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

FIX Kinda Broken Damage Saturation

42 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

278
[DRHS]
Members
439 posts
22,354 battles

SO just in a match 3 min in, me and a YueYang face off at a cap, he eats 2 torps from  me in my Grozvoi. Yueyang Base HP 18,500 with no skill on this one increasing his HP to 23,000. Grozvoi torps do 15,100 each. One hit bow 1 hit stern broadside and the Yueyang surrvived with 186hp left. Sorry WG he should have died plain an simple. He had taken no damage before the torps hit so "damage saturation" should NOT  be a factor. So unless the basic laws of math have changed and 15,100 x 2 no longer equals 30,200 your game is BROKEN. 

 I understand the damage saturation mechanic. The torps hit in 2 different locations (bow & stern) so there should have been no reduction for the first torp ( they hit less than a second apart) & with the 2nd torp hitting the stern of the ship it should not have been affected by the damage saturation mechanic eiter(a second seperate damage location).

In effect I riped off his bow and stern but he lived because your game applied the damage saturation mechanic to the second torp which hit a diferent damage location.

Now if you want a DD to survive a dual torp hit like this one then adjust your wiki to represent this. State that DD's only have one damage location not the multiple that is stated on the wiki. Fix the game or fix the wiki One is broken right now so get on it. 

Edited by BarronRichthofen
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,911
[WORX]
Members
16,968 posts
22,074 battles
2 minutes ago, BarronRichthofen said:

So unless the basic laws of math have changed and 15,100 x 2 no longer equals 30,200 your game is BROKEN. 

 There is more to it then the "math"... Do you account for torp reduction % ?

Did you consider that a compartment of a DD HP have a different value, depending, where the torp hits? The total amount of these values will equal the total HP of the ship.

Lastly, no replay, no basis for your argument..

GL/HF

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertest Coordinator
7,223 posts
14,434 battles

Damage saturation is applied immediately and dynamically during a torpedo or bow hit. 
 

The first hit does not get a free pass to do damage over the saturation limit. If it did, Shimakaze torpedoes would always one-shot most DDs to any portion of the ship since they do 23K.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,164
[GOB]
Members
4,389 posts
24,096 battles

Go the the end screen of that battle... See what total damage you did to the DD and with what.    You didn't post that or anything else so I am guessing people can help you more with that info.  It's the best way to figure out things like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,615
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
6,121 posts
27,944 battles
1 hour ago, BarronRichthofen said:

I understand the damage saturation mechanic. The torps hit in 2 different locations (bow & stern) so there should have been no reduction for the first torp ( they hit less than a second apart) & with the 2nd torp hitting the stern of the ship it should not have been affected by the damage saturation mechanic eiter(a second seperate damage location).

That means you don't understand the damage saturation mechanic. It's not based on first or second hit, it's just a matter of depleting the local HP in a section. The bow has only so much, and the stern has only so much. If your torp does more than that amount (which it probably does), the amount in excess of the sectional HP is lost.

So what you essentially got was all his bow HP, all his stern HP, and both torps' worth (which is not the same as raw listed) against the "whole hull" pool.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
[GWG]
Members
8,018 posts
15,871 battles

TRAINING ROOM TIME:

Open up a battle and set yourself up fighting several non-shooting immobole bots.

Get real close and torp them repeatedly in the bow.  (use your RN DD if you have one for individual torp launches).

For each hit, you will see the inflicted damage decrease until it's about zilch...   So you stick 20 torps into Yue Yang and don't sink it.

......

NOW think of ways you can exploit that mechanic...   Damage saturation shows as your hull is all blackened.

Go back into that training room against an ARMED but stationary DD (Minekaze is good - all torps - no guns) and see if you can practice taking all the torps in your bow....  or the stern... 

See how many torps you can absorb without sinking.

LEARN this skill and abuse the hell out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[DRHS]
Members
439 posts
22,354 battles
24 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

 There is more to it then the "math"... Do you account for torp reduction % ?

Did you consider that a compartment of a DD HP have a different value, depending, where the torp hits? The total amount of these values will equal the total HP of the ship.

Lastly, no replay, no basis for your argument..

GL/HF

It was a DESTROYER IT HAS NO DAMN TORP PROTECTION wake up and READ!!!!! and yeah I have the replay and if WG want's to see it I'll give it to them. 

