Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
AkiyamaSaneyuki_2017

Which tier 7 BB is the most combustible?

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
553 posts
2,178 battles

I seem to know which one, still I wanna know if it's just me being extremely unlucky or it actually is the ship.

 

This ship basically gets lit in 2 places by DDs with a single salvo consecutively for twice, which is just ridiculous.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,892
[SYN]
Members
15,861 posts
12,803 battles

ah, I know which one.

The one you use.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[-KIA-]
Members
2,290 posts
14,205 battles

Mathematically, whichever one has:

Fire Chance = FRC · ( 1 - DCM1 ) · ( 1 - FP ) · ( FCB - IFHE + DE + Σ S )

No DCM1
and
No FP skill
and
A stock hull (higher FRC)

Edited by thegamefilmguruman
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
118
[WOLF8]
Members
517 posts
8,926 battles

As a CL/CA main who enjoys toasting BBs I usually have good luck starting fires on Gneisenau, Scharnhorst, KGV, and Colorado....especially when I'm playing my Königsberg flying a VL signal :Smile_Default:

Edited by Slammer58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
13,990 posts
5,814 battles

I theorise that the most "combustible" Tier 7 BB is Nelson. A higher proportion of Nelson captains (compared to other BBs) likely don't run fire prevention skills/modules. Or at least I don't... Maybe I'm weird...

Nelsons do not care about being on fire, and may actively WANT to be set on fire, so they can farm Fireproof and Dreadnought medals with the superheal. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
662
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,609 posts
10,459 battles

The mathematical values and reductions make a difference.  But, the size of the ship does as well.  Bigger ships make better long range targets.  Those long range shots are generally taken by ships that have a higher chance of setting a fire, and if the area is larger, then the chance of more shots hitting is higher, which increases the overall fire chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,803
[WORX]
Members
10,675 posts
18,567 battles

Usually its the ship that is the longest and with a lot of super structure space... It can be a TALL super structure like the NAGATO or

Just long like the Nelson...

Either big target, is a Fire hazard.

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
281
[HSD]
Members
704 posts
12,392 battles

No T7 BB when assuming equivalence in hull (eg, using highest researched hull, and equivalent Capt skills and signals). They all have the same in built hidden modifier to reducing the chance to be set on fire.

Captain skills and mountable modules are one source of differentiation to vulnerability, but they have equal access.

 

The size, speed and armour of the ships are a variable that can influence the amount of shots lobbed at them (eg, KGV with 26mm plating everywhere, people like to fling HE a lot because it can stick, which has the incidental effect of more rolls at causing fires).

Your posture and position to can influence this to, closest ship to the reds? Welcome to BBQ central. Moving very slowly, perhaps bow on with a barely shifting target aspect? Welcome to BBQ central. Long range? Moving at speed? Shifting aspect? Well not BBQ central.

Player position, posture and desirability in terms of being a target will have far more impact on how often you get set on fire. All the fire prevention skills in the game wont help if you are the only target for 6 enemy reds.

 

Again to reiterate, no BB when fully researched, and discounting player controlled personalising is any more vulnerable than another to being set on fire by the algorithm/formula/voodoo/RNGesus. Soft factors can make your ship have more shells directed at it than another T7 BB but those shells won't have any hidden advantage, it's just more chances being rolled due to increased quantity of shell hits.

Edited by Meatshield_No13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
[ARRSE]
Members
192 posts
1,402 battles

Soviet ships seem to be the hardest to light up.

No surprise there, I suppose..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,486
[CAST]
Members
4,996 posts
3,513 battles

Every single BB of the same tier has exactly the same chance of being set on fire, barring things like upgrades and captain skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,127 posts
7,992 battles

All Tier 7 BBs have identical fire resistance coefficients and are equally susceptible to being set on fire.

 

29 minutes ago, Turbogerbil said:

Soviet ships seem to be the hardest to light up.

No surprise there, I suppose..

Confirmation bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,453
[WOLFG]
Members
29,058 posts
8,308 battles
46 minutes ago, Meatshield_No13 said:

Captain skills and mountable modules are one source of differentiation to vulnerability, but they have equal access.

True, but certain ships are likely to be specialised in a similar way.

A lot of people say KM BBs are prone to fire, and it makes sense. They are likely to have MFCS and/or AFT instead of FP, and burn longer because they may use the rudder shift upgrade instead of DCM1 to facilitate brawling, as well as possibly BFT instead of BoS.

Back in the day, my IJN BBs were the least affected by fire, because there was no point to speccing them for AA, like US BBs, or secondaries, like KM BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
[ARRSE]
Members
192 posts
1,402 battles
2 hours ago, yashma said:

All Tier 7 BBs have identical fire resistance coefficients and are equally susceptible to being set on fire.

 

Confirmation bias.

 

 

...or is it relative lack of superstructure compared to the other lines?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,453
[WOLFG]
Members
29,058 posts
8,308 battles
10 minutes ago, Turbogerbil said:

 

 

...or is it relative lack of superstructure compared to the other lines?

 

No, you don't have to pen to start a fire, any part of the ship will do.

A smaller ship would be likely to take fewer shells, and thus fewer fires, but if shells hit, there's no difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,127 posts
7,992 battles
43 minutes ago, Turbogerbil said:

 

 

...or is it relative lack of superstructure compared to the other lines?

 

Soviet BBs have good armor plating and quick cool down DCP which makes them very resistant to HE spam...but they're still set on fire the exact same as every other BB line.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
[ARRSE]
Members
192 posts
1,402 battles
3 hours ago, Skpstr said:

No, you don't have to pen to start a fire, any part of the ship will do.

A smaller ship would be likely to take fewer shells, and thus fewer fires, but if shells hit, there's no difference. 

 

 

Well, thats the point:  less "ship" (i.e. surface area) = less fires, because fewer HE shells will hit in the first place.

 

There probably is a difference in the average fire damage received by individual BBs, and it probably correlates to the relative surface area of the model. I'm not aware that either data set is in the public domain.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,453
[WOLFG]
Members
29,058 posts
8,308 battles
58 minutes ago, Turbogerbil said:

There probably is a difference in the average fire damage received by individual BBs, and it probably correlates to the relative surface area of the model. I'm not aware that either data set is in the public domain.

If it did correlate, it would be coincidental. Fire damage is tied to HP, so if all T7 BBs had exactly the same number of fires per match, Lyon would have the least damage, as it has the fewest HP. 

Look at Colorado & Gneisenau. Gneisenau is clearly a bigger ship. But because they're close in HP, (Colorado had an "artificial" HP buff at one point, because it was so far behind Nagato) they'd have very similar average fire damage. A stock Nagato would have less fire damage than either, while an upgraded Nagato would have more.

What you'd need to know is average number of fires set on each ship.

 

 

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.

×