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

Some questions about Dispersion

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
410 posts
26 battles

Mostly a rambling bunch of questions fired at @LittleWhiteMouse and @hanesco which hopefully some others might also find interesting.

My dubious understanding on dispersion comes from the the wiki, LittleWhiteMouse's reviews and proships.ru along with IChase's and How it Works videos. 

Every time a salvo is fired the game calculates a dispersion ellipse for every *turret* at the point the salvo is aimed at. The turret's ellipses mostly overlap but less so at close range.

From my understanding the value calculated from the formula and with the horizontal width of the dispersion ellipse is determined by one of these formula. (Along with all the sigma values for ships I'm aware of)

 

Spoiler

Destroyers and IJN CAs        (Range in km) x 7.5m + 15m                128m@15km                

All destroyers of all tiers and nations σ2.0.

All IJN cruisers except Mogami mounted with the 155mm guns

Premium US Cruisers: Albany σ2.0?, Atlanta σ1.7, Flint σ1.7? 

Premium Russian cruiser tIII Aurora σ2.0?, tX Smolensk σ2.0, 

Premium French cruiser: tX Colbert σ2.0

 

Cruisers                          (Range in km) x 6.9m + 33m                137m@15km

All cruisers Tier I to Tier VIII cruisers unless otherwise mentioned.        σ2.0

All cruisers Tier IX and Tier X cruisers unless otherwise mentioned.      σ2.05

IJN Cruiser: tVIII Mogami mounted with the 155mm guns (σ2.0?)

UK Premium Cruiser: tVIII Cheshire        σ2.05

US Premium Cruiser: tIII St. Louis σ1.8, tIII Charleston σ1.8, tVIII AL Montpelier σ2.15

German Premium Cruiser: tIX Siegfried σ2.05 (yes really)


 

Azuma and Yoshino Dispersion”         (Range in km) x 9.5m + 15m                158m@15km

IJN Premium Cruisers: tIX Azuma σ2.05,  tX Yoshino σ2.05 

Russian Cruisers: tIX Riga σ2.05, tX Petropavlovsk σ2.05


 

Tallinn and Mikoyan”         (Range in km) x 9.3m + 26m                166m@15km

Russian Cruisers: tV Mikoyan σ2.05, tVIII Tallinn σ2.05

(Thanks again hanesco)
 

Graf Spee Dispersion”/”Battlecruiser Dispersion”     (Range in km) x 8.4m + 48m        174m@15km

German Premium Cruisers: tVI Admiral Graf Spee σ1.9, tIX Agir σ2.05

US Premium Cruiser tIX Alaska σ2.05

Russian Premium Cruiser: tX Stalingrad  σ2.65

US Premium Battleships: tVII Florida σ1.7, tIX Georgia σ1.8

UK Premium Battleship: tX Thunderer σ1.9

French Premium Battleship: tVIII Champaign σ2.0


 

"Slava Dispersion"        (Range in km) x 5m + 105m                        180m@15km

Russian Premium Battleship: tX Slava σ1.9

I've seen Slava's dispersion described as getting better at long range but I assume this is just hyperbole. It does only gain 5m per km however.


 

"Mikasa Dispersion"                (Range in km) x 7.7m + 69m                185m@15km

Premium IJN Battleship: tII Mikasa σ1.8

A shock to anyone who has ever actually tried to shoot anything with Mikasa...


 

"Japanese Battleship Dispersion"        (Range in km) x 7.2m + 84m        192m@15km

Techtree IJN  Battleships: tIII Kawachi σ1.8,  tIV Myogi σ2.0, tV Kongo σ1.8, tVI Fuso σ1.5, tVII Nagato σ2.0, tVIII Amagi σ1.8, tIX Izumo σ2.0, tX Yamato  σ2.1

Premium IJN  Battleships: tIV Ishizuchi        σ2.0, tVI Mutsu σ1.8, tVII Ashitaka σ1.8, tVIII Kii        σ1.7, tVIII Ignis Purgatio/Ragnarok σ1.9, tIX Musashi σ1.8, tX Shikishima  σ2.1

