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

How much does the +4% dispersion on the camo matter?

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,263
[TBW]
Members
10,732 posts
18,445 battles

It means 4% more spread when some one shoots at you. Could be the difference from 1 shell hitting you  or 2+. It helps.

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,800
[1984]
Members
4,457 posts
21,505 battles
57 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

Title. I am trying to minimize costs because I am extremely cheap.

Credits are worthless and in any case you should be easily recuperating 22k for your camo in all tier 8 and below games.

the disperion bonus is extremely important which is why any uu taking the concealment module slot is of questionable calue to say the least. Pay attention when you shoot at ships with camo vs ships without, you will see the difference in number of hits/misses.

Edited by monpetitloup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[WAIFU]
[WAIFU]
Members
454 posts
10,422 battles

If your going for saving, it doesn't really matter too much as in you the player won't really notice the difference unless its a BB firing at you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORCH]
Members
664 posts
17,055 battles

I've wondered the same.  After digging around for awhile, I'm pretty sure there's no way, or at least no realistic way, to calculate an empirical answer.  My guess is that having the camo means you will, on average, get hit by one or two fewer shells per game.  That's overall.  In any given game, the difference could be larger, or there could be no difference at all.  It's even possible that, for example, a shell would have hit your superstructure, but the added dispersion causes it to fly a tiny bit shorter, and it ends up in your citadel instead.

Bottom line...it does make a difference, although the difference is probably small.  Still, type 3 and 5 camos don't cost much, so you should probably run the camo most the time.  Personally, I don't use camo in coop.  In Randoms, I always use camo at higher tiers, virtually never at lower tiers, and usually run a camo on tiers 6/7.  Also, always run camo for things like ranked, clan battles, etc.  But that's just me.  Your mileage may vary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
212
[UNC]
Members
852 posts
6,196 battles

Most high tier BBs have max dispersion values north of 200m, so a 4% increase will net a dispersion ellipse approximately 9-10m wider than without the camo.  Probably enough to turn a pen into an overpen based on whether the shell hits near the center or extremity of the ship.  My guess is that the average player won't actually notice a difference, but if you were to take the same ship and run a couple hundred games both with and without camo you would see a difference in average damage taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[COOP2]
Members
357 posts
9,185 battles

You can always use the camo that only does 4% dispersion increase they are much cheaper, 7500 credits versus 22500 or something close to that, if you don't care about the extra concealment.

11 hours ago, monpetitloup said:

Credits are worthless and in any case you should be easily recuperating 22k for your camo in all tier 8 and below games.

True, even one decent co-op battle at tier 6 (just about the sweet spot in co-op for credits) will give you enough for a few battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,714
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,955 posts

Combined with the concealment upgrade module, you get a total of 9% negative impact on an enemy's dispersion. 

Makes camo and that upgrade worth quite a bit more than the 4-pt CE skill, IMO -- it still does something once you've been spotted.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
120
[F4E]
Members
251 posts
5,942 battles
12 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

Title. I am trying to minimize costs because I am extremely cheap.

I mean obviously every bit helps, but as the OP stated, he is cheap.

IMO, I run camo only on destroyers and cruisers that I don't need XP for.  (I run +XP camo's if Im grinding which has both conceal and dispersion bonuses).

I run +dispersion only camo on BB's.

For the higher tier games, T9/T10, I run the type with both camo and dispersion cause its a drop in the bucket anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
120
[F4E]
Members
251 posts
5,942 battles
3 minutes ago, Ironshroud said:

True, even one decent co-op battle at tier 6 (just about the sweet spot in co-op for credits) will give you enough for a few battles.

But then the camo costs you 10 minutes of you life playing a co-op game.  IMO 10mins > any camo..

I know this is a game of grinding.  Ships I can handle, because I have fun playing them.  The minute I have to grind to get a camo (or a stupid upgrade from the RB) in order to be at the same level of the comp is the day I leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
675 posts
9,405 battles

Don't know if you are a new player, but after a while you should have tons of free camo in your inventory. Containers, events, campaigns, etc., it's pretty easy to build a stockpile.

