Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
warheart1992

BB SAP and DDs; is this handholding really needed?

47 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,216
[KWF]
Members
5,809 posts
7,013 battles

Before anyone accuses me of being a BB fanboy, please take a look at my stats and notice that I'm actually pretty close to a DD main.

Spoiler

1488745697_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSStatsNumbersNA-warheart1992-Playerinfoandstats.png.32e2042f3eb9fabafe339bc7a2c39e2d.png

While I enjoy and appreciate the class and the challenges and capabilities it brings , I'm not some kind of class fanatic that will defend it to the end regardless if broken or not. With that in mind, someone has to talk about DDs and the ammo the new BBs fire, SAP.

So, SAP is offered with the new RM BBs as

Quote

Semi-armor-piercing shells instead of HE shells. These shells deal significant damage to weakly and moderately protected targets and ship parts, but do not cause fires.

That's all fair and dandy, Italian cruisers are generally well liked and even with the lack of HE got some nice potential, especially tier VIII+ upwards. They can be absolutely devastating when they catch an unaware DD and punish misplays.

Now, BB SAP is instead treated as an overpenetration when it hits a DD, dealing 10% of the max damage listed. In a recent community stream I asked Mr. Crysantos about this, to get the response that SAP alpha is higher than AP, so it's better to shoot at DDs. In theory this has some basis. Let's see Vittorio Veneto's SAP and AP max damage comparison

972001706_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSFittingTool.png.e97e4578f759e780307cfa8631f30081.png

So, SAP does 500 more damage than AP. On a 10% of a penetration of a DD, this translates into 50 extra damage. What's more, in contrast to HE you can't incapacitate modules easily, so that's another disadvantage. On top of this, you also get the shotgun accuracy of the new ships that has you move ever closer, thus in greater danger from DDs. And the cherry on top, the secondary suite of most of these ships is comprised primarily of 90mm guns, unable to penetrate DD plating. So a line with bad range, bad accuracy, bad secondaries and average concealment is made to be played the closest to DDs.

In my opinion this is a form of hand holding that's simply not needed. I'm not saying that BB SAP should oneshot DDs, but at least be on par and a bit ahead of HE in terms of effectiveness. The lack of accuracy, lack of incapacitations and fires can compensate for any alpha potential anyway.

Bottom line, not only does this make DDs very strong against a type of ammo that's supposed to be perfect to moderately and lightly skinned targets, but also one that takes character away from the upcoming BBs.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 23
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,042
[O_O]
[O_O]
Members
5,235 posts
22,853 battles
28 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Before anyone accuses me of being a BB fanboy, please take a look at my stats and notice that I'm actually pretty close to a DD main.

  Reveal hidden contents

1488745697_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSStatsNumbersNA-warheart1992-Playerinfoandstats.png.32e2042f3eb9fabafe339bc7a2c39e2d.png

While I enjoy and appreciate the class and the challenges and capabilities it brings , I'm not some kind of class fanatic that will defend it to the end regardless if broken or not. With that in mind, someone has to talk about DDs and the ammo the new BBs fire, SAP.

So, SAP is offered with the new RM BBs as

That's all fair and dandy, Italian cruisers are generally well liked and even with the lack of HE got some nice potential, especially tier VIII+ upwards. They can be absolutely devastating when they catch an unaware DD and punish misplays.

Now, BB SAP is instead treated as an overpenetration when it hits a DD, dealing 10% of the max damage listed. In a recent community I asked Mr. Crysantos about this, to get the response that SAP alpha is higher than AP, so it's better to shoot at DDs. In theory this has some basis. Let's see Vittorio Veneto's SAP and AP max damage comparison

972001706_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSFittingTool.png.e97e4578f759e780307cfa8631f30081.png

So, SAP does 500 more damage than AP. On a 10% of a penetration of a DD, this translates into 50 extra damage. What's more, in contrast to HE you can't incapacitate modules easily, so that's another disadvantage. On top of this, you also get the shotgun accuracy of the new ships that has you move ever closer, thus in greater danger from DDs. And the cherry on top, the secondary suite of most of these ships is comprised primarily of 90mm guns, unable to penetrate DD plating. So a line with bad range, bad accuracy, bad secondaries and average concealment is made to be played the closest to DDs.

