

If I knew then how to record it, I would. But I was just starting out and just seeing that got me hooked on BBs.

So it may seem impossible. You and any other player is more than capable of doing it.

Wayne Gretzky said: you 100% miss any shot you don't take.

Not impossible, just improbable.

But when you do you will marvel at what you just did.

So when those 20 inch BBs come out, expect me to drop it above.

 

 

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

6 minutes ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

I hate to break this news to you but I have dropped 457mm Ohio shells on a GK at 22-23km and the shell did plunge in and I got a citadel.

It's rare but the plunging fire is possible with any battleship.

No, it isn't. Plunging fire - if all the experts such as LWM, etc. are correct - is impossible given the trajectories. The maps are compressed - you are never seeing shells arc in at angles as steep as they would IRL.

[SteelRain_Rifleman]

10 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Repulse said:

No, it isn't. Plunging fire - if all the experts such as LWM, etc. are correct - is impossible given the trajectories. The maps are compressed - you are never seeing shells arc in at angles as steep as they would IRL.

A freefall object max velocity is 54 meters per second. That is terminal velocity. But planes are not at that high an altitude. Add bomber speed to the drop which could be say 100 meters per second plus terminal and that is 154.

Shell velocity is a good 700 mid range 600 meters per second long range.

Most AP bomb drops I do from AP bombers while some are vertical, some are close to 65 degrees going in to the deck and get a citadel.

In every case I citadeled a BB, the shell was at around the 65 degree angle going in.

And that shell has the velocity of 600 meters per second.

That is more than enough to overmatch a deck armor if the angle is there.

I got that angle 3 times or more and the magic range number is 21km and out.

Physics is there.

I looked in to it back when I got the first one. I researched the plunging fire of Jutland.

I was just as skeptical as you were, but once math explained it, I understood.

It's in the game, it's just so few take the shot, so few will know where to hit, and so many are content with closing in and relying on their belt armor.

HMS Hood sailed in close to rely on the armor belt, but Bismarck dropped it in to turret 3. That was a hell of a shot.

If you think WG will keep plunging fire out of the game, think again. It's already here, just nobody uses it like flank speed or secondaries.

They did say no caliber above 460mm.

And they changed their mind didn't they?

If you want to check it out, just do the training room and try it. Nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Just bear in mind that hitting a moving Target that is far away, changing course, and your eyeballs are your only guidance; requires a lot of practice than hitting a stationary target.

Most players in random are accustomed to the stationary ones, hence the mid range campy meta.

That can change. Just practice.

I am used to hitting 3 dimensional objects moving objects. But that is just me.

I am sure more players will be doing this as the game evolves.

It's only a matter of time.

I don't use the Rifleman name as just a name, it's what I do.

Good luck 👍

<O

 

 

 

 

[Ace_04]

5 hours ago, tm63au said:

I remember playing on Strait in my Fuso and Kongo loading into game waiting till guns loaded then firing at my opposite number and both ships were more or less stationary.

Maybe the map size might have to be enlarged 5 rows both ways so to the O line and the 15 line. 

Let's not encourage anybody to make maps any bigger.  Some maps are arguably too big already, where it takes 5 full minutes to engage the first ships in battle (looking at you, Tears of the Desert).

[Tekina_]

If anything at high tiers most maps are too small for the kind of effective range ships start getting. It's part of the reason gameplay becomes less aggressive up there.

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

3 hours ago, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

A freefall object max velocity is 54 meters per second. That is terminal velocity. But planes are not at that high an altitude. Add bomber speed to the drop which could be say 100 meters per second plus terminal and that is 154.

Shell velocity is a good 700 mid range 600 meters per second long range.

Most AP bomb drops I do from AP bombers while some are vertical, some are close to 65 degrees going in to the deck and get a citadel.

In every case I citadeled a BB, the shell was at around the 65 degree angle going in.

And that shell has the velocity of 600 meters per second.

That is more than enough to overmatch a deck armor if the angle is there.

I got that angle 3 times or more and the magic range number is 21km and out.

Physics is there.

I looked in to it back when I got the first one. I researched the plunging fire of Jutland.

I was just as skeptical as you were, but once math explained it, I understood.

It's in the game, it's just so few take the shot, so few will know where to hit, and so many are content with closing in and relying on their belt armor.

