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

Roma, Dead Eye Demonstrated

90 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

41,661
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
12,480 posts
10,567 battles

y6HZtNu.gif
180 AP shells fired at a stationary Fuso bot with no camouflage at 15km.  Shots are coming in from right to left, effectively having the Fuso bow-tank the incoming rounds.

  • Cool 27
  • Thanks 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,662
[HINON]
Members
8,680 posts
12,670 battles

men want only one thing and its disgusting

what men want: actually accurate Roma

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,830
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,812 posts
4,278 battles

Interesting, it really seems to affect the vertical dispersion far more than horizontal dispersion. In fact the horizontal dispersion doesn't really seem to improve, at least in this sample.  Either way, while it's noticeable improvement looking at it I'm betting the average player won't notice much difference. Great work as always.

Also part of me really wants to try and write some code to be able to formally calculate the differences between the two, but that's a project for when I have more free time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
376
[-ICE-]
Members
506 posts

Id settle for a pen or two per game not every single one being a overpen.  Its been a prob forever you see other BB's knocking the hell out of everyone with cits every salvo and the Roma just gets overpens constantly and wow wont fix it

Edited by CRZY_TRAIN
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,002
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,705 posts
4,771 battles
5 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

Interesting, it really seems to affect the vertical dispersion far more than horizontal dispersion

Well yeah.  The major axis is a lot longer than the minor so would be affected more.  (It's a percent buff.)

Perhaps someone will math the % effect on the dispersion ellipse area ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,661
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
12,480 posts
10,567 battles
1 minute ago, iDuckman said:

Perhaps someone will math the % effect on the dispersion ellipse area ...

Way ahead of you.  Tune in to my Angry Youtuber review of the battleship skills.

  • Cool 7
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,151
[KWF]
Members
5,738 posts
6,985 battles

The one positive Deadeye change that should stay as it is, especially considering Roma isn't your run of the mill 20km+ sniper....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,002
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,705 posts
4,771 battles
3 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Way ahead of you.  Tune in to my Angry Youtuber review of the battleship skills.

Eagerly awaiting the sound of shattering crowdwisdom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,387
[WOLFC]
Members
2,533 posts
10,981 battles

The true reasoning behind WG creating Dead Eye is revealed: they hope to sell more Romas as part of the Italian BB hype. :Smile_trollface:

Edited by Nevermore135
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,830
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,812 posts
4,278 battles
12 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Well yeah.  The major axis is a lot longer than the minor so would be affected more.  (It's a percent buff.)

Yeah, but there's really no change I can see. If anything it looks worse. Though without actually counting the points it's hard to say. You'd expect a bigger change on the vertical axis, but still something on the X. But after staring at it for a minute I don't see a difference in horizontal.

It does look like things are more consistent around the center with Deadeye, which is what matters. Looking forward to seeing what Mouse has for area, because without counting dots I'm essentially guessing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[KRAB]
Members
910 posts
7,402 battles

Knowing WG Deadeye somehow has a different effect on the vertical dispersion of every ship using some random hidden number. 

I really think that the vertical dispersion should be given in game along with the horizontal dispersion.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
656
[FAE]
Members
2,622 posts
3,662 battles

Also if you take deadeye do you take concealment expert? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,387
[WOLFC]
Members
2,533 posts
10,981 battles
4 minutes ago, BlailBlerg said:

Also if you take deadeye do you take concealment expert? 

The two skills synergize well. Dead Eye uses the concealment value displayed in port when you enter battle.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,661
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
12,480 posts
10,567 battles
18 minutes ago, BlailBlerg said:

What is this supposed to show? 

The differences between taking Dead Eye and not taking Dead Eye on Roma's main battery dispersion.  No more, no less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
376
[-ICE-]
Members
506 posts

lol  alot especially if you dont broadside her to fire..  haha

6 shells every 30 seconds unless you broadside her then 9.  and most of those miss and the ones that connect get overpens every time... wish it was a lie but its the honest truth..  lol

Edited by CRZY_TRAIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,661
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
12,480 posts
10,567 battles
4 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

How many battles, on average, would it take a Roma to fire 180 shells?

One to two, depending.  That's ten minutes of sustained firing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
376
[-ICE-]
Members
506 posts

Thats reaching.. id say min 4 games or more depends how quick the other BB's cit her or cruisers set it on fire to be sunk which is alot that ship burns like hell even with full fire prev skills and all.  The ship needs a little love but wow dont seem to like the Roma to much  lol

Edited by CRZY_TRAIN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,248
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,709 posts
21,754 battles
1 hour ago, iDuckman said:

Perhaps someone will math the % effect on the dispersion ellipse area ...

That much is easy. An ellipse that shrinks to 90% of its original X and Y dimensions has 81% of the original area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,661
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
12,480 posts
10,567 battles
1 minute ago, Edgecase said:

That much is easy. An ellipse that shrinks to 90% of its original X and Y dimensions has 81% of the original area.

The change between vertical and horizontal dispersion is not 1:1.  Vertical dispersion is really wonky in its calculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,248
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,709 posts
21,754 battles
12 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

The change between vertical and horizontal dispersion is not 1:1.  Vertical dispersion is really wonky in its calculation.

The latest model I've seen uses a perfectly elliptical dispersion area projected perpendicular to the plane of shell travel at the point of impact with the water surface. Diagonally reclined like a cornhole board, if you will. It explains the existence of a single vertical dispersion parameter, the differences in elongation patterns at different ranges, and a previously unexpected vertical dispersion compression resulting from increased maximum range (totally counterintuitive, but apparently reproducible). With respect to that ellipse, the calculation is nice and straightforward.

Edited by Edgecase
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
701
[TIMT]
Members
1,332 posts
4,871 battles
3 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

The latest model I've seen uses a perfectly elliptical dispersion area projected perpendicular to the plane of shell travel at the point of impact with the water surface. Diagonally reclined like a cornhole board, if you will. It explains the existence of a single vertical dispersion parameter, the differences in elongation patterns at different ranges, and a previously unexpected vertical dispersion compression resulting from increased maximum range (totally counterintuitive, but apparently reproducible). With respect to that ellipse, the calculation is nice and straightforward.

Yeah that model was rather interesting. For those who missed it on reddit, apparently the dispersion ellipse is drawn on a plane perpendicular to the shell travel vector. Then you scale the vertical axis by a factor which in turn depends on distance.

When you think about it, it makes total sense: Go outside at night on a dark field and shine a focused flashlight on something far away. The circular aperture will project a light cone, which will leave this very long elliptical pattern on the ground. To avoid that, WG scaled the vertical component, to get smaller the shallower the angle of impact is. My suspicion is that deadeye somehow interacts with this scaling factor in an unintended way, thereby improving vertical dispersion more than it should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×