In my opinion this is a form of hand holding that's simply not needed. I'm not saying that BB SAP should oneshot DDs, but at least be on par and a bit ahead of HE in terms of effectiveness. The lack of accuracy, lack of incapacitations and fires can compensate for any alpha potential anyway.

Bottom line, not only does this make DDs very strong against a type of ammo that's supposed to be perfect to moderately and lightly skinned targes, but also one that takes character away from the upcoming BBs.

As a fellow DD main, I support this position...

Spoiler

image.png.9cc53326266e1086ce73ea3319cff4a0.png

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,487
[BNKR]
[BNKR]
Members
2,819 posts
2,663 battles

Not sure why they made the 10% change. Maybe in testing they discovered full SAP damage against DDs was too strong?  But like you mentioned, Italian BBs have poor dispersion, and laughable secondaries.  I cant imagine BB SAP would be much worse than British BB HE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,264
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
29,888 posts
25,782 battles

WG was so scared about Battleship SAP dominating the game that they literally threw their entire library of books to reign Italian Battleships in.

 

Really bad accuracy - You think 1.8 Sigma Roma was inaccurate?  She's a sniper compared to the 1.6 Sigma ITA BB Line.

Poor gun ranges - Not an issue for Co-Op but it will be for PVP.  Tier X has 18.9km gun range.  Tier VIII is 18.1km.  Tier VII is 17.55km.  Tier VI is at 17.2km, but to be fair, USN BBs this tier are worse than that.

A number of ships with slower than typical reloads.  Tier IV & V, VII are at 33 seconds.  Tier VIII is at 34 seconds.  Tier IX is at 37 seconds.  The Tier X will be at 38 seconds but has a 4x4 main battery.

Worst Battleship Line against Destroyers.  Lots of them have 90mm secondaries with 15mm HE Pen, they can't even Pen the hulls of Tier VI Destroyers.  Both SAP & AP are capped against Destroyers.  This BB Line literally has very little defenses against Destroyers.

Terrible AA - I expected this because poor AA was a common characteristic of the Axis navies of WWII.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15,317
[ARGSY]
Members
23,419 posts
17,347 battles
25 minutes ago, CaptainKaitoGhost said:

Maybe in testing they discovered full SAP damage against DDs was too strong?

The Cavour has thirteen gun barrels at Tier 5 - I want you to imagine what would happen if a Cavour with Deadeye rolled good dispersion and landed a full salvo on a T4 DD. I'm absolutely unsurprised that they toned it down, and I say this as someone who both drives destroyers and who enjoys popping the little b:etc_swear:s like zits when I catch them out in a battleship.

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
966
Members
2,070 posts
12,694 battles
12 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Lots of them have 90mm secondaries with 15mm HE Pen, they can't even Pen the hulls of Tier VI Destroyers. 

This part bothers me a lot. I don't understand why WG is so obsessed with fixed rate HE pen when AP pen can vary so much. Would it really be the end of the world to give those guns 19mm pen ( or fenyang 19mm pen for that matter). WG has a bad habit of thinking inside the box when they should be thinking outside the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,916
[SGSS]
Members
5,777 posts
1 hour ago, warheart1992 said:

Before anyone accuses me of being a BB fanboy, please take a look at my stats and notice that I'm actually pretty close to a DD main.

  Reveal hidden contents

1488745697_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSStatsNumbersNA-warheart1992-Playerinfoandstats.png.32e2042f3eb9fabafe339bc7a2c39e2d.png

While I enjoy and appreciate the class and the challenges and capabilities it brings , I'm not some kind of class fanatic that will defend it to the end regardless if broken or not. With that in mind, someone has to talk about DDs and the ammo the new BBs fire, SAP.

So, SAP is offered with the new RM BBs as

That's all fair and dandy, Italian cruisers are generally well liked and even with the lack of HE got some nice potential, especially tier VIII+ upwards. They can be absolutely devastating when they catch an unaware DD and punish misplays.