 

21 minutes ago, Compassghost said:

Damage saturation is applied immediately and dynamically during a torpedo or bow hit. 
 

The first hit does not get a free pass to do damage over the saturation limit. If it did, Shimakaze torpedoes would always one-shot most DDs to any portion of the ship since they do 23K.

Then wargaming need to make a far more detailed description of the damage saturation mechanic that INCLUDES torp damage and the percentages of HP each section has.  But the wiki does not give enough information to figure out what the exact HP for a section is.  Torp damage from the 2 hits was 17,736 so damage saturation did affect both torp to different degrees. But with the information on the wiki it is impossible to determine how much was reduced because you are not given the precentages of each section of the ship. The torps hit so close together that even slowed down to max the replay does not show exact damage numbers. It looks like the first torp hit for around 7-8 k and the second doing a bit less. 

So doing some rough math (really rough) First torp hits stern (when I looked closely at the replay it hits 2 frames before the second, under 1 second between hits) It does the roughly 7-8k dmg. Figuring the 0.165 reduction that should give us around 6k HP for the stern + the remainder of the 15,100 torp dmg being reduced to give the 7-8k dmg applied. Second Torp same thing but a little less damage. The issue I really have is that for a Destroyer the damage reduction seems a bit excessive. We're not talking about a ship that is 100's of meters long and has plenty of bulkheads to reduce the damage.  Your looking at a Ship under 100m , it does not have the structual strenght to reduce the damage that damn much.  (98%reduction I think not) BB or CA sure there is enough distance to allow bulkhead and such to do their job and reduce the damage. But in a DD your looking at 3-4 bulkhead at best for the entie ship, not enough to give that kind of reduction

So WG give us EXACT percentage numbers for each section of a ship. The "The maximum HP for these compartments are always 105% of the ship’s maximum HP. The maximum HP of the "hull" compartment is always 75% of the ship's maximum HP. " is NOT enough information to stop posts like this one. I want to know what my torps SHOULD do and their MAX damage is as well. If I have the EXACT percentages of each section of a ship I can then determine if I need to throw a few HE rounds at a DD in addition to the torps to kill it. (Yeah I can do math that fast in my head)

In the match in question I had to spend another 5 min chasing that YueYang down with under 200hp left to finish him off. If I had the info needed to make the determination in advance I would have pressed him and killed quickly. 

I personally think the 0.165 reduction is fine for BB/CA/CV big ships plenty of open spase to diffuse explosions. A DD though it should be far less of a reduction 0.33 or so for HE/Torps. AP should still have the reduction because an AP round hitting a ship with little to no armor will punch right thru just like the current AP/DD interaction is currently working.

I won't bring the IRL arguement into this because this is a game not real life but it does imitate reality and a DD taking 2 torp to bow and stern boradside should NOT survive it.

 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
[GWG]
Members
8,018 posts
15,871 battles

Mechanic works just fine.....

Compare the 'potential' with 'actual' damage...  and...   lolz  SIX torpedoes into a DD..

And a replay file for your viewing pleasure...

 

DaringDamage_A.jpg

20201209_120341_PBSD110-Daring_34_OC_islands.wowsreplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertest Coordinator
7,223 posts
14,434 battles
1 hour ago, AVR_Project said:

TRAINING ROOM TIME:

Open up a battle and set yourself up fighting several non-shooting immobole bots.

Get real close and torp them repeatedly in the bow.  (use your RN DD if you have one for individual torp launches).

For each hit, you will see the inflicted damage decrease until it's about zilch...   So you stick 20 torps into Yue Yang and don't sink it.

......

NOW think of ways you can exploit that mechanic...   Damage saturation shows as your hull is all blackened.

Go back into that training room against an ARMED but stationary DD (Minekaze is good - all torps - no guns) and see if you can practice taking all the torps in your bow....  or the stern... 

See how many torps you can absorb without sinking. 

LEARN this skill and abuse the hell out of it. 

 

Torpedoes always do damage now. They removed the full saturation mechanic with the damage rework in 0.7.11. You can test this with a Derzki on any ship, even the Yamato. It will take significantly reduced damage, but it will always do guaranteed damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
16,276 posts
23,561 battles

Perhaps it is time for the OP to change the title of the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
16,276 posts
23,561 battles
1 minute ago, BarronRichthofen said:

Done

 

Nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
[GWG]
Members
8,018 posts
15,871 battles
1 hour ago, Compassghost said:

 

Torpedoes always do damage now. They removed the full saturation mechanic with the damage rework in 0.7.11. You can test this with a Derzki on any ship, even the Yamato. It will take significantly reduced damage, but it will always do guaranteed damage.