Pan Asian Premium Battleship: tIX Bajie  σ2.1


 

"Warspite Dispersion"                                 (Range in km) x 10.3m +51m                206m@15km

UK Battleship: tVI Queen Elizabeth σ2.0

UK Premium Battleships: tVI Warspite σ2.0, tVII Hood 1.9s, tVIII Vanguard σ2.0

US Premium Battleship: tX Ohio σ2.0


 

"American Battleship Dispersion"                            (Range in km) x 10m + 60m        210m@15km

US Battleships: tIII South Carolina σ1.9, tIV Wyoming σ1.5, tV New York σ1.8, tVI New Mexico σ1.5, tVII Colorado σ2.0, tVIII North Carolina σ2.0, tVIII Kansas σ1.5, tIX Iowa σ1.9, tIX Minnesota 1.8, tX Montana σ1.9, tX Vermont σ1.95

US Premium Battleships: tIV Arkansas Beta σ1.5, tV Texas σ1.8, tV Oklahoma σ1.8, tVI Arizona σ1.8, tVI W. Virginia 1941 σ1.8, tVII California σ1.9, tVIII Alabama σ1.9, tVIII Massachusetts σ1.7, tIX Missouri σ1.9

US Premium Cruiser: tX Puerto Rico  σ2.2

UK Battleships: tIII Bellerophon σ1.8, tIV Orion σ1.6, tV Iron Duke σ1.8, tVII King George V σ1.8, tVIII Monarch σ1.8, tIX Lion σ1.8, tX Conqueror σ1.8

UK Premium Battleships: tIII Dreadnought σ1.8, tVII Duke of York σ1.8, tVII Nelson σ1.9

German Battleships: tIII Nassau σ1.8, tIV Kaiser σ1.8, tV König σ1.8, tVI Bayern σ1.8, tVII Gneisenau σ1.8, VIII Bismarck σ1.8, tIX Friedrich der Große σ1.8,  tX Großer Kurfürst σ1.8

German Premium Battleships: König Albert σ1.8, tVI Prinz Eitel Friedrich  σ2.0, tVII Scharnhorst  σ2.0, tVIII Tirpitz σ1.8, tVIII Odin σ2.0, tIX Pommern σ1.5

Russian Premium Battleships: tIV Nikolai I σ2.0, tV Oktyabrskaya σ1.8, sVII Poltava σ1.7, tIX AL Sov. Rossiya σ1.8

Russian Premium Cruiser: tIX Kronstadt σ2.05


 

"Russian Battleship Dispersion"                                               (Range in km) x 11.9m + 33m        212m@15km

Russian Battleships: tIII Knyaz Suvorov σ1.5, tIV Gangut σ1.4, tV Pyotr Velikiy σ1.7, tVI Izmail σ1.6, tVII Sinop σ1.5, tVIII Vladivostok σ1.6, tIX Sovetsky Soyuz σ1.7, tX Kremlin σ1.8

Russian Premium Battleships: tVIII Lenin σ1.7


 

"The Dispersion formerly known as German Battleship"            (Range in km) x 9.8m + 66m           213m@15km

French Battleships: tIII Turenne σ1.8, tIV Courbet σ1.8, tV Bretagne σ1.8, tVI Normandie σ1.6, tVII Lyon σ1.5, tVIII Richelieu σ1.8, tIX Alsace σ1.6, tX Republique σ2.0

French Premium Battleships: VI Dunkerque σ1.7, VIII Gascogne σ1.9, VIX Jean Bart σ1.9, tX Bourgogne σ1.8

Italian Premium Battleships: tV Giulio Cesare σ1.9, tVIII Roma/AL Littorio σ1.8

Pan European Premium Battleship: tV Viribus Unitis σ1.8

So far so good.

The Vertical proportion of the dispersion ellipse is actually bigger than the horizontal but a value isn't given for this. proships.ru sometimes lists a value but I understand from LittleWhiteMouse based on comments from WG that this might be taken out of context with what it relates to.