Now, BB SAP is instead treated as an overpenetration when it hits a DD, dealing 10% of the max damage listed. In a recent community stream I asked Mr. Crysantos about this, to get the response that SAP alpha is higher than AP, so it's better to shoot at DDs. In theory this has some basis. Let's see Vittorio Veneto's SAP and AP max damage comparison

972001706_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSFittingTool.png.e97e4578f759e780307cfa8631f30081.png

So, SAP does 500 more damage than AP. On a 10% of a penetration of a DD, this translates into 50 extra damage. What's more, in contrast to HE you can't incapacitate modules easily, so that's another disadvantage. On top of this, you also get the shotgun accuracy of the new ships that has you move ever closer, thus in greater danger from DDs. And the cherry on top, the secondary suite of most of these ships is comprised primarily of 90mm guns, unable to penetrate DD plating. So a line with bad range, bad accuracy, bad secondaries and average concealment is made to be played the closest to DDs.

In my opinion this is a form of hand holding that's simply not needed. I'm not saying that BB SAP should oneshot DDs, but at least be on par and a bit ahead of HE in terms of effectiveness. The lack of accuracy, lack of incapacitations and fires can compensate for any alpha potential anyway.

Bottom line, not only does this make DDs very strong against a type of ammo that's supposed to be perfect to moderately and lightly skinned targets, but also one that takes character away from the upcoming BBs.

It still dons 10 percent damage to DD. Its no different than AP.

As far as hand holding DD have gotten a good year of buff so lets hold on off on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,916
[SGSS]
Members
5,777 posts
28 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

The Cavour has thirteen gun barrels at Tier 5 - I want you to imagine what would happen if a Cavour with Deadeye rolled good dispersion and landed a full salvo on a T4 DD. I'm absolutely unsurprised that they toned it down, and I say this as someone who both drives destroyers and who enjoys popping the little b:etc_swear:s like zits when I catch them out in a battleship.

Have you played that ship?  It cannot hit a breaching Blue Whale at 100 yards away.

SAP still does 10 percent damage only. Realistically its no different than AP 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,472 posts
13,117 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

WG was so scared about Battleship SAP dominating the game that they literally threw their entire library of books to reign Italian Battleships in.

 

Really bad accuracy - You think 1.8 Sigma Roma was inaccurate?  She's a sniper compared to the 1.6 Sigma ITA BB Line.

Poor gun ranges - Not an issue for Co-Op but it will be for PVP.  Tier X has 18.9km gun range.  Tier VIII is 18.1km.  Tier VII is 17.55km.  Tier VI is at 17.2km, but to be fair, USN BBs this tier are worse than that.

A number of ships with slower than typical reloads.  Tier IV & V, VII are at 33 seconds.  Tier VIII is at 34 seconds.  Tier IX is at 37 seconds.  The Tier X will be at 38 seconds but has a 4x4 main battery.

Worst Battleship Line against Destroyers.  Lots of them have 90mm secondaries with 15mm HE Pen, they can't even Pen the hulls of Tier VI Destroyers.  Both SAP & AP are capped against Destroyers.  This BB Line literally has very little defenses against Destroyers.

Terrible AA - I expected this because poor AA was a common characteristic of the Axis navies of WWII.

Any of the ships with 90mm secondaries also have either 135mm or 152mm secondaries in triple turrets. On the tech tree Italians they're pretty much normal for other nations secondaries. Roma got screwed over by getting the slow firing version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,117 posts
44,174 battles

In the high tier RM BB I have now, the secondaries seem to do significant damage to DDs. Either they penetrate the DDs another way or their dispersion pattern was changed. 

This may be what was done to compensate for the 10% damage only measure from BB SAP you describe. But I will look more into that as I play the ship more.

This may be a global change to the 90mm guns so you can see where that stands on other ships as well. The shells I see so far fly at the upper parts of the ship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,216
[KWF]
Members
5,809 posts
7,013 battles
Just now, SteelRain_Rifleman said:

In the high tier RM BB I have now, the secondaries seem to do significant damage to DDs. Either they penetrate the DDs another way or their dispersion pattern was changed. 