HMS Hood sailed in close to rely on the armor belt, but Bismarck dropped it in to turret 3. That was a hell of a shot.

If you think WG will keep plunging fire out of the game, think again. It's already here, just nobody uses it like flank speed or secondaries.

They did say no caliber above 460mm.

And they changed their mind didn't they?

If you want to check it out, just do the training room and try it. Nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Just bear in mind that hitting a moving Target that is far away, changing course, and your eyeballs are your only guidance; requires a lot of practice than hitting a stationary target.

Most players in random are accustomed to the stationary ones, hence the mid range campy meta.

That can change. Just practice.

I am used to hitting 3 dimensional objects moving objects. But that is just me.

I am sure more players will be doing this as the game evolves.

It's only a matter of time.

I don't use the Rifleman name as just a name, it's what I do.

Good luck 👍

<O

 

 

 

 

Okay, well. That's nice, but there's no plunging fire in this game. Sorry. Life's tough.

I'll happily refer this to @LittleWhiteMouse

[Ziggy_Sprague]

7 hours ago, Taichunger said:

 three aircraft carriers.

 

7 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

That is only seen regularly but not all the time with tier 4 CV's.

 

About 20% of the time, or once every five Randoms, according to my count.

[Wasaboi]

52 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Repulse said:

Okay, well. That's nice, but there's no plunging fire in this game. Sorry. Life's tough.

I'll happily refer this to @LittleWhiteMouse

Quote

Argument from authority

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

Jump to navigation Jump to search

An argument from authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), also called an appeal to authority, or argumentum ad verecundiam, is a form of defeasible^[1]argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion. It is well known as a fallacy, though some consider that it is used in a cogent form when all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.^[2][3] Other authors consider it a fallacy to cite an authority on the discussed topic as the primary means of supporting an argument.^[4]

 

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

28 minutes ago, Varknyn12 said:

 

I don't have to prove what others have proven. Sorry. Try again... and while you're at it? Draw a new avatar.

[LittleWhiteMouse]

4 hours ago, Battlecruiser_Repulse said:

Okay, well. That's nice, but there's no plunging fire in this game. Sorry. Life's tough.

I'll happily refer this to @LittleWhiteMouse

Plunging fire largely is non-existent in World of Warships due to the auto-ricochet mechanics.  For example, here's the starting range where there's a chance for plunging fire to penetrate for the tier 10 battleships:

• Yamato: 25km
• Montana: 23.1km
• Ohio: 23.5km
• Kremlin:  29.1km
• Großer Kurfürst 406mm:  24.8km
• Großer Kurfürst 420mm:  25.7km
• Conqueror:  26km
• Thunderer:  25km
• Republique:  25.3km
• Bourgogne:  26.4km

Anything less than this and their AP shells will auto-ricochet.  For plunging AP shells to be a thing, you need ships like Duke of York with their improved auto-ricochet angles. But you also need tremendous range to capitalize on this.  For example, Duke of York's AP shells have a chance (and only a chance) to penetrate armoured decks at a range of 18.1km.  The ship herself has a base range of 18.2km -- not exactly a whole lot of space to take advantage of this ability.

Most of what people assume to be "plunging fire" is usually nothing more than overmatch mechanics at play.  For example, all battleships can overmatch each other's extremities and at least some part of the deck at tiers 5 and below.  380mm or greater can overmatch the 25mm decks of tier 6 and 7 battleships, etc.

[LittleWhiteMouse]

Someone let the courts know that calling in expert witnesses is apparently against the rules according to @Varknyn12. 

[mushmouthmorton]

11 hours ago, Battlecruiser_Repulse said:

You're really overthinking this. It's nearly impossible to hit moving ships at greater than about 23k in WoWs. Moreover, no matter where you are on the map, you CANNOT hit ships with plunging fire. That's the big overmatch advantage that 20" guns have, and it isn't possible to take advantage of it in this game.

Sorry - I beg to differ. Long range +20K shots are not high percentage, but they do happen, Took out a carrier at 22K with plunging fire yesterday in my Yammy. It was at 25% health, 1 salvo, 3 hits, one cit and BOOM! During the last clan wars season, there was this Moskova. I say was because all it took was one salvo, at max range from my Monty. It happened 35 seconds into the match. The red team never recovered.