Overall I understand the slow, arcing shells have less vertical dispersion than faster, flatter arcing shells. Although it's easier to hit targets with faster shells. LWM's recent thread is enlightening in showing we might have wrong assumptions how it works.

Having calculated the dispersion ellipse the actual target of every shell are individually distributed at random by gaussian distribution, and the game renders the flight path of the shells as they fly and what they actually end up hitting, be it the ship, the water or an island... or the wrong ship... This is where sigma comes in.

Three things confuse me however:

1)
Does the horizontal dispersion from the above formula/in port refer to the radius or the diameter of the dispersion ellipse?

The How it works video shows it is the diameter.

HOWEVER! Ships in WoWS are twice as big as they actually are, so a Bismarck in game is 500m long rather than 250m as it was historically. This has been confirmed in this RU Q&A back in September 2016. Likewise I’ve had a very patient friend help me measure a Bismarck in a training room and it seemed to be half a kilometre

It’s therefore a bit unclear if the dispersion ellipse is likewise scaled to this as I feel fairly certain I have seen battleships salvos fall wider than ships that are 500m long in game but that might just be my memory or game perspective playing tricks with me.  This gets a bit more complex with the test Fuso from LWM's reviews, as I explain later.

 

2) Do modifiers such as  -7% dispersion from aiming mod 1 /+4% for camo/+5% for Concealment module simply to the horizontal diameter of the ellipse or to the area?. Likewise the doubled dispersion from firing without having a target locked on.

I believe it’s the former.

 

3) The How it Works and Ichase’s video seem to simply say the dispersion ellipsoid is the furthest a shell could fall. This makes sense.

The wiki more confusingly seems to say " "The in-port value describes dispersion in terms of one probable error, i.e. it gives a value where 50% of the fired shells will land around the point of aim".

This implies shells can fall further out than the maximum (horizontal) dispersion given in port, or I've just misread this. Which is correct?

 

The answers I get a bit more complex when I was paying attention to LWM's mapping of Pommern at 15km. German BBs like Pommern now use the US BB formula so horizontal dispersion should be 210m @ 15km. Pommern is using Aiming systems mod 1 (-7%) but the Fuso is not wearing camouflage IIRC and Fuso is far too proud and glorious for the IJN to even consider mounting a Concealment module (so it can't)  this would go down to 195m assuming the simple answer to question 2.

Fuso was historically 205m long, so I presume this'd translate to 410m in game. Given that during the tests Fuso is bow tanking with shots to the coming right to left. With really bad MS paint skills it looks like the maximum horizontal dispertion is actually very close to the length of the in-game Fuso... which would imply it's actually close to 400m in game. Does this change any of the above answers?

Have I confused myself and everyone else further?

Pommern Dispertion at 15km.png

Edited by SoothingWhaleSongEU
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[-NEM-]
Members
1,108 posts
13,358 battles
8 hours ago, SoothingWhaleSongEU said:

Mostly a rambling bunch of questions fired at @LittleWhiteMouse and @hanesco which hopefully some others might also find interesting.

My dubious understanding on dispersion comes from the the wiki, LittleWhiteMouse's reviews and proships.ru along with IChase's and How it Works videos. 

My understanding every time a salvo is fired the game calculates a dispersion ellipse for every *turret* at the point the salvo is aimed at. The turrets mostly overlap but less so at close range.

From my understanding the value calculated from the formula and with the horizontal width of the dispersion ellipse is determined by one of these formula. (Along with all the sigma values for ships I'm aware of)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Destroyers and IJN CAs        (Range in km) x 7.5m + 15m                128m@15km                

All destroyers of all tiers and nations σ2.0.

All IJN cruisers except Mogami mounted with the 155mm guns

Premium US Cruisers: Albany σ2.0?, Atlanta σ1.7, Flint σ1.7? 