The benefits are modest but definitely worthwhile if you value your long term performance(plus all the extra XP, captain's XP, credits etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
380
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
785 posts
4,952 battles

Tbh cost isn't the reason I'm asking this. I'm just wondering if I can get away with using the concealment only camo because I prefer that design over the others without suffering major combat efficiency 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,535
[PSA]
Members
5,113 posts
3,732 battles

Generally speaking, the pros of equipping camo outweigh the cons. Plus with premium consumables now being free, there really is no excuse to not spend 22k on camo if you don't already have a ton provided from events, missions, and containers.

Note: I speak specifically about PVP. If you don't want to wear camo in coop, go nuts. The bots already seem to know where you are anyways, even if they can't shoot at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391
[HMCSH]
Beta Testers
1,634 posts
21,191 battles

If the enemy is using Aiming System mod1 = -7%

If you are using Concealment mod = +5%

If you are using Camo = +4%

Then the net gain is +2% dispersion on the shells fired at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,081
[WOLFG]
Members
31,298 posts
9,617 battles
14 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

Title. I am trying to minimize costs because I am extremely cheap.

Depends on who's doing the shooting.

If it's a BB, you're giving shells an extra 10m or so to miss you.

If it's a DD, no real effect.

TBH, if you're not interested in incremental effects, you don't really need the 3% concealment bonus either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,081
[WOLFG]
Members
31,298 posts
9,617 battles
1 hour ago, PotatoMD said:

Tbh cost isn't the reason I'm asking this. I'm just wondering if I can get away with using the concealment only camo because I prefer that design over the others without suffering major combat efficiency 

In that case, sure!

That's what I typically use on low-tier ships, because everybody's dispersion is so bad in the first place lol.

You might want to look at mods too.

I use one from the Modstation that changes a lot of the camo.

For example, it makes the standard camo on Gneisenau look historical, and turns some of the really weird designs into more pleasing ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,529
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
28,749 posts
25,011 battles

Considering how big Battleship dispersion pattern can be, anything helps. 

Let's say you're a mid tier Cruiser that prefers not to die from an Arizona's AP salvo.

Arizona's dispersion at 16km is 221m (725ft), which for convenience's sake, that's the range AZ is shooting at your Schors.  Camo dispersion penalty worsens that by 8.84m (29ft).

 

Also, Camo with a dispersion penalty to the attackers of 4% also stacks with ships that have access to Slot 5 with the ever-important CSM1 upgrade.  CSM1 gives a 5% dispersion penalty to the attacker.  Altogether that's a 9% dispersion penalty.

 

So a Cleveland with a Full Stealth Build (camo + CSM1 are 2 out of 3 parts of it) forces a 9% dispersion penalty against say, that same Arizona.  Instead of Arizona having her normal dispersion of 221m if attacking Cleveland at 16km, AZ's now worsens by 19.89m (65ft), and that 221m dispersion becomes 241m (790ft).

 

Most especially when one considers that a lot of people equip ASM1 for 7% Dispersion improvement.

Another big consideration are Tier IX-X USN BBs that access APRM2 in Slot 6 which provides 11% Dispersion improvement (No USN BB has access to ASM1 in Slot 3).  When I played High Tier Cruisers, the only thing I hated more than a Yamato player that knew how to aim was Montana.  An AP salvo fired from a 16"/50 x12 armed Montana equipped with APRM2 isn't a pleasant experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SuperTest Coordinator, Beta Testers
6,655 posts
12,056 battles

In technical statistics, it roughly "balances out" because shots that could have hit you would miss you, while shots that would have missed you will hit you. Dependent of course, on individual player skill. Against a player with perfect aim, it will always be beneficial. Against a player with not-so-great aim, then you start getting these weird reverse situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,136
[TDRB]
Members
5,162 posts
13,743 battles
16 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

Title. I am trying to minimize costs because I am extremely cheap.

Aiming System Mod 1 reduces your dispersion by 7%. Experiment by adding & removing this upgrade.  This should give you an idea what reducing dispersion does.

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.

×