308 EzioAuditore1456 Beta Testers 1,466 posts 7,318 battles Report post #1 Posted September 8, 2016 the purpose behind this chart is to compare the combat capability of many ships. keep this in mind, theres no absolutely accurate way to predict the behavior of the matches, therefore complaints such as "its unrealistic" or "it doesnt take armor into consideration" will be soundly ignored. this is the official potential damage thread, the instructions are the following: for this charts purposes, things like fire, flooding and ramming damage are not being taken into account. the ships are considered as fully upgraded, damage is calculated in hit points (HP) and reload time is calculated in seconds, without taking into account any captain skills, in complete salvos within 1 minute (cruisers and destroyers) or 1 minute and 30 seconds (90 seconds, battleships)* *this means that sliced fire rates will only take into account how many shells you actually fire in 60-90 seconds (a full minute would be too low for battleships), therefore if your reload is 21 seconds, the chart takes into account you firing 2 times, once 3 * 21 is 63. the chart is divided in 3 categories: potential damage, optimal damage and realistic damage potential damage is the damage you theorically could do under perfect, rather utopic circumstances. this measure takes into account the reload time of the guns x all the shells hitting the target and dealing the maximum damage specified for each type of shell optimal damage is a measure under optimal but not perfect circumstances. it takes into account that some shots will miss (more about that below) and each shell that hit will deal half the maximum damage specified for each type of shell. it can seem a bit disproportional, but for this chart purposes im considering that every shot that hits will deal damage. this measure takes into account the reload time of the guns x the shells that hit the target dealing half the maximum damage specified for each type of shell realistic damage is a measure more aligned to results you are going to face when using such ships. it takes into account that some of your shells will miss and each one that hit will deal 1/3 of the damage. this measure takes into account the reload time of the guns x the shells that hit the target dealing 1/3 of the maximum damage specified for each type of shell: PS: the fact that in both optimal and realistic scenarios all shells that hit the target deal damage is countered by the fact that you can hit more shells than the specified in the chart below optimal and realistic damage take into consideration that some shots are going to miss. in this case, the pattern is [S/2 + 1], being [S] the number of guns, except the first 4 scenarios, once ships with 4, 5, 6 and 7 guns are mostly cruisers and destroyers, and tend to be more accurate. for this chart purposes, when a ship has: 4 guns, the chart considers that 3 shells will hit; 5 guns, the chart considers that 3 shells will hit; 6 guns, the chart considers that 4 shells will hit; 7 guns, the chart considers that 4 shells will hit; 8 guns, the chart considers that 5 shells will hit; 9 guns, the chart considers that 5 shells will hit; 10 guns, the chart considers that 6 shells will hit; 12 guns, the chart considers that 7 shells will hit; AP SHELLS IJN BATTLESHIPS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE KAWACHI* 32400 48600 145800 MYOGI 40000 60000 180000 KONGO 51000 61200 244800 FUSO 71400 107100 367200 NAGATO 42000 61000 201600 AMAGI 75600 109800 378000 IZUMO 64500 96750 348300 YAMATO 73995 118500 399600 *due to Kawachis weird gun placement im considering 6 guns firing at the enemy USN BATTLESHIPS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE SOUTH CAROLINA 40500 60750 194400 WYOMING 58086 87150 298800 NEW YORK 41196 61800 206000 NEW MEXICO 49000 129500 252000 COLORADO 61995 93000 297600 NORTH CAROLINA 65490 98250 353700 IOWA 67500 101250 364500 MONTANA 94500 141750 486000 KMS BATTLESHIPS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE NASSAU 36000 54000 172800 KAISER 50400 75600 252000 KÖNIG 50400 75600 252000 BAYERN 65394 98100 261600 GNEISENAU 46392 69600 208800 BISMARK 57990 87000 278400 FRIEDRICH DER GROBE 45000 67500 216000 GROBER KÜRFUST 63000 94500 324000 *the nassau can only point 8 of its guns at a same target IJN CRUISERS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE HASHIDATE 10800 16200 43200 CHIKUMA 19320 29000 87000 TENRYU 27000 40500 108000 KUMA* 36000 54000 162000 FURUTAKA 25056 37600 112800 AOBA 31320 47000 141000 MYOKO 37584 56400 188000 MOGAMI 37584 56400 188000 IBUKI 37584 56400 188000 ZAO 50400 75600 259200 *the chikuma and the kuma can only bring 6 guns at a same target USN CRUISERS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE ERIE 8784 13200 35200 CHESTER* 24000 36000 96000 ST. LOUIS* 35000 52500 168000 PHOENIX* 33056 49600 148800 OMAHA* 33056 49600 148800 CLEVELAND 52234 78400 268800 PENSACOLA 42000 63000 180000 NEW ORLEANS 30660 46000 165600 BALTIMORE 33320 50000 180000 DES MOINES 83300 125000 450000 *Chester can only point 4 guns at a same target; st. louis can point 8, phoenix and omaha can point 6 VMF CRUISERS (AP) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE ORLAN 9576 14400 38400 NOVIK* 31968 48000 144000 BOGATYR* 24000 36000 115200 SVIETLANA* 24990 37500 120000 KIROV 27320 41000 147600 BUDYONNY 38500 57750 207900 SHCHORS 53900 80850 277200 CHAPAYEV 53900 80850 277200 DMITRI DONSKOI 41048 61600 211200 MOSKVA 48325 72500 261000 *Bogatyr and svietlana can only point 8 guns at the same target; Novik can only point 6 HE SHELLS IJN CRUISERS (HE) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE HASHIDATE 10800 16200 43200 CHIKUMA 17320 26000 78000 TENRYU 24000 