Jump to content


How does a 14in round barely deal any more damage than a 5in round?

Wowsb forum still down

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

Player_5773117413 #1 Posted 05 February 2018 - 06:26 PM

    Professional Tinfoil Hatter

  • Players
  • 27917 battles
  • 8,562
  • [IRD]
  • Member since:
    07-16-2014

^

 

Hit a dd or cl with a big round from a bb...and you barely scratch them more than they scratch you with their ap...or he splash. Overpen mechanics = another way for rng to shaft you


"HULK SMASH[er]!!!"

^ Gotta derp around in Tier 7 before the inevitable nerf! ^

Just another demo account, nothing to see here

"Say what you like, but stop pissing on my back and telling me it's raining." Blartch


cheasesteak #2 Posted 05 February 2018 - 06:47 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19253 battles
  • 4,137
  • [COD-R]
  • Member since:
    11-15-2014
HE or AP?  I'd imagine 14" AP goes right through an unarmored ship, doing much lower damage.  Real world battles support this.

 

 

Overpriced Lackey to the Barons of Entrenched Corporate Greed


Howitzer_155 #3 Posted 05 February 2018 - 10:25 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 43698 battles
  • 4,546
  • [DD]
  • Member since:
    01-11-2015

View PostPlayer_5773117413, on 05 February 2018 - 01:26 PM, said:

^

 

Hit a dd or cl with a big round from a bb...and you barely scratch them more than they scratch you with their ap...or he splash. Overpen mechanics = another way for rng to shaft you

whats your in-game name?



christian1470 #4 Posted 05 February 2018 - 11:11 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 37672 battles
  • 4,753
  • [III-H]
  • Member since:
    10-05-2014

View Postcheasesteak, on 05 February 2018 - 01:47 PM, said:

HE or AP?  I'd imagine 14" AP goes right through an unarmored ship, doing much lower damage.  Real world battles support this.

 

you keep saying that, but no one is looking at ships on the bottom. Doesn't matter if the rounds go straight through when placed at or below the waterline. Nothing sinks a boat faster than a few 16" wide holes in the bottom. Even rounds that land above the waterline exit below on the other side if they make it all the way through. 

Player_5773117413 #5 Posted 06 February 2018 - 12:04 AM

    Professional Tinfoil Hatter

  • Players
  • 27917 battles
  • 8,562
  • [IRD]
  • Member since:
    07-16-2014

View Postcheasesteak, on 05 February 2018 - 12:47 PM, said:

HE or AP?  I'd imagine 14" AP goes right through an unarmored ship, doing much lower damage.  Real world battles support this.

 

Ap. And yea, I get what your saying. But at the same time, you'd figure the contact fuse on one of the rounds would hit something more solid like the machinery and blow up, right?

 

View PostHowitzer_155, on 05 February 2018 - 04:25 PM, said:

whats your in-game name?

 

Same as this: Player_5773117413


"HULK SMASH[er]!!!"

^ Gotta derp around in Tier 7 before the inevitable nerf! ^

Just another demo account, nothing to see here

"Say what you like, but stop pissing on my back and telling me it's raining." Blartch


Ericmopar #6 Posted 06 February 2018 - 03:40 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3271 battles
  • 2,442
  • Member since:
    04-10-2017
Easy answer, Random Number Poseidon.

Old and Treacherous Flying Monkey.

 

 


ufddd #7 Posted 06 February 2018 - 04:18 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6025 battles
  • 658
  • Member since:
    08-29-2015
It does seem a bit wrong. Even considering over pen, ripping half a dozen 14 inch holes in a ship is going to do some significant damage whether it explodes or no. 

cheasesteak #8 Posted 06 February 2018 - 01:04 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19253 battles
  • 4,137
  • [COD-R]
  • Member since:
    11-15-2014

View Postchristian1470, on 05 February 2018 - 11:11 PM, said:

 

you keep saying that, but no one is looking at ships on the bottom. Doesn't matter if the rounds go straight through when placed at or below the waterline. Nothing sinks a boat faster than a few 16" wide holes in the bottom. Even rounds that land above the waterline exit below on the other side if they make it all the way through. 

 

​You mentioned Battle of Samar.  In that battle, it was specifically noted that early in the battle the Japanese battleships were using AP against the Jeep Carriers, and that the shells went straight through causing little damage.  That same was noted in other battles where BBs engaged DDs (also unarmored).  Large caliber AP rounds had HE charges that were supposed to go off after armor penetration.  This didn't work with thin skinned ships.  With WW-2 era ships, you get a 16" hole below waterline, you can patch it or seal the compartment. 