Someday, maybe we will be allowed to shoot at and hit the torpedoes....
See the replay in the other post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles
2 hours ago, AVR_Project said:

Mechanic works just fine.....

This ^ there are real world examples of additional hits to a ship simply stirring up the wreckage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,890
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead, Privateers
18,962 posts
5,224 battles

.

Edited by iDuckman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles
5 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

npdZWKV.gif

Yes, but those all hit the stern. The OP claims one in the stern, one in the bow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,179
[SYN]
[SYN]
Beta Testers
2,557 posts
15,221 battles

Damage saturation is a software defect that WG pretends to be a "mechanism" so they don't have to fix it. What purpose does this "mechanism" serve?

Change my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
323
[KSC]
Wiki Editor, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
468 posts
11,410 battles
2 minutes ago, chewonit said:

Damage saturation is a software defect that WG pretends to be a "mechanism" so they don't have to fix it. What purpose does this "mechanism" serve?

Change my mind.

To give life to kleber! 

:p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertest Coordinator
7,223 posts
14,434 battles
Just now, chewonit said:

Damage saturation is a software defect that WG pretends to be a "mechanism" so they don't have to fix it. What purpose does this "mechanism" serve?

Change my mind.

To point out that ships can, and often did, survive devastating hits to their bow/stern, and that just focusing the bow indefinitely would not easily sink a ship.

image.png.d044243a9aa06aeda9a662795deea45a.png

Unfortunately, the side effect of pure saturation was that some ships could just bow tank indefinitely and take no damage and become zombies. The rework removed most pure saturation in favor of pure overpenetration on saturated components.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,911
[WORX]
Members
16,968 posts
22,074 battles
4 hours ago, BarronRichthofen said:

IT HAS NO DAMN TORP PROTECTION 

Not torp protection,

Torpedo DMG reduction % (its in the game). Every ship has a torp reduction %... But in the end... Its Dmg saturation the main issue...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,222
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,056 posts
30,833 battles
21 minutes ago, Compassghost said:

To point out that ships can, and often did, survive devastating hits to their bow/stern, and that just focusing the bow indefinitely would not easily sink a ship.

image.png.d044243a9aa06aeda9a662795deea45a.png

Unfortunately, the side effect of pure saturation was that some ships could just bow tank indefinitely and take no damage and become zombies. The rework removed most pure saturation in favor of pure overpenetration on saturated components.

Battle of Tassafaronga was where several USN CAs got blasted really good by Long Lances.  4 USN CAs were present and were supposed to be part of a far superior ambushing force, but the IJN force led by RAdm.Tanaka and the excellent scouting by DD Takanami upset the ambush.  The USN suffered 1 sunk CA and the other 3 survived but were out of action for a long time.  The IJN lost only DD Takanami while the other 7 DDs escaped.  The United States Navy was always impressed by Tanaka's performance against a far superior force but IJN leadership didn't take it that way.  Tanaka didn't push to drop off the badly needed supplies / troops to Guadalcanal.  He also said that Guadalcanal was untenable for Japan and the forces needed to leave the island because Japan was losing far too much for that island.  This criticism and his "failure" at Tassafaronga in the eyes of his superiors meant the days of the IJN's best Division Commander was limited.  He'd lose command and get shuffled to a desk job in BURMA for the rest of the war, never to have any wartime command ever again.  He'd survive WWII because of that.

 

A force of 8 IJN Destroyers vs 4 USN CAs, 1 CL, 4 DDs.

RAdm Tanaka

RaizoTanaka.jpg

New Orleans-class CA Minneapolis

1920px-Damaged_USS_Minneapolis_(CA-36)_a

New Orleans

Damaged_USS_New_Orleans_(CA-32)_reaching

Pensacola took a torpedo hit.

1920px-USS_Pensacola_(CA-24)_alongside_o

 

Northampton, lead ship of her class was sunk during the battle.  Here she is in October 1942 trying to tow soon to be lost Hornet.

1920px-USS_Northampton_(CA-26)_attemptin

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×