So yes - it can be done!

 

[LittleWhiteMouse]

1 minute ago, mushmouthmorton said:

Sorry - I beg to differ. Long range +20K shots are not high percentage, but they do happen, Took out a carrier at 22K with plunging fire yesterday in my Yammy. It was at 25% health, 1 salvo, 3 hits, one cit and BOOM! During the last clan wars season, there was this Moskova. I say was because all it took was one salvo, at max range from my Monty. It happened 35 seconds into the match. The red team never recovered.

So yes - it can be done!

You didn't take him out with plunging fire.  Yamato's shells aren't coming down at an angle steep enough to follow nominal penetration rules at 22km.  If they hit a section of armour 33mm or thicker, they'd simply auto-ricochet.  What you saw there was either upper-hull penetrations or simply the overmatch of armour sections of 32mm or thinner.

[BrushWolf]

4 hours ago, Ziggy_Sprague said:

 

 

About 20% of the time, or once every five Randoms, according to my count.

Yet the people complaining about this act like it is every match,

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

8 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Plunging fire largely is non-existent in World of Warships due to the auto-ricochet mechanics.  For example, here's the starting range where there's a chance for plunging fire to penetrate for the tier 10 battleships:

• Yamato: 25km
• Montana: 23.1km
• Ohio: 23.5km
• Kremlin:  29.1km
• Großer Kurfürst 406mm:  24.8km
• Großer Kurfürst 420mm:  25.7km
• Conqueror:  26km
• Thunderer:  25km
• Republique:  25.3km
• Bourgogne:  26.4km

Anything less than this and their AP shells will auto-ricochet.  For plunging AP shells to be a thing, you need ships like Duke of York with their improved auto-ricochet angles. But you also need tremendous range to capitalize on this.  For example, Duke of York's AP shells have a chance (and only a chance) to penetrate armoured decks at a range of 18.1km.  The ship herself has a base range of 18.2km -- not exactly a whole lot of space to take advantage of this ability.

Most of what people assume to be "plunging fire" is usually nothing more than overmatch mechanics at play.  For example, all battleships can overmatch each other's extremities and at least some part of the deck at tiers 5 and below.  380mm or greater can overmatch the 25mm decks of tier 6 and 7 battleships, etc.

Thank you. I knew I had seen you discuss this at length before, but it was years ago.

[Ziggy_Sprague]

8 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

Yet the people complaining about this act like it is every match,

I haven't seen anyone complaining about this acting like it's every match. It clearly isn't.

In my experience (linked above) I'm seeing two or more CVs about 70% of the time.

But that's not every match.

[BrushWolf]

3 minutes ago, Ziggy_Sprague said:

I haven't seen anyone complaining about this acting like it's every match. It clearly isn't.

In my experience (linked above) I'm seeing two or more CVs about 70% of the time.

But that's not every match.

That how most of the three per team CV rants read to me. Yes, 20% is on the high side but that leaves 80% for none, one and two per team.

[Wasaboi]

19 hours ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Someone let the courts know that calling in expert witnesses is apparently against the rules according to @Varknyn12. 

He wasn't simply calling what he claimed was a witness. He was claiming that the other side of the argument was flat our wrong, despite not being able to present any evidence himself, and that an entirely subjective and *claimed* authority on the matter dictates what is factual. Thus, an appeal to authority.

Nice try though.

[RyuuohD_NA]

6 minutes ago, Varknyn12 said:

He wasn't simply calling what he claimed was witnessed. He was claiming that the other side of the argument was flat our wrong, despite not being able to present any evidence himself, and that an entirely subjective and *claimed* authority on the matter dictates what is factual. Thus, an appeal to authority.

Nice try though.

OK Zarth12.

[LittleWhiteMouse]

On 1/16/2020 at 8:55 AM, Varknyn12 said:

He wasn't simply calling what he claimed was a witness. He was claiming that the other side of the argument was flat our wrong, despite not being able to present any evidence himself, and that an entirely subjective and *claimed* authority on the matter dictates what is factual. Thus, an appeal to authority.

Nice try though.

Oh, is that what he was doing?  Cause from here it looked like he summoned me into a conversation to provide the information he knew I had, likely remembering that this subject had been brought up before and that I commented upon it with facts and figures. 

You really don't like being upstaged...