Hindenberg vs Zao : Accuracy & AP Effectiveness

[Bronco]

Having both ships in my port, I decided to take them both into a training room and verify their accuracy and AP effectiveness. 

 

Setup:

I didn't think shooting at the broadside of any ship would be very indicative of the ship's accuracy therefore I decided to setup the target ship with its bow directly pointing to the broadside of the test ship. In naval terms, this is what is known as crossing the T. I elected to use the Yamato and the Montana as targets for two reasons. They both have a lot of armor and a lot of health. Both test ships were equipped with the same upgrades with regard to improved accuracy.

 

Range: 

Long enough to fully test the accuracy of both ships but not too long that it would be hard to detect the targets. Therefore, I selected 16km since I also wanted to test the effectiveness of the AP rounds. 

 

Aiming Point:

Just above the second turret. Using shell tracking, this aiming point produced a consistent landing area that was midway down the hull of the target.

 

Enough with the details, onto the results....

 

Hindenberg vs Yamato:

Rounds fired: 1353

Hits: 872 

Hit %: 64.44

Penetrations: 225

Pen %: 16.63

Damage: 99490

Avg Damage / Pen: 442

Effective AP DPM (standard ROF of 6 RPM): 6 x 12 x .1663 x 442 = 5292

Effective AP DPM (upgraded ROF of 6.8 RPM): 6.8 x 12 x .1663 x 442 = 5998

 

Salvo Distribution : A count of how many rounds hit per salvos

12	11	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1
1	1	4	13	9	8	6	3

 

Hindenberg vs Montana:

Rounds fired: 972

Hits: 612

Hit %: 62.96

Penetrations: 305

Pen %: 31.38

Damage: 185929

Avg Damage / Pen: 610

Effective AP DPM (standard ROF of 6 RPM): 6 x 12 x .3138 x 610 = 13782

Effective AP DPM (upgraded ROF of 6.8 RPM): 6.8 x 12 x .1663 x 442 = 15619

 

Salvo Distribution : A count of how many rounds hit per salvos

12	11	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1
	1	6	13	23	18	13	3	3		1

 

Zao vs Yamato:

Rounds fired: 1032

Hits: 735

Hit %: 71.22

Penetrations: 217

Pen %: 21.03

Damage: 86623

Avg Damage / Pen: 399

Effective AP DPM (standard ROF of 4.4 RPM): 4.4 x 12 x .2103 x 399 = 4430

Effective AP DPM (upgraded ROF of 5.0 RPM): 5.0 x 12 x .2103 x 399 = 5034

 

Salvo Distribution : A count of how many rounds hit per salvos

12	11	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1
	4	10	27	25	11	3	2	2

 

Zao vs Montana:

Rounds fired: 948

Hits: 631

Hit %: 66.56

Penetrations: 354

Pen %: 37.34

Damage: 187223

Avg Damage / Pen: 528

Effective AP DPM (standard ROF of 4.4 RPM): 4.4 x 12 x .3734 x 528 = 10410

Effective AP DPM (upgraded ROF of 5.0 RPM): 5.0 x 12 x .3734 x 528 = 11829

 

Salvo Distribution : A count of how many rounds hit per salvos

12	11	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1
	3	8	17	20	8	10	6	1	1	1

 

Conclusions:

For both ships, the Yamato was easier to hit but harder to damage. In general, the Zao is considerably more accurate than the Hindenberg (despite both ships having the same dispersion of 145)  but the increase in ROF and AP damage tips the scales in favor of the Hindenberg for effective AP DPM. As shown by the salvo distribution, the Zao has a tighter grouping around 8 hits/salvo than the Hindenberg (although I only started to record salvo hits for the Hindenberg half way through the Yamato test), but the Hindenberg wins the prize for the only 12/12 salvo against the Yamato. (Editorial Note: It was a really, really tight grouping. So tight I knew within a second it was going to be a 12/12).

 

Overall, I believe the Zao would serve best as an accurate flamethrower (thanks to its accuracy and a very high 22% fire chance with the demo skill on the captain) while the Hindenberg can ditch out adequate damage with its AP rounds at range and up close (thanks to its accuracy, ROF and increased AP damage).

 

Finally, comparing the two ships on their effective AP DPM (averaged over both targets), Hindenberg is 28% more effective than the Zao. 

