Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About CompanionCav

  • Rank
    Agricultural Magnate

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

505 profile views
  1. Thanks for the info and source, I stand corrected. This means that for Hood's 381mm AP to properly fuse, it needs the target armor to have 63.5mm of LOS thickness at minimum. Targets with 19mm platings (T8/9 DDs) trigger the fuse at about 17 degrees from centerline. Targets with 25mm platings (common to various heavy cruisers and T7 BB) at about 23 degrees from centerline. For DDs, at such an angle they become vulnerable to normal pens from all manner of BB AP anyway because shells can travel lengthwise. However, Hood can deal normal pen more frequently because the shells can now hit relatively closer to target DD's bow or stern and not overpen. Same story with cruisers. But I think the effect will be more felt because cruisers often angle at about 20~30 deg between their salvos.
  2. The question is if the game calculate the armor plate LOS thickness at impact for fusing purposes even when the shell "ignores" the armor due to overmatching. My understanding so far was that shells have hardcap on travel time post-penetration regardless of fuse setting and that this is the main reason whenever DDs suffer normal pen from BB shells; penetrating shells travel lengthwise and shells' hardcap lifetime runs out before exiting the ship, resulting in normal pen.
  3. Leak is bit confusing on DF part. As I understand it, DF panic effect and AA DPS bonus will be applied only to the 1.5km range rocket thing. In return, DF lasts 60 seconds and the rockets get 25x DPS. Ricochet angle has been buffed and fuse delay has been shortened, which fits right with popular view that "battlecruisers are meant to be extra strong against cruisers and bit weak against proper BB peers." (not necessarily true in game context but whatever) Words are that shortened fuse delay won't make the ship any stronger against DDs because shells need to hit thicker armor than DD armors in order to arm properly.
  4. I'd argue that a skill becomes a necessity when have-nots are at such a disadvantage against haves. i.e. Kutuzov is strong without IFHE. But IFHE raised its damage output to such levels that the skill became de facto necessity for the ship.
  5. Eugen (and Hipper) will feel rather tanky when enough European 15 incher BBs are added to saturate the MM - Vanguard, Littorio, Richelieu, etc. But until then, it must watch in envy as its turd friend Mogami finally pay off her AFT firestarter sins and got buffed twice (IFHE, then recent turret traverse) to finally become a decent cruiser.
  6. Fully upgraded Clemson has 6-gun broadside of 102mm guns that reload at 7 seconds. DPM is about 25k~26k. (normal HE hits) Nicholas A hull has 5-gun broadside of 127mm guns that reload at 6.5 seconds. DPM is about 27k. Note that this has same alpha strike as Clemson due to its guns being larger. Nicholas B hull has 4-gun broadside of 127mm guns that reload at 4 seconds. DPM is 36k. Reload speed (and thus DPM) can be buffed through captain skills Adrenaline Rush and Basic Fire Training. All things being equal, Nicholas should not have slower reload speed than Clemson.
  7. Forum opinions might change a bit when Flamu (who seems to have a respectable number of followers) issues his opinions via youtube. From what I hear from his streams, he thinks that the ship is in his own words "solid, but difficult." He also thinks that the ship is "very tanky when angled." IMO his observations match well with disclosed ship statistics for the Hood. It is tanky when angled because in addition to its hefty HP, its side hull is filled with armor values immune to AP overmatching and also because good turret angles allow the user to comfortably stay at a sharp angle. It is also resistant against HE, even against IFHE of all relevant cruiser guns because it has 51mm deck armor. It is somewhat difficult to use, because relatively thin side armor forces the user to keep enemies in as narrow cone as possible but bad agility and bad turret traverse hinder user efforts to keep things that way.
  8. I mean, German BBs rarely eat citadels even at 10~15km band while broadsiding Amagi et al can expect multiple citadels at such ranges. Just wanted to remind difference in degree of protection. Not all turtles are born equal. Anyway, I'm glad to see that Hood has good turret angles to make up for its rather weak armor. Hood needs 32 degrees from centerline to present full broadside salvo - this is almost as good as Kongo and Sharnhorst that only need 30 deg angle. Most battleships hover around 35 deg, including Hood's most similar contemporary Nagato.
  9. How do you cope with having worse concealment than some cruisers?
  10. I wonder if people will use the ship in same setup but with nerfed rudder, or ditch the concealment entirely for extra rudder mod, or take extra rudder and incorporate CE into captain build to make up for the concealment loss.
  11. IIRC Tirpitz turret angle was buffed to match Bismarck's. In any case, according to GM3D site, Bismarck has same turret angles as Tirpitz when firing forward but worse angle for #2 turret when firing backward.
  12. Unless German torps get buffed to 8km or so, I think Hydro option will still be better for ranked. This assumes continuation of smoke meta and domination of Bensons.
  13. Notser is, at least on the face, actively justifying his usage of IFHE on DM as a viable choice both in his video and on reddit as well, which is why I posted the vid in this thread. He just made another vid on IFHE Moskva. I concur with Mesrith that Notser's going clickbait way. A shame, I thought he was better than that.
  14. Damages from your ordinary "shitter" is contained within each game that he participates in. But damages from vids like this is server-wide.
  15. When you changed the gun, did you find any drop in shells' ability to hit underwater citadels? i.e. NC, Amagi, Izumo...