 

 

Overpriced Lackey to the Barons of Entrenched Corporate Greed


christian1470 #9 Posted 06 February 2018 - 02:17 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 37672 battles
  • 4,753
  • [III-H]
  • Member since:
    10-05-2014

View Postcheasesteak, on 06 February 2018 - 08:04 AM, said:

 

​You mentioned Battle of Samar.  In that battle, it was specifically noted that early in the battle the Japanese battleships were using AP against the Jeep Carriers, and that the shells went straight through causing little damage.  That same was noted in other battles where BBs engaged DDs (also unarmored).  Large caliber AP rounds had HE charges that were supposed to go off after armor penetration.  This didn't work with thin skinned ships.  With WW-2 era ships, you get a 16" hole below waterline, you can patch it or seal the compartment. 

 I understand what you are saying. No different than shooting AP through a stick built home. Maybe it takes out the fridge, maybe just the milk. My gripe is an entire battleship broadside at close range. If you are sending 8 14" shells through the length of the ship, it's pretty likely that you are going to hit some major running gear, or put enough holes to flood half the ship. Engines don't like to run when they have a huge hole in the side of them, and one can only close so many compartments. Also, boats that are half full of water steer like crap. 



cheasesteak #10 Posted 06 February 2018 - 03:49 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19253 battles
  • 4,137
  • [COD-R]
  • Member since:
    11-15-2014

View Postchristian1470, on 06 February 2018 - 02:17 PM, said:

Also, boats that are half full of water steer like crap. 

Both tanks and boats are deficient here.  Damage a ship until it is almost sinking, and it can still maneuver at full speed and fire all of its guns.  WG realism. 


 

 

Overpriced Lackey to the Barons of Entrenched Corporate Greed


christian1470 #11 Posted 06 February 2018 - 04:36 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 37672 battles
  • 4,753
  • [III-H]
  • Member since:
    10-05-2014

View Postcheasesteak, on 06 February 2018 - 10:49 AM, said:

Both tanks and boats are deficient here.  Damage a ship until it is almost sinking, and it can still maneuver at full speed and fire all of its guns.  WG realism. 

 

most of these ships had at least two engines and props. They should be able to traverse while maintaining position, like tanks do, but nope!

Player_5773117413 #12 Posted 06 February 2018 - 11:48 PM

    Professional Tinfoil Hatter

  • Players
  • 27917 battles
  • 8,562
  • [IRD]
  • Member since:
    07-16-2014

View Postcheasesteak, on 06 February 2018 - 07:04 AM, said:

 

​You mentioned Battle of Samar.  In that battle, it was specifically noted that early in the battle the Japanese battleships were using AP against the Jeep Carriers, and that the shells went straight through causing little damage.  That same was noted in other battles where BBs engaged DDs (also unarmored).  Large caliber AP rounds had HE charges that were supposed to go off after armor penetration.  This didn't work with thin skinned ships.  With WW-2 era ships, you get a 16" hole below waterline, you can patch it or seal the compartment. 

 

but even at the battle of Samar, most of the dd's and de's making suicide charges went to the bottom. Don't know if it was from cruiser fire or if they eventually succumbed to bb rounds, but they took damage from something.

"HULK SMASH[er]!!!"

^ Gotta derp around in Tier 7 before the inevitable nerf! ^

Just another demo account, nothing to see here

"Say what you like, but stop pissing on my back and telling me it's raining." Blartch


ufddd #13 Posted 07 February 2018 - 02:47 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6025 battles
  • 658
  • Member since:
    08-29-2015

View Postchristian1470, on 06 February 2018 - 04:36 PM, said:

 

most of these ships had at least two engines and props. They should be able to traverse while maintaining position, like tanks do, but nope!

Whilst it’s possible to walk a boat around with two (or more) props once you get to something like a moderate or large warship the props are too close together and the ship too long for their to be any reasonably noticeable effect. A battle would pass before you’d turned a few degrees. 

 

These days with bow thrusters, azimut prop drives and even Voith Schneider’s ships can and do manoeuvre how they please, for those that lack them, there are still tug boats. 



redeemedbychrist23 #14 Posted 08 February 2018 - 06:47 AM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 11229 battles
  • 171
  • [B_AOG]
  • Member since:
    10-18-2015

View Postchristian1470, on 05 February 2018 - 11:11 PM, said:

 

you keep saying that, but no one is looking at ships on the bottom. Doesn't matter if the rounds go straight through when placed at or below the waterline. Nothing sinks a boat faster than a few 16" wide holes in the bottom. Even rounds that land above the waterline exit below on the other side if they make it all the way through. 

right!







Also tagged with Wowsb, forum, still, down

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users