Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
JTM78

Secondary Armament Dispersion?

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7
[TRFFG]
Members
19 posts
1,034 battles

Why are the Secondary Armaments Dispersion values not show?

Is there a website that lists the Secondary Armaments Dispersion?

If we have signals and captian skills to improve the Secondary Armament Dispersion it should really be listed in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
63
[DDCO]
[DDCO]
Members
96 posts
13,639 battles

Don't know if there is a site that has the stat's. There is a 4 point captain skill ( manual secondarie's) that will improve dispersion quite well. But you have to tag the ship to be able to use it. Most german ships have ok secondary's. Most other's seem to shoot everywhere except at the ship it is supposed too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[VOP]
Members
548 posts

Secondary dispersion seems to cover the max range of the secondary, from in the water next to my ship to well beyond the target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
230
[DOG]
Members
980 posts
11,111 battles

Most ships have horrible dispersion, and it is not worth wasting captain skills or modules to try to improve it.  The exceptions are:

Massachusetts, Georgia, French BBs above tier 5, and German BBs.  I think the Shikishima and Ohio are supposed to be pretty good too.  There are a few cruisers that look like it might be worth it, but it's usually not good enough to give up something else to get it.

Also, be aware that building a ship for maximum secondary accuracy can occasionally be counter productive at very close range.  This is because the AI is programmed to aim at center of mass, which means you'll hit belt armor almost exclusively inside of 5 km or so.  If they are slightly less accurate, you end up with more shells hitting superstructure due to dispersion, where secondaries can actually penetrate.

As for a table listing precise accuracy, I don't know of one that is published.  But you can check out Little White Mouse's reviews to see if it might be worthwhile on a given ship.

Edited by zubalkabir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,960
[WOLFG]
Members
27,416 posts
7,365 battles
2 hours ago, zubalkabir said:

Most ships have horrible dispersion, and it is not worth wasting captain skills or modules to try to improve it.  The exceptions are:

Massachusetts, Georgia, French BBs above tier 5, and German BBs.  I think the Shikishima and Ohio are supposed to be pretty good too. 

I found Nagato and Amagi fairly decent too. I haven't noticed any issues dropping FP for MFCS, and with AFT, range is 7.6km, very useful for dealing with charging DD/CLs. (it's not intended for brawling)

The ROF is lower, but the fire chance appreciably higher.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[TRFFG]
Members
19 posts
1,034 battles
4 hours ago, Drifter_X said:

WOWS Fitting Tool:

https://wowsft.com/

You can look at dispersion values here.

If those secondary dispersion value are true. There is no reason to ever build a secondary built ship!! A Mass with a secondary built captian is 310 disoersion without Manual fire control. This is crazy!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
[WAG]
Beta Testers
775 posts
6,995 battles
12 minutes ago, JTM78 said:

If those secondary dispersion value are true. There is no reason to ever build a secondary built ship!! A Mass with a secondary built captian is 310 disoersion without Manual fire control. This is crazy!!

i think you did something wrong, when i do a full secondary biuld on mass with that calculator its only 124 with a sigma of 1.0 not 310

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[TRFFG]
Members
19 posts
1,034 battles
14 minutes ago, GX9900A said:

i think you did something wrong, when i do a full secondary biuld on mass with that calculator its only 124 with a sigma of 1.0 not 310

Do it without the Manual Fire Control Skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
[WAG]
Beta Testers
775 posts
6,995 battles
5 minutes ago, JTM78 said:

Do it without the Manual Fire Control Skill.

why would you ever do a secondaries biuld without manual?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
596 posts
5,440 battles
Just now, GX9900A said:

why would you ever do a secondaries biuld without manual?

After seeing base dispersion, I'd have to ask the same thing.  I never realized how big a difference it actually makes.  GK secondaries maxed for range have 530m dispersion without MFCS; 212m with.  Mass/Georgia can get down to around 106m with MFCS.  Wow.  The only possible reason I can think of for not taking MFCS is so that the secondaries will open up on their own - less micromanagement.  Taking MFCS for a secondary build also makes CE a prohibitively expensive skill, but I suppose in a true full secondary build you don't care as much about concealement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
404 posts
3,821 battles
6 hours ago, JTM78 said:

Why are the Secondary Armaments Dispersion values not show?

Is there a website that lists the Secondary Armaments Dispersion?

If we have signals and captian skills to improve the Secondary Armament Dispersion it should really be listed in the game.

its simple

few gifted prem ships = somewhat accurate

everyone else secondarys:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
91
[SLDR]
Members
243 posts
9,151 battles
56 minutes ago, Uncle_Lou said:

Taking MFCS for a secondary build also makes CE a prohibitively expensive skill, but I suppose in a true full secondary build you don't care as much about concealement.

In the case of BB, concealment skill is really not that great of a bonus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[WOLF3]
Members
236 posts
8,914 battles
1 hour ago, Uncle_Lou said:

After seeing base dispersion, I'd have to ask the same thing.  I never realized how big a difference it actually makes.  GK secondaries maxed for range have 530m dispersion without MFCS; 212m with.  Mass/Georgia can get down to around 106m with MFCS.  Wow.  The only possible reason I can think of for not taking MFCS is so that the secondaries will open up on their own - less micromanagement.  Taking MFCS for a secondary build also makes CE a prohibitively expensive skill, but I suppose in a true full secondary build you don't care as much about concealement.

I have built the Georgia with 10km-ish secondaries with manual fire control with good success. 9-10 km is pretty far and the Georgia does wonders with its 127mm guns. DD's that wander close are usually dead within 5 salvos. If you want secondaries you can take seriously they have to hit things.

Edited by Drifter_X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
112 posts
8,427 battles
20 hours ago, GX9900A said:

why would you ever do a secondaries biuld without manual?

because with the ships with the really accurate secondaries (Georgia, etc) once you start getting in close, your secondaries are all hitting the belt armor, and not penetrating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
793 posts
5,457 battles
20 hours ago, GX9900A said:

why would you ever do a secondaries biuld without manual?

This is a great question and deserves an answer. LWM compares the different secondaries of the big T8 brawlers which has some great info. We can see the secondary range, caliber, and reload all at a glance and think AHA and plan your build. But the intangible with these things is firing angles. Where are the secondaries placed + the hull design will determine how much side you have to show. Ship like Tirpitz and Mass can actually do quite well bow on meaning quite a few guns will fire even with minimum angling. Odin is a different beast in that it requires showing, comparatively, a lot more side to get a lot of your guns firing. Odin’s secondary are best at the side which doesn’t help a lot in aggressive play. So is it better to just go in and allow all guns to fire at more targets at once and be less accurate but almost certainly firing more guns at different targets or is it better to try and focus one ship. In this situation both are viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×