This may be what was done to compensate for the 10% damage only measure from BB SAP you describe. But I will look more into that as I play the ship more.

This may be a global change to the 90mm guns so you can see where that stands on other ships as well. The shells I see so far fly at the upper parts of the ship. 

Keep in mind that it might be the 152mm turrets doing the heavy work. So far I'm not aware of any change in the secondary BB formula for RM BBs, though you might just be noticing the "lazy" arcs low caliber shells tend to have. Which is true in that it can help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,183
Members
545 posts
20 battles

SAP absolutely has to be capped at 10% damage against DD's.  If it did full pen damage it would break the game.

To demonstrate this, we first need to look at why they capped BB AP shells at 10% damage.  This is because AP, if it did a full pen, used to do 30% damage to a DD.  For the average BB, this is comparable to about 20-25% of a DD's health - it is the effective equivalent of a citadel.  Now for AP this would happen when the DD angled sharply in or out to the incoming shells, because the AP has to go through sufficient thickness of armour to fuse the shell before it has the ability to full pen.  For a 406mm shell (for example), this would require 67mm of effective armour before the shell would fuse, or a minimum of 75° angle.  That is a very sharply angled DD.  This creates a quandary for the DD, do they stay broadside and eat a heap of overpens, or kite away (what should be the correct choice!), and eat less shells but potentially more damage.  There was no correct game play decision for the DD here, and the sheer amount of damage that was being done to DD's by BB's was considered game breaking enough to facilitate the change to all BB AP shells being capped at 10% damage.

Now let's compare this to SAP.  Firstly a few facts about this shell type.  SAP cannot overpen - it always deals full pen damage when it pens.  SAP deals more damage per shell than AP.  SAP can overmatch, using the same 14.3 rule as AP.

What does this mean for the interaction between BB SAP and a DD if there was no 10% cap?  Well 381mm SAP can overmatch 26mm armour - given that DD's have 19mm hulls and 13mm superstructure at tiers 8-10, this means that 381mm SAP is able to pen a DD's armour at any angle (note a Venezia can only overmatch 14mm of armour, meaning a DD who angles to a Venezia can only be penned through the superstructure, and will bounce the SAP shells off their hull).  Now remember, SAP can't overpen, unlike a BB AP shell that will often overpen due to either failing to pass through sufficient effective armour thickness to fuse the shell, or because it is passing through a thin DD and will detonate outside the ship on the far side due to the shell leaving the ship before the fuse timer expires.  Given that SAP can't overpen, and that a DD can't ricochet a BB SAP shell at any angle, EVERY SINGLE BB SAP SHELL THAT HITS A DD WOULD DO FULL PEN DAMAGE, REGARDLESS OF ANGLE, OR THE PART OF THE DD BEING HIT. 

Given a 381mm SAP shell damage of 12500, this would mean that every single shell that hit a DD, regardless of angle, would do 3750 damage.  If we look at a Shima for example, that has 21400 health with Survivability Expert, it would take only six BB SAP shell hits to kill the Shima from full health.  That is ignoring of course the fact that the BB would be highly unlikely to be the only ship attempting to damage the DD.  Let's also not forget that the tier 10 RM BB has 16 guns, so you'd only need a 37.5% hit rate to delete a DD, from full health, with one salvo.

Basically, due to the particular mechanics of SAP shells, BB SAP would completely break the game for DD's if it was able to do full pen damage.  There was simply no way that WG could create BB calibre SAP with this ability, which is why BB SAP only does 10% damage to DD's, and why this will never change.

  • Cool 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,216
[KWF]
Members
5,809 posts
7,013 battles
3 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

SAP absolutely has to be capped at 10% damage against DD's.  If it did full pen damage it would break the game.