 

I hope you all find this helpful. I plan to do some more testing along these lines with other ships. At the moment, I'm limited to the ships in my port but when the PTS goes live again, I might put up a poll and let you all decide which ships should be put to the test.

 

Regards,

Bronco

 

[suleiman71]

That isn't the only factor in Hindenburg vs. Zao.  I think you should focus on solely Hindenburg vs. Zao also, to see which ship is actually better.

[Bronco]

That isn't the only factor in Hindenburg vs. Zao.  I think you should focus on solely Hindenburg vs. Zao also, to see which ship is actually better.

 

I wanted to mainly focus on the accuracy and AP effectiveness since those are easy to test in a controlled manner.

[userz123]

German HE so bad tho...

[Dr_Venture]

German HE so bad tho...

 

Which makes them hard to use in the higher tiers where you are sometimes forced to us HE against heavily armored targets at long range.

 

The high tiers are all about range these days, nobody wants to close due to the high repair bills. 

[suleiman71]

German HE so bad tho...

 

11% * 12 * 6.0

 

24% * 12 * 4.4

 

I think Zao will be able to set around the same amount of fires as Hindenburg can. 

[Bronco]

German HE so bad tho...

 

I agree. Also, HE would be very difficult to test because of limited HE damage available per ship and you can't stack fires in the same area. If someone can think of a controlled manner to test HE, I would love to hear your ideas and be willing to carry out the testing if the method is reasonable.

[BlazerSparta]

This is kind of biased in favour of Hindenburg. Looking at raw stats, there's no doubt that Hindenburg wins hand down in the AP department, but AP alone does not make a ship. You can't make a general comparison just based on AP.

 

For example, Zao has better HE DPM and fire chance, better stealth, and better armour on paper, off the top of my head.

[suleiman71]

 

I agree. Also, HE would be very difficult to test because of limited HE damage available per ship and you can't stack fires in the same area. If someone can think of a controlled manner to test HE, I would love to hear your ideas and be willing to carry out the testing if the method is reasonable.

 

I'd suggest shooting in the three easiest zones to catch fire, the bow, midsection, and stern. There's rumored to be 5 sections where fire can be set but nobody has been able to prove it. 

 

Once a zone catches on fire, go to the next zone.

[Dr_Venture]

This is kind of biased in favour of Hindenburg. Looking at raw stats, there's no doubt that Hindenburg wins hand down in the AP department, but AP alone does not make a ship. You can't make a general comparison just based on AP.

 

For example, Zao has better HE DPM and fire chance, better stealth, and better armour on paper, off the top of my head.

 

Stupid good torpedo launchers to boot. Yet the Hind get's those criminal torpedo arcs.

[Bronco]

 

11% * 12 * 6.0

 

24% * 12 * 4.4

 

I think Zao will be able to set around the same amount of fires as Hindenburg can. 

 

Without the demo skill, it's 11% vs 19% for base fire chance so the numbers are closer than you think. I still think the Zoa would win the HE battle, given its higher base HE damage and fire chance. Just not sure how to test it in a controlled manner.

[ryuukei8569]

 

I wanted to mainly focus on the accuracy and AP effectiveness since those are easy to test in a controlled manner.

 

Better off testing against cruisers then, you spend around a thousand rounds on each ship, must have been a full 20 minutes worth of firing you have done there. Also you probably shouldn't have used Yamato and montana, because this forum will now be quickly overrun with Yamato OP, Montana weak debate. Just sayin, should have used different ships. Also its Zao, not Zoa

[Bronco]

This is kind of biased in favour of Hindenburg. Looking at raw stats, there's no doubt that Hindenburg wins hand down in the AP department, but AP alone does not make a ship. You can't make a general comparison just based on AP.

 

For example, Zao has better HE DPM and fire chance, better stealth, and better armour on paper, off the top of my head.

 

I regret the title of the post. It wasn't meant as an overall comparison, just looking at base accuracy and AP (since mainly that's all the Hindenberg has going for it). So in a sense, this test/analysis is a bit basis towards the Hindenberg. It wasn't my intention.

[Skramjet]

 

I regret the title of the post. It wasn't meant as an overall comparison, just looking at base accuracy and AP (since mainly that's all the Hindenberg has going for it). So in a sense, this test/analysis is a bit basis towards the Hindenberg. It wasn't my intention.

