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

Why is Shikishima's AA so much better than Satsuma's?

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles

Shikishima:

16 x 3 25mm triple mounts
24 x 2 40mm twin mounts
10 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 102dps with 85% hit chance (2.13 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 438dps with 75% hit chance (9.13 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 235dps with 75% hit chance (11.75 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1540
Number of explosions: 10 (1 per gun)
Hit probability: 75%
Action zone: 3.5-5.8km
 

Satsuma:

30 x 3 25mm triple mounts
20 x 2 40mm twin mounts
14 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 196dps with 85% hit chance (2.18 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 371dps with 75% hit chance (9.28 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 161dps with 75% hit chance (5.75 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1400
Number of explosions: 7
Hit probability: 75%
Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Is four more 40mm guns really worth 67dps?  How do four more 100mm barrels result in 74 less dps, 3 less flak clouds and do 140 less damage per flak cloud?

EDIT:

Others with the same guns:

Kii:

17 x 3 25mm triple mounts
16 x 2 40mm twin mounts
8 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 118dps with 85% hit chance (2.31 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 309dps with 75% hit chance (9.656 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 203dps with 75% hit chance (12.69 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1470
Number of explosions: 8 (1 per gun)
Hit probability: 75%
Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Yoshino:

24 x 1 25mm single mounts
20 x 3 25mm triple mounts
12 x 2 40mm twin mounts
8 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 217dps with 85% hit chance (2.58 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 221dps with 90% hit chance (9.21 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 193dps with 90% hit chance (12.06 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1540
Number of explosions: 9 (1.13 per gun)
Hit probability: 90%

 

Yoshino:

24 x 1 25mm single mounts
20 x 3 25mm triple mounts
12 x 2 40mm twin mounts
8 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 217dps with 85% hit chance (2.58 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 221dps with 90% hit chance (9.21 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 193dps with 90% hit chance (12.06 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1540
Number of explosions: 8 (1 per gun)
Hit probability: 90%

Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Zao:

20 x 1 25mm single mounts
11 x 3 25mm triple mounts
9 x 2 40mm twin mounts
6 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 151dps with 85% hit chance (2.85 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 172dps with 90% hit chance (9.56 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 151dps with 90% hit chance (12.58 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1540
Number of explosions: 6 (1 per gun)
Hit probability: 90%

Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Ibuki:

28 x 1 25mm single mounts
6 x 3 25mm triple mounts
6 x 2 40mm twin mounts
4 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 154dps with 85% hit chance (3.35 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 119dps with 90% hit chance (9.92 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 105dps with 90% hit chance (13.13 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1470
Number of explosions: 5 (1.25 per gun)
Hit probability: 90%

Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Haurgumo:

16 x 1 25mm single mounts
6 x 2 40mm twin mounts
5 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 63dps with 95% hit chance (3.94 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 123dps with 100% hit chance (10.25 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 133dps with 100% hit chance (13.3 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1540
Number of explosions: 6 (0.6 per gun)
Hit probability: 100%

Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

Kitakaze:

18 x 1 25mm single mounts
6 x 2 40mm twin mounts
4 x 2 100mm twin mounts

Continuous damage

  • Short range 2.5km: 74dps with 95% hit chance (4.11 per gun)
  • Medium range 3.5km: 123dps with 100% hit chance (10.25 per gun)
  • Long range 5.8km: 109dps with 100% hit chance (13.63 per gun)

Damage by shell explosions: 1470
Number of explosions: 5 (0.63 per gun)
Hit probability: 100%

Action zone: 3.5-5.8km

 

OK, after adding in the DPS per gun it looks like it more or less adds up, except for the DPS done by Satsuma's fourteen 100mm guns being about half that of all other 100mm armed IJN ships.  The number of shell explosions is also low, being more similar to the DD ratio than the cruiser or BB ratio.  The explosion damage seems to be tier based with Tier VIII Akizuki doing 1400 , Tier IX Kitakaze, Azuma and Ibuki doing 1470 and Tier X Zao, Yoshino, Harugumo and Shikishima doing 1540 .  The odd ones being Kii at Tier VIII doing Tier IX's damage and Satsuma at Tier X doing Tier VIII's damage.