To demonstrate this, we first need to look at why they capped BB AP shells at 10% damage.  This is because AP, if it did a full pen, used to do 30% damage to a DD.  For the average BB, this is comparable to about 20-25% of a DD's health - it is the effective equivalent of a citadel.  Now for AP this would happen when the DD angled sharply in or out to the incoming shells, because the AP has to go through sufficient thickness of armour to fuse the shell before it has the ability to full pen.  For a 406mm shell (for example), this would require 67mm of effective armour before the shell would fuse, or a minimum of 75° angle.  That is a very sharply angled DD.  This creates a quandary for the DD, do they stay broadside and eat a heap of overpens, or kite away (what should be the correct choice!), and eat less shells but potentially more damage.  There was no correct game play decision for the DD here, and the sheer amount of damage that was being done to DD's by BB's was considered game breaking enough to facilitate the change to all BB AP shells being capped at 10% damage.

Now let's compare this to SAP.  Firstly a few facts about this shell type.  SAP cannot overpen - it always deals full pen damage when it pens.  SAP deals more damage per shell than AP.  SAP can overmatch, using the same 14.3 rule as AP.

What does this mean for the interaction between BB SAP and a DD if there was no 10% cap?  Well 381mm SAP can overmatch 26mm armour - given that DD's have 19mm hulls and 13mm superstructure at tiers 8-10, this means that 381mm SAP is able to pen a DD's armour at any angle (note a Venezia can only overmatch 14mm of armour, meaning a DD who angles to a Venezia can only be penned through the superstructure, and will bounce the SAP shells off their hull).  Now remember, SAP can't overpen, unlike a BB AP shell that will often overpen due to either failing to pass through sufficient effective armour thickness to fuse the shell, or because it is passing through a thin DD and will detonate outside the ship on the far side due to the shell leaving the ship before the fuse timer expires.  Given that SAP can't overpen, and that a DD can't ricochet a BB SAP shell at any angle, EVERY SINGLE BB SAP SHELL THAT HITS A DD WOULD DO FULL PEN DAMAGE, REGARDLESS OF ANGLE, OR THE PART OF THE DD BEING HIT. 

Given a 381mm SAP shell damage of 12500, this would mean that every single shell that hit a DD, regardless of angle, would do 3750 damage.  If we look at a Shima for example, that has 21400 health with Survivability Expert, it would take only six BB SAP shell hits to kill the Shima from full health.  That is ignoring of course the fact that the BB would be highly unlikely to be the only ship attempting to damage the DD.  Let's also not forget that the tier 10 RM BB has 16 guns, so you'd only need a 37.5% hit rate to delete a DD, from full health, with one salvo.

Basically, due to the particular mechanics of SAP shells, BB SAP would completely break the game for DD's if it was able to do full pen damage.  There was simply no way that WG could create BB calibre SAP with this ability, which is why BB SAP only does 10% damage to DD's, and why this will never change.

If WG is in a position to program a specific type of shell to do 10% or 33% of damage to a specific enemy, then they can also tweak it to any percentage that helps. The point on AP stands somewhat, though keep in mind that SAP alpha is barely higher than AP alpha in that case and that the majority of high tier DDs are completely overmatchable by BB AP anyway, with very few exceptions.   I never argued for SAP to be doing full penetration damage, as I agree it would be too much. But in my opinion, an alpha capability a bit better than the HE alpha of ships with similar caliber would be reasonable, provided you can't set a fire, can't incapacitate modules easily and are doing all this in a very inaccurate platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12,597 posts
14,320 battles
2 hours ago, warheart1992 said:

Before anyone accuses me of being a BB fanboy, please take a look at my stats and notice that I'm actually pretty close to a DD main.

  Reveal hidden contents

1488745697_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSStatsNumbersNA-warheart1992-Playerinfoandstats.png.32e2042f3eb9fabafe339bc7a2c39e2d.png

While I enjoy and appreciate the class and the challenges and capabilities it brings , I'm not some kind of class fanatic that will defend it to the end regardless if broken or not. With that in mind, someone has to talk about DDs and the ammo the new BBs fire, SAP.