Premium Russian cruiser tIII Aurora σ2.0?, tX Smolensk σ2.0, 

Premium French cruiser: tX Colbert σ2.0

 

Cruisers                          (Range in km) x 6.9m + 33m                137m@15km

All cruisers Tier I to Tier VIII cruisers unless otherwise mentioned.        σ2.0

All cruisers Tier IX and Tier X cruisers unless otherwise mentioned.      σ2.05

IJN Cruiser: tVIII Mogami mounted with the 155mm guns (σ2.0?)

UK Premium Cruiser: tVIII Cheshire        σ2.05

US Premium Cruiser: tIII St. Louis σ1.8, tIII Charleston σ1.8, tVIII AL Montpelier σ2.15

German Premium Cruiser: tIX Siegfried σ2.05 (yes really)


 

Azuma and Yoshino Dispersion”         (Range in km) x 9.5m + 15m                158m@15km

IJN Premium Cruisers: tIX Azuma σ2.05,  tX Yoshino σ2.05 

Russian Cruisers: tIX Riga σ2.05, tX Petropavlovsk σ2.05


 

Tallinn and Mikoyan”         (Range in km) x 9.3m + 26m                166m@15km

Russian Cruisers: tV Mikoyan σ2.05, tVIII Tallinn σ2.05

(Thanks again hanesco)
 

Graf Spee Dispersion”/”Battlecruiser Dispersion”     (Range in km) x 8.4m + 48m        174m@15km

German Premium Cruisers: tVI Admiral Graf Spee σ1.9, tIX Agir σ2.05

US Premium Cruiser tIX Alaska σ2.05

Russian Premium Cruiser: tX Stalingrad  σ2.65

US Premium Battleships: tVII Florida σ1.7, tIX Georgia σ1.8

UK Premium Battleship: tX Thunderer σ1.9

French Premium Battleship: tVIII Champaign σ2.0


 

"Slava Dispersion"        (Range in km) x 5m + 105m                        180m@15km

Russian Premium Battleship: tX Slava σ1.9

I've seen Slava's dispersion described as getting better at long range but I assume this is just hyperbole. It does only gain 5m per km however.


 

"Mikasa Dispersion"                (Range in km) x 7.7m + 69m                185m@15km

Premium IJN Battleship: tII Mikasa σ1.8

A shock to anyone who has ever actually tried to shoot anything with Mikasa...


 

"Japanese Battleship Dispersion"        (Range in km) x 7.2m + 84m        192m@15km

Techtree IJN  Battleships: tIII Kawachi σ1.8,  tIV Myogi σ2.0, tV Kongo σ1.8, tVI Fuso σ1.5, tVII Nagato σ2.0, tVIII Amagi σ1.8, tIX Izumo σ2.0, tX Yamato  σ2.1

Premium IJN  Battleships: tIV Ishizuchi        σ2.0, tVI Mutsu σ1.8, tVII Ashitaka σ1.8, tVIII Kii        σ1.7, tVIII Ignis Purgatio/Ragnarok σ1.9, tIX Musashi σ1.8, tX Shikishima  σ2.1

Pan Asian Premium Battleship: tIX Bajie  σ2.1


 

"Warspite Dispersion"                                 (Range in km) x 10.3m +51m                206m@15km

UK Battleship: tVI Queen Elizabeth σ2.0

UK Premium Battleships: tVI Warspite σ2.0, tVII Hood 1.9s, tVIII Vanguard σ2.0

US Premium Battleship: tX Ohio σ2.0


 

"American Battleship Dispersion"                            (Range in km) x 10m + 60m        210m@15km

US Battleships: tIII South Carolina σ1.9, tIV Wyoming σ1.5, tV New York σ1.8, tVI New Mexico σ1.5, tVII Colorado σ2.0, tVIII North Carolina σ2.0, tVIII Kansas σ1.5, tIX Iowa σ1.9, tIX Minnesota 1.8, tX Montana σ1.9, tX Vermont σ1.95