Edited by Helstrem
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[PISD]
Members
1,994 posts
6,542 battles

actual number of guns means nothing in this game, the final number is based on balance. Which is why Halland have better AA than many cruiser and BB.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,581 posts
2,011 battles
12 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

actual number of guns means nothing in this game, the final number is based on balance. Which is why Halland have better AA than many cruiser and BB.

No, its relative, to both the tier and the ship type. However, the AA of a ship tier doesn't make comparisons only within that tier.

Shikishima might also have Yamato's late-war radar guidance.

Edited by black_hull4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
509
[KAPPA]
Members
1,555 posts
8,768 battles

Gotta admit, that is pretty darn strange. I had to check my Shikishima and the 'loaned' Satsuma, which I have setup with identical secondary/AA builds (when you have 21 skill points, it's doable) and yeah, Shikishima packs more punch with mine throwing 11 flak bursts per salvo vs. 8 per for Satsuma, continuous dmg is also heavily weighted in Shikishima's favor.

3 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

No, its relative, to both the tier and the ship type. 

Shikishima might also have Yamato's late-war radar guidance.

Shikishima and Satsuma both have identical radar equipment, which is actually more advanced than Yamato's late war gear, it's pretty much either prototype stuff or projected improvements. The same sets can be seen on Zao and Hizen as well.

Edited by CaptHarlock_222

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles
32 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

actual number of guns means nothing in this game, the final number is based on balance. Which is why Halland have better AA than many cruiser and BB.

 

20 minutes ago, black_hull4 said:

No, its relative, to both the tier and the ship type. However, the AA of a ship tier doesn't make comparisons only within that tier.

Shikishima might also have Yamato's late-war radar guidance.

I edited the opening post with more data.  The numbers seem to line up pretty well for all ships armed with the 25mm, 40mm and 100mm guns, except Satsuma gets about half the long range DPS per barrel that the others do, Satsuma gets fewer explosions per barrel than even the DDs do, Satsuma's explosions do Tier VIII damage as seen on Akizuki and Tier VIII Kii's explosions do Tier IX damage as seen on Kitakaze and Ibuki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,731
[KIA-C]
Members
3,824 posts
16,790 battles

I guess in the world of "what if", CV wouldnt have happened and BB would focus on their guns . lul

 

Or it's just WG wanted to keep the trend of IJN ship have bad AA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,477 posts
4,779 battles

Reminds me of when I made a fuss about Indianapolis and Pensacola having less AA range than every other ship. But at least I could be told that in reality they were older models or actually couldn't reach as far. 

 

But yeah reasons. Those 4 extra 40mm is less flak and Satsuma focuses more on close range AA instead. I don't know how much close range matters in the grand scheme of things though outside of rockets these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,466
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,935 posts
22,964 battles

Balance is king, but WG does try to be consistent about these things.

Here, Satsuma is listed as using Type 97 guns, while Shikishima has Type 98. Does that line up with a 2x difference in long range effectiveness per barrel? Heck if I know, but at least it gives them some kind of cover story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-MN-]
Members
17 posts
4,001 battles

Caliber doesn't matter in this game, especially in AA. World of Warships has no logic - except in advertising on YouTube - the answer to anything is always the same: "Because Wargaming wants it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
365
[Y0L0]
Members
616 posts
26,078 battles
On 6/23/2021 at 11:32 PM, Karstodes said:

actual number of guns means nothing in this game, the final number is based on balance. Which is why Halland have better AA than many cruiser and BB.

Cause that's really balanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,698 posts
6,719 battles

OK, here is another odd one.  Ibuki's A hull's long range AA is provided by four twin mounts of 100mm Type 98 guns which give it a long range continuous DPS of 112.  Upgrading to the B hull adds some 40mm mid range guns but does not change the long range AA at all, still being four twin mounts of 100mm Type 98 guns, but now they provide a reduced continuous DPS of 105.

Why?  It is such a small difference and Ibuki is an underperforming Tier IX, so why the small nerf to its long range AA when upgrading to the B hull?

Edited by Helstrem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×