36000 96000 KUMA 32000 48000 144000 FURUTAKA 17600 26400 79200 AOBA 22000 33000 99000 MYOKO 26400 39600 132000 MOGAMI 26400 39600 132000 IBUKI 26400 39600 132000 ZAO 31724 47600 163200 USN CRUISERS (HE) VMF CRUISERS (HE) SHIP REALISTIC DAMAGE OPTIMAL DAMAGE POTENTIAL DAMAGE ORLAN 9576 14400 38400 NOVIK* 27168 40800 163200 BOGATYR* 15192 22800 91200 SVIETLANA* 15192 22800 91200 KIROV 16660 25000 90000 BUDYONNY 25655 38500 138600 SHCHORS 35917 53900 184800 CHAPAYEV 35917 53900 184800 DMITRI DONSKOI 23324 35000 120000 MOSKVA 25825 38750 139500 *Bogatyr and svietlana can only point 8 guns at the same target; Novik can only point 6 VMF DESTROYERS (HE) PREMIUM BATTLESHIPS (AP) PREMIUM CRUISERS (AP) PREMIUM DESTROYERS (HE) *TO BE CONTINUED* 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308 EzioAuditore1456 Beta Testers 1,466 posts 7,318 battles Report post #2 Posted September 8, 2016 *RESERVED* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
267 SubTender_Taigei Members 553 posts 8,586 battles Report post #3 Posted September 8, 2016 Looking forward to the Atlanta! You get an upvote for taking to time to do this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308 EzioAuditore1456 Beta Testers 1,466 posts 7,318 battles Report post #4 Posted September 8, 2016 (edited) Looking forward to the Atlanta! You get an upvote for taking to time to do this thanks, in matter of fact i spent around 5 hours gathering the info to post here. expect the updates to come in the following order: USN CRUISERS (AP) IJN CRUISERS (HE) USN CRUISERS (HE) VMF CRUISERS (HE) VMF CRUISERS (AP) VMF DESTROYERS (HE) then ill probably do the premiums and save the scenarios no one uses (bbs HE, dds AP) for last Edited September 8, 2016 by EzioAuditore1456 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
91 ADM_Zakk_Zero Members 811 posts 4,250 battles Report post #5 Posted September 8, 2016 the purpose behind this chart is to compare the combat capability of many ships. keep this in mind, theres no absolutely accurate way to predict the behavior of the matches, therefore complaints such as "its unrealistic" or "it doesnt take armor into consideration" will be soundly ignored. It's already been said, and I hope you get many, many more in the future for putting all this together, but mad props to you for such awesome info!!!!!!!! I, too, am very curious as to the Atlanta's numbers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
60 Heaven_Rains Members 328 posts 4,978 battles Report post #6 Posted September 8, 2016 the purpose behind this chart is to compare the combat capability of many ships. *reads the assumptions* ... they are so simplified that a Montana appears good...which is alright if we're talking about potential AP damage. But unless you incorporate dispersion distribution, shell caliber, shell type, fire chance, and target and armor assumption, and more, the charts you produce for 'realistic damage' and 'optimal damage' will be pointless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308 EzioAuditore1456 Beta Testers 1,466 posts 7,318 battles Report post #7 Posted September 8, 2016 *reads the assumptions* ... they are so simplified that a Montana appears good...which is alright if we're talking about potential AP damage. But unless you incorporate dispersion distribution, shell caliber, shell type, fire chance, and target and armor assumption, and more, the charts you produce for 'realistic damage' and 'optimal damage' will be pointless. not pointless enough for you to simply ignore instead of crying Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308 EzioAuditore1456 Beta Testers 1,466 posts 7,318 battles Report post #8 Posted September 12, 2016 PS: fixed a little mistake where i considered the nassau as being able to point all of its 12 guns at the same target Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
17 youkali Members 26 posts 3,907 battles Report post #9 Posted September 15, 2016 (edited) I have done a quick and dirty analysis of the effect of dispersion, or what we called CEP or circular error probable, on the IJN CA "Realistic DG" for AP given by the OP. It leads to this interesting table: SHIP R DG DISP CEP area new RDG HASHIDATE 10800 76 18146 1993 CHIKUMA 19320 92 26591 2299 TENRYU 27000 108 36644 2258 KUMA 36000 110 38013 2893 FURUTAKA 25056 114 40828 1864 AOBA 31320 126 49876 1882 MYOKO 37584 140 61575 1809 MOGAMI 37584 141 62458 1782 IBUKI 37584 136 58107 1922 ZAO 50400 136 58107 2578 As a real noob, I thought I'd throw this to the trolls to see if the huge falloff in gun performance after the Kuma, and extending all the way to the Zao, corresponds with what more experienced gamers feel is correct. If it is, I can extend the analysis to what the OP has graciously provided. The table assumes a dispersion of 30m or less results always results in a hit. Edited September 15, 2016 by youkali Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
17 youkali Members 26 posts 3,907 battles Report post #10 Posted September 15, 2016 SHIP R DG DISP CEP area RDG @ 9.1km HASHIDATE 10800 76 18146 1993 CHIKUMA 19320 92 26591 3047 TENRYU 27000 108 36644 3431 KUMA 36000 110 38013 5769 FURUTAKA 25056 114 40828 4124 AOBA 31320 126 49876 5613 MYOKO 37584 140 61575 5863 MOGAMI 37584 141 62458 5853 IBUKI 37584 136 58107 7157 ZAO 50400 136 58107 9189 My earlier post gave the OP's estimated realistic damage at max dispersion for the guns in question, which I can only assume is calculated and given for the maximum range of the gun, so it wasn't an apples to apples comparison. What would that be, you ask? Glad you did. The table here gives the RDG corrected for dispersion at the max range of the Hashidate, 9.1 clicks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