US Premium Battleships: tIV Arkansas Beta σ1.5, tV Texas σ1.8, tV Oklahoma σ1.8, tVI Arizona σ1.8, tVI W. Virginia 1941 σ1.8, tVII California σ1.9, tVIII Alabama σ1.9, tVIII Massachusetts σ1.7, tIX Missouri σ1.9

US Premium Cruiser: tX Puerto Rico  σ2.2

UK Battleships: tIII Bellerophon σ1.8, tIV Orion σ1.6, tV Iron Duke σ1.8, tVII King George V σ1.8, tVIII Monarch σ1.8, tIX Lion σ1.8, tX Conqueror σ1.8

UK Premium Battleships: tIII Dreadnought σ1.8, tVII Duke of York σ1.8, tVII Nelson σ1.9

German Battleships: tIII Nassau σ1.8, tIV Kaiser σ1.8, tV König σ1.8, tVI Bayern σ1.8, tVII Gneisenau σ1.8, VIII Bismarck σ1.8, tIX Friedrich der Große σ1.8,  tX Großer Kurfürst σ1.8

German Premium Battleships: König Albert σ1.8, tVI Prinz Eitel Friedrich  σ2.0, tVII Scharnhorst  σ2.0, tVIII Tirpitz σ1.8, tVIII Odin σ2.0, tIX Pommern σ1.5

Russian Premium Battleships: tIV Nikolai I σ2.0, tV Oktyabrskaya σ1.8, sVII Poltava σ1.7, tIX AL Sov. Rossiya σ1.8

Russian Premium Cruiser: tIX Kronstadt σ2.05


 

"Russian Battleship Dispersion"                                               (Range in km) x 11.9m + 33m        212m@15km

Russian Battleships: tIII Knyaz Suvorov σ1.5, tIV Gangut σ1.4, tV Pyotr Velikiy σ1.7, tVI Izmail σ1.6, tVII Sinop σ1.5, tVIII Vladivostok σ1.6, tIX Sovetsky Soyuz σ1.7, tX Kremlin σ1.8

Russian Premium Battleships: tVIII Lenin σ1.7


 

"The Dispersion formerly known as German Battleship"            (Range in km) x 9.8m + 66m           213m@15km

French Battleships: tIII Turenne σ1.8, tIV Courbet σ1.8, tV Bretagne σ1.8, tVI Normandie σ1.6, tVII Lyon σ1.5, tVIII Richelieu σ1.8, tIX Alsace σ1.6, tX Republique σ2.0

French Premium Battleships: VI Dunkerque σ1.7, VIII Gascogne σ1.9, VIX Jean Bart σ1.9, tX Bourgogne σ1.8

Italian Premium Battleships: tV Giulio Cesare σ1.9, tVIII Roma/AL Littorio σ1.8

Pan European Premium Battleship: tV Viribus Unitis σ1.8

So far so good.

The Vertical proportion of the dispersion ellipse is actually bigger than the horizontal but a value isn't given for this. proships.ru sometimes lists a value but I understand from LittleWhiteMouse based on comments from WG that this might be taken out of context with what it relates to.

Overall I understand the slow, arcing shells have less vertical dispersion than faster, flatter arcing shells. Although it's easier to hit targets with faster shells. LWM's recent thread is enlightening in showing we might have wrong assumptions how it works.

Having calculated the dispersion ellipse the actual target of every shell are individually distributed at random by gaussian distribution, and the game renders the flight path of the shells as they fly and what they actually end up hitting, be it the ship, the water or an island... or the wrong ship... This is where sigma comes in.

Three things confuse me however:

1)
Does the horizontal dispersion from the above formula/in port refer to the radius or the diameter of the dispersion ellipse?

The How it works video shows it is the diameter.