So, SAP is offered with the new RM BBs as

That's all fair and dandy, Italian cruisers are generally well liked and even with the lack of HE got some nice potential, especially tier VIII+ upwards. They can be absolutely devastating when they catch an unaware DD and punish misplays.

Now, BB SAP is instead treated as an overpenetration when it hits a DD, dealing 10% of the max damage listed. In a recent community stream I asked Mr. Crysantos about this, to get the response that SAP alpha is higher than AP, so it's better to shoot at DDs. In theory this has some basis. Let's see Vittorio Veneto's SAP and AP max damage comparison

972001706_Screenshot_2021-02-21WoWSFittingTool.png.e97e4578f759e780307cfa8631f30081.png

So, SAP does 500 more damage than AP. On a 10% of a penetration of a DD, this translates into 50 extra damage. What's more, in contrast to HE you can't incapacitate modules easily, so that's another disadvantage. On top of this, you also get the shotgun accuracy of the new ships that has you move ever closer, thus in greater danger from DDs. And the cherry on top, the secondary suite of most of these ships is comprised primarily of 90mm guns, unable to penetrate DD plating. So a line with bad range, bad accuracy, bad secondaries and average concealment is made to be played the closest to DDs.

In my opinion this is a form of hand holding that's simply not needed. I'm not saying that BB SAP should oneshot DDs, but at least be on par and a bit ahead of HE in terms of effectiveness. The lack of accuracy, lack of incapacitations and fires can compensate for any alpha potential anyway.

Bottom line, not only does this make DDs very strong against a type of ammo that's supposed to be perfect to moderately and lightly skinned targets, but also one that takes character away from the upcoming BBs.

The true problem is the severe nerfing of BB secondary guns with the skill Rework. So now other means are getting added to attempt to take their place that could turn out worse for DDs and CLs than secondary guns ever were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,916
[SGSS]
Members
5,777 posts
18 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

Any of the ships with 90mm secondaries also have either 135mm or 152mm secondaries in triple turrets. On the tech tree Italians they're pretty much normal for other nations secondaries. Roma got screwed over by getting the slow firing version.

I experimented with secondary Roma.

It was fun having 10. something sec.  Got a lot of hits but did basically did no damage.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,472 posts
13,117 battles
3 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

I experimented with secondary Roma.

It was fun having 10. something sec.  Got a lot of hits but did basically did no damage.

 

They don't get the German Special pen rules, so I'd imagine that would be the case. They're really just anti-DD guns.

The tech tree Italians start with an 8 second reload on the 152's, so you're likely getting 6 or 9 152mm rounds every 8 seconds. Which is not too different than from normal non-secondary BB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,877
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,948 posts
15,779 battles
6 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

SAP absolutely has to be capped at 10% damage against DD's.  If it did full pen damage it would break the game.

I'm pretty bad at maths, but I think I'm right in saying that there are numbers between 10 and 33 for damage proportion. 

Given 33% hits from Thunderer HE do 2,700 rather than the 1,250 of current 15in SAP, and even Montana's 'normal' HE does 1,880 there's clearly scope to increase SAP damage. 

Having so little practical difference between ammunition choice anti-DD is bad game design, especially as the original intention was to have significantly higher SAP damage - the first draft of the Italian battleships had 14,000 SAP vs 12,000 AP so at least you'd get 200 instead of 50 more damage anti-DD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,559 posts
10,681 battles

I was also very disappointed how underwhelming BB SAP was against DD. So far I switched to just using AP and not really noticing much of a difference. On other ships the SAP feels like even more of a dice roll than just spamming AP at all angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
966
Members
2,070 posts
12,694 battles
7 minutes ago, mofton said:

I'm pretty bad at maths, but I think I'm right in saying that there are numbers between 10 and 33 for damage proportion. 

Given 33% hits from Thunderer HE do 2,700 rather than the 1,250 of current 15in SAP, and even Montana's 'normal' HE does 1,880 there's clearly scope to increase SAP damage. 

Having so little practical difference between ammunition choice anti-DD is bad game design, especially as the original intention was to have significantly higher SAP damage - the first draft of the Italian battleships had 14,000 SAP vs 12,000 AP so at least you'd get 200 instead of 50 more damage anti-DD. 