 

You can edit posts, you are aware?

Make sure to use full editor.

[suleiman71]

 

Without the demo skill, it's 11% vs 19% for base fire chance so the numbers are closer than you think. I still think the Zoa would win the HE battle, given its higher base HE damage and fire chance. Just not sure how to test it in a controlled manner.

 

Consider this. Not sure if it'd work though. 

 

 

I'd suggest shooting in the three easiest zones to catch fire, the bow, midsection, and stern. There's rumored to be 5 sections where fire can be set but nobody has been able to prove it. 

 

Once a zone catches on fire, go to the next zone.

 

[Bronco]

 

Better off testing against cruisers then, you spend around a thousand rounds on each ship, must have been a full 20 minutes worth of firing you have done there. Also you probably shouldn't have used Yamato and montana, because this forum will now be quickly overrun with Yamato OP, Montana weak debate. Just sayin, should have used different ships. Also its Zao, not Zoa

 

Thanks for picking that out. I'm working on just 3 hours of sleep. My bad. I picked the Montana and Yamato because it takes time to setup the test ship at the same distance, etc. I wanted to get the most testing with the same target therefore I elected for the T10 BBs. And yes, the Montana seems a bit weaker on armor.

[suleiman71]

 

Thanks for picking that out. I'm working on just 3 hours of sleep. My bad. I picked the Montana and Yamato because it takes time to setup the test ship at the same distance, etc. I wanted to get the most testing with the same target therefore I elected for the T10 BBs. And yes, the Montana seems a bit weaker on armor.

 

Montana has the same thickness of belt armor as Yamato, it's just organized in a different and less effective manner.

[Bronco]

 

Consider this. Not sure if it'd work though. 

 

 

 

Yes, I was thinking along the same lines. Hit the usual 3 zones until it catches fire. Just not sure with bot how fire works. Do they repair or do they burn until some base extinguisher time elapse. It could turn out to be a very lengthy test.

[Elysion]

Hindenburg has roughly the same fires-over-time chances as mogami taking rate of fire and number of guns into account. Its likley to be more accurate so probably slightly better in the long run.

 

Its HE is NOT BAD i wish people would stop claiming that. It can do just fine spamming HE when ap is not an option for it. Sure its not 'as' good as zao, but people act like its some sort of ap specialist. Its merely better at ap, while zao is better at HE. Zao still uses AP when it can, and is only forced to use HE when it cant get those juicy hits, and hindenburg is going to operate by the same rule, as is every single cruiser played smartly. AP when you can, HE otherwise.

[Deterrumeversor]

I will give the OP a thumbs up for this test.

It took a lot of time and patience to perform...

 

Surprisingly though, as OP points out; both are supposed to have the same dispersion, but one is clearly more accurate than the other...

And that same one clearly has better penetration capability..

[Bronco]

I will give the OP a thumbs up for this test.

It took a lot of time and patience to perform...

 

Surprisingly though, as OP points out; both are supposed to have the same dispersion, but one is clearly more accurate than the other...

And that same one clearly has better penetration capability..

 

Yes, that is a mystery. I had to double check it because when I first got my Hindenberg on Monday and mounted the accuracy upgrade to it, I noticed a difference in the dispersion in favor of the Zao.  When I ran the numbers, it confirmed what I had seen but during my write up, I wanted to quote the difference then noticed they are now the same. Therefore, I suspect that they are in fact different but they are listed incorrectly in the game. Because the numbers do not lie and the salvo distribution supports this as well. During the test, I could actually tell that the Zao's groupings were tighter. 

[Elysion]

Since their velocities and massess are different the arcs are going to vary. Depending on the angle the shell comes in at based on the range, certain arcs may 'see' a narrower target than others. That could account for hit rate differences.

 

[Compassghost]

For actual penetration on the Hindenburg, the proper place is to aim right at the middle of the ship, above the lowest portion of the belt, at any range beyond 2km. This ensures your shells penetrate into the armored non-citadeled sections for 2K damage, as opposed to bouncing off the lower belt <_<

[jrbisson]

Very interesting and detailed analysis. How long did it take you to do the testing?

[Bronco]

Very interesting and detailed analysis. How long did it take you to do the testing?

 

Thank you. It took me about 2 hours to perform the tests and collect the data, maybe 20 minutes to write the post.