HOWEVER! Ships in WoWS are twice as big as they actually are, so a Bismarck in game is 500m long rather than 250m as it was historically. This has been confirmed in this RU Q&A back in September 2016. Likewise I’ve had a very patient friend help me measure a Bismarck in a training room and it seemed to be half a kilometre

It’s therefore a bit unclear if the dispersion ellipse is likewise scaled to this as I feel fairly certain I have seen battleships salvos fall wider than ships that are 500m long in game but that might just be my memory or game perspective playing tricks with me.  This gets a bit more complex with the test Fuso from LWM's reviews, as I explain later.

 

2) Do modifiers such as  -7% dispersion from aiming mod 1 /+4% for camo/+5% for Concealment module simply to the horizontal diameter of the ellipse or to the area?. Likewise the doubled dispersion from firing without having a target locked on.

I believe it’s the former.

 

3) The How it Works and Ichase’s video seem to simply say the dispersion ellipsoid is the furthest a shell could fall. This makes sense.

The wiki more confusingly seems to say " "The in-port value describes dispersion in terms of one probable error, i.e. it gives a value where 50% of the fired shells will land around the point of aim".

This implies shells can fall further out than the maximum (horizontal) dispersion given in port, or I've just misread this. Which is correct?

 

The answers I get a bit more complex when I was paying attention to LWM's mapping of Pommern at 15km. German BBs like Pommern now use the US BB formula so horizontal dispersion should be 210m @ 15km. Pommern is using Aiming systems mod 1 (-7%) but the Fuso is not wearing camouflage IIRC and Fuso is far too proud and glorious for the IJN to even consider mounting a Concealment module (so it can't)  this would go down to 195m assuming the simple answer to question 2.

Fuso was historically 205m long, so I presume this'd translate to 405m in game. Given that during the tests Fuso is bow tanking with shots to the coming right to left. With really bad MS paint skills it looks like the maximum horizontal dispertion is actually very close to the length of the in-game Fuso... which would imply it's actually close to 400m in game. Does this change any of the above answers?

Have I confused myself and everyone else further?

Pommern Dispertion at 15km.png

Almost everything you mentioned is correct as far as we know.

1) The dispersion ellipse is scaled accordingly to the ships. So, while it says 195m of dispersion for Pommern, in truth, the length of the horizontal axis is 390 m, really close to Fuso's length of 410 m. Just for fun, the horizontal axis of Pommern without aiming would be 880m @ 15km.

2) Your believe is correct. The percentage shown affect only the horizontal axis of the ellipse, at least the bonus given by Aiming System Mod1 (the only one verifiable in-port).

3) You got confused. I don't have Paint at hand (writing from a phone), so I will try to be clear:

Remember we get a projected ellipse over the water's surface, with the vertical dispersion being bigger than the horizontal dispersion. We can draw a zone inside that dispersion ellipse (the zone is an ellipse too) where aprox 50% of the shells will always go, and that ellipse longer axis will be the same as the horizontal dispersion axis we see in-game. The dimensions of that zone is literally a black-box (we only know the horizontal axis being the longest), and it seems to be used as a balance measure by WG, but normally it is still big enough to allow for overshoots and undershoots.

This, in other words, mean that the 50% you see in the wiki, refers to a zone that is alredy inside the dispersion ellipse, so no shells should fall out of this ellipse. This distribution helps concentrate even more shells in the center and make scoring hits easier without guaranteeing pinpoint accuracy. Remember, the horizontal axis is still 400m long for Pommern.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,222
[-TRM-]
Members
5,566 posts

You made me see something I never noticed.
Firing on a 500m long Bismarck. Thats 1/3 longer than our Nimitzes Carriers. Sheesh.

There is a idea. Make them life sized. Like really small targets.

 

Ive noticed visually when sailing past a breakwater with a 20 foot damn fishing boat docked by a house not much bigger than the damn thing and my Shima is almost as long as the freaking queen mary II. Ive been turning that over in my mind last couple of days.

 

What they screwed up on is the game map world. Make the world bigger. If I can dock that shima next to that fishing boat it will mean more than 2 minutes sailing to get to the middle for a longer game in a larger ocean. Ive thought about it sometimes. Dock the thing make it look like just another ignored scenery while getting to torp dum dum sailing by in his 1500 foot long bismarck.