This is another example of WG not thinking outside the box when they should be. They focus on making everything follow the same equation even when it makes balancing a mess instead of just giving these ships a special damage system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,216
[KWF]
Members
5,809 posts
7,013 battles
13 minutes ago, mofton said:

I'm pretty bad at maths, but I think I'm right in saying that there are numbers between 10 and 33 for damage proportion. 

Given 33% hits from Thunderer HE do 2,700 rather than the 1,250 of current 15in SAP, and even Montana's 'normal' HE does 1,880 there's clearly scope to increase SAP damage. 

Having so little practical difference between ammunition choice anti-DD is bad game design, especially as the original intention was to have significantly higher SAP damage - the first draft of the Italian battleships had 14,000 SAP vs 12,000 AP so at least you'd get 200 instead of 50 more damage anti-DD. 

To expand on this, let's pick the 380mm of the Richelieu and Alsace and their HE damage. Max is 5400, so on the 33% full penetration you get 1782, so 1780 HE damage.

Now onto Veneto, Lepanto, Colombo that get the 1,250 damage for a 10% "penetration" with SAP. This time at a 16,5% damage percentage, half of the full penetration of HE you get 2062,5 alpha. And that without breaking modules or setting fires that can also affect spotting. Even that might be too much, but your point stands that you can play with these values until you get the correct one, in that case the damage value that makes BB SAP a reason to switch to without blowing out DDs left and right in a few hits.

 

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,680
[HINON]
Members
8,696 posts
12,693 battles
2 hours ago, CaptainKaitoGhost said:

Not sure why they made the 10% change. Maybe in testing they discovered full SAP damage against DDs was too strong?

have you........not seen what the Italian CRUISERS SAP does to DDs? now imagine the 15" SAP being able to do the 33% per pen on a DD, 3 shells would be enough to make that DD never be able to show itself again in that match because one well placed secondary shell would be enough to kill it and thats if those 3 shells didnt nuke it out of existence, 15" SAP shells with 33% pen on DDs would be the equal to throwing mini nukes at the DDs

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,183
Members
545 posts
20 battles
14 minutes ago, mofton said:

I'm pretty bad at maths, but I think I'm right in saying that there are numbers between 10 and 33 for damage proportion. 

Given 33% hits from Thunderer HE do 2,700 rather than the 1,250 of current 15in SAP, and even Montana's 'normal' HE does 1,880 there's clearly scope to increase SAP damage. 

Having so little practical difference between ammunition choice anti-DD is bad game design, especially as the original intention was to have significantly higher SAP damage - the first draft of the Italian battleships had 14,000 SAP vs 12,000 AP so at least you'd get 200 instead of 50 more damage anti-DD. 

A DD would saturate after the first shell or two from that Thunderer, and then the HE shells would be doing 16.5% damage, or 1353 damage, which is actually less than the 1490 damage of a 10% capped Thunderer AP shell.  Of course, the HE shell would be breaking stuff and setting fires, making it the optimal choice, but it's still doing less damage after the first couple of shells.

This makes 10% SAP damage to DD's a pretty reasonable figure at which to set the cap, given it's quite comparable to other shell types.

Also, WG intend for BB SAP to do heavy but consistent damage to angled BB's and cruisers, which is supposed to be the strength of the ships.  Whether they've succeeded on that front is a discussion for another thread, but given that intended strength, it would seem that making RM BB's particularly strong against DD's as well would mean they would be intended to be strong against all ship types, something that would raise pretty obvious balance concerns.  As it is, they are comparable to most other BB's when it comes to effectiveness against DD's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,916
[SGSS]
Members
5,777 posts
37 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

They don't get the German Special pen rules, so I'd imagine that would be the case. They're really just anti-DD guns.

The tech tree Italians start with an 8 second reload on the 152's, so you're likely getting 6 or 9 152mm rounds every 8 seconds. Which is not too different than from normal non-secondary BB's.

Could interesting to have a full sec BB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×