 

If we had to exist in a game world that small in real life our rooms would be 5 feet high instead of 8 foot ceilings. Truly a lilliputian land.

Edited by xHeavy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[-NEM-]
Members
1,108 posts
13,358 battles
15 minutes ago, xHeavy said:

There is a idea. Make them life sized. Like really small targets

The game was like that during alpha, or even before that. It made aiming really painful. They resized the ships, and then worked on the dispersion, as it was too accurate after the changes in the models went through. 

Those are times the majority of players don't know (me included), so I can't ascertain any dates or patches to let you cross reference what I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,222
[-TRM-]
Members
5,566 posts

Sure its "too accurate" a battery of 6 155's artillery on Paladin US Carriers will put all rounds inside a circle 700 yards across. If they did special burst fire depressing barrel a few degrees each round under computer control they can splat 18 rounds plus into that circle on TOT.

Add in any accuracy enhancers and now you can pick a building window to put one shell in and save the rest.

 

I think if they found the ships too small with aiming painful that means the magnification is not sufficient. If you recall the optics used in warships of that era were HUGE, pick a little ship 25 miles on a clear day and ZOOOOM in enough to determine roughly range and speed of target. I don't know about you but optics that big are a little too heavy to lift. Surely computer graphics work can be programmed to replicate that visual.

Edited by xHeavy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[-NEM-]
Members
1,108 posts
13,358 battles
5 hours ago, xHeavy said:

Sure its "too accurate" a battery of 6 155's artillery on Paladin US Carriers will put all rounds inside a circle 700 yards across. If they did special burst fire depressing barrel a few degrees each round under computer control they can splat 18 rounds plus into that circle on TOT.

Add in any accuracy enhancers and now you can pick a building window to put one shell in and save the rest.

 

I think if they found the ships too small with aiming painful that means the magnification is not sufficient. If you recall the optics used in warships of that era were HUGE, pick a little ship 25 miles on a clear day and ZOOOOM in enough to determine roughly range and speed of target. I don't know about you but optics that big are a little too heavy to lift. Surely computer graphics work can be programmed to replicate that visual.

That was the decision they took during Alpha. I only begun to play when Open Beta went live (September 2015) so I don't know the details about that topic first-hand. Probably some of the Alpha Testers would come to explain that change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
410 posts
26 battles
On 12/10/2020 at 3:14 PM, hanesco said:

Almost everything you mentioned is correct as far as we know.

1) The dispersion ellipse is scaled accordingly to the ships. So, while it says 195m of dispersion for Pommern, in truth, the length of the horizontal axis is 390 m, really close to Fuso's length of 410 m. Just for fun, the horizontal axis of Pommern without aiming would be 880m @ 15km.

2) Your believe is correct. The percentage shown affect only the horizontal axis of the ellipse, at least the bonus given by Aiming System Mod1 (the only one verifiable in-port).

3) You got confused. I don't have Paint at hand (writing from a phone), so I will try to be clear:

Remember we get a projected ellipse over the water's surface, with the vertical dispersion being bigger than the horizontal dispersion. We can draw a zone inside that dispersion ellipse (the zone is an ellipse too) where aprox 50% of the shells will always go, and that ellipse longer axis will be the same as the horizontal dispersion axis we see in-game. The dimensions of that zone is literally a black-box (we only know the horizontal axis being the longest), and it seems to be used as a balance measure by WG, but normally it is still big enough to allow for overshoots and undershoots.

This, in other words, mean that the 50% you see in the wiki, refers to a zone that is alredy inside the dispersion ellipse, so no shells should fall out of this ellipse. This distribution helps concentrate even more shells in the center and make scoring hits easier without guaranteeing pinpoint accuracy. Remember, the horizontal axis is still 400m long for Pommern.

 

Aha... the double scaling to match ships makes everything make more sense (and kinda not when it comes to descriptions? - but that's WG's call.)

Thanks @hanesco

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.

×