Jump to content
Flametz

HEAP testing with 152mm in PT 0.6.0 #2

Recommended Posts

All this is going to do is just make BBs even less want to push and tank. Like, whats the point of being in my Yamato, or the North Carolina with its invincible front hull and bouncing battleships non stop if cruisers can just chuck HEAP at me and completely invalidate that. 

Cruisers needed a bit of a buff, but this isnt the answer (nor is stupidly high fire chances) 

It needs to be something like buffing cruiser HP, of RoF/base damage on the guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem with cruisers is their staying power. In my battleship the first ships I target are cruisers, because it's the fastest way to take guns away from the enemy team. Just giving them heal like the RN cruisers would fix many of the problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MntRunner said:

The main problem with cruisers is their staying power. In my battleship the first ships I target are cruisers, because it's the fastest way to take guns away from the enemy team. Just giving them heal like the RN cruisers would fix many of the problems. 

This is highly agreed on even in the official forum yet WG is ignoring it, at least after T6 ships start with at least 1 heal with by t10 get a full 3 (obviously this isn't including premium and captain skills), problem is you make one mistake and some how survive you have to pay super careful the rest of the match even skipping shots because you know you'll get hit in return

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this the more I get the change. They're nerfing mid-Calibre cruiser fire chances by buffing fire prevention and nerfing demo expert. The small changes to fire chance and total fires don't mean much to large calibre guns with high fire chance but really hurt the spammy guns. So to compensate those guns now deal consistent DPM rather than DOT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoughts on secondaries, specifically the high-tier German ones (105mm HE, 128mm HE, and 150mm HE, with 8%, 5%, and 9% fire chance respectively)?  I'm guessing that IFHE will do nothing extra against most destroyer armor; should increase direct damage against most cruisers, and should be good against most battleships, many of which will now be using Fire Prevention anyway.  Will it be worth 4 points for a German battleship that is already having to spend another 8 on Manual Secondaries and AFT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, OnboardG1 said:

The more I think about this the more I get the change. They're nerfing mid-Calibre cruiser fire chances by buffing fire prevention and nerfing demo expert. The small changes to fire chance and total fires don't mean much to large calibre guns with high fire chance but really hurt the spammy guns. So to compensate those guns now deal consistent DPM rather than DOT.

But those guns will now

1. deal front-loaded damage

2. deal mostly pen damages (heal 50%) rather than fire damages (heal 100%)

I know that light cruisers shun prolonged fight with BBs and relying on unrepairable fire as major damage source is better for their survival as they can just frisk away after lighting the target up. However, there are few that can afford to stay on target for an extended period due to either smoke or stealth fire. I'm really concerned about these and I hope I'm just overreacting.

 

19 hours ago, Mesrith said:

Thoughts on secondaries, specifically the high-tier German ones (105mm HE, 128mm HE, and 150mm HE, with 8%, 5%, and 9% fire chance respectively)?  I'm guessing that IFHE will do nothing extra against most destroyer armor; should increase direct damage against most cruisers, and should be good against most battleships, many of which will now be using Fire Prevention anyway.  Will it be worth 4 points for a German battleship that is already having to spend another 8 on Manual Secondaries and AFT?

 

Well if I'm getting the formulas right...

Before IFHE:

105mm has 17mm pen (105/6 rounded to nearest then -1). Good for T7 and below DD hulls, some cruiser superstructures but not much else.

128mm has 31mm pen (GE privilege, 128/4 rounded to nearest then -1). Good for anything that's T7 BB and below and T8 cruiser and below - bow and freeboard. Superstructure of course included.

150mm has 37mm pen. Can damage all BB and CA bow and freeboard. NC deck is vulnerable. USN BBs generally have whole deck area in front of turrets plated same as bow/stern - vulnerable 32mm.

Vulnerability exceptions are 50mm Moskva freeboard, German BBs' armored part of bow, and German BBs' whole side - they have no two-digit armored side plate part.

After IFHE:

105mm has 22mm pen. Good for all DD hulls (except small 50mm sections on Gearing and Khaba) and BB superstructures.

128mm has 41mm pen. Same target as pre-IFHE 150mm plus Iowa and Montana's deck

150mm has 48mm pen. Not much change. Next meaningful armor cut is 50mm.

 

With IFHE, 105mm can now actually hurt DDs. 128mm can now actually hurt BBs. 150mm stays almost same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an HE spamming cruiser I'm firing non stop. It tends to be in stuff like Zao where I can reliably cause full duration fires that I'll go dark and let the damage tick. More consistent, less RNG damage which potentially provides mitigation to brick wall bowtanking is not a bad thing in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking at the current fire prevention and it is 7 percent now I(This was changed a few patches ago as it used to be 3 percent). So the only thing the captains tree update changes is the max sections on fire go from 4 to 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CompanionCav said:

Well if I'm getting the formulas right...

Before IFHE:

105mm has 17mm pen (105/6 rounded up then -1). Good for T7 and below DD hulls, some cruiser superstructures but not much else.

128mm has 32mm pen (GE privilege, 128/4). Good for BB bows, freeboard platings (GE BBs are exceptions - Too THICC), and superstructures. Amagi and Izumo decks are vulnerable.

150mm has 37.5mm pen. Can damage same targets as 128mm. NC deck is vulnerable. IF rounded up to 38, Iowa and Monty decks are vulnerable.

After IFHE:

105mm has 22.1mm pen. Good for all DD hulls (except small 50mm sections on Gearing and Khaba) and BB superstructures.

128mm has 41.6mm pen. Same target as pre-IFHE 150mm

150mm has 48.75mm pen. Not much change. Next meaningful armor cut is 50mm.

Wait what? The 105s do not benefit from the german's caliber/4-exception? Also, the bonus is conspiculously nerfed to 25% instead of 30%, which means you need a minium caliber of 153mm guns to make it work against 32mm-bows (except for german secondaries that is). There are still plenty of 25mm-zones on many cruisers and some fo the lower and mid-tier battleships, that 120mm guns can penetrate with this skill though.

Come to think of that, there is only one type of ship in the entire game, where this skill now allows you to penetrate battleship bows and those are 180mm-armed russian cruisers, as everyone else uses 152s or less. The fuck? I´d like to urge any data-miners that read this thread and post, to check which ships or guns have an exception to the caliber/6-rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CompanionCav said:

According to Octavian, 25% in IFHE as well as 0.1% in Adrenaline Rush descriptions are typo.

Asia site supposedly has correct descriptions.

Very likely, IFHE will come with 30% bonus.

 

Thanks for this.  Adrenaline Rush at .2% is a bit more impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw the Reddit post. I didn't realise DE secondaries also had the d/4 calibre rule. Bismarck is going to be even more of a low skill-floor potato boat with this change. Don't especially like that.

On a positive note, does this make Yamato secondary spec actually viable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll edit my above post to apply "round to nearest integer and subtract one" to German rule as well as per Flametz's forum post.

 

Ok, done editing above IFHE calculation post.

 

I don't think Yamato secondaries will be improved unless Yammy's 127mm gets the German treatment. 155mm fires AP anyway and is unaffected.

 

Anyway, if the IFHE indeed becomes prevalent, then combined with fire prevention, German BBs might become extremely tanky against cruisers - unless they bow-on camp of course. Cruiser shells aimed at BB superstructure can stray into freeboard and shatter. IFHE in effect makes sure that these shells too do damage. However, German BB freeboard is still immune as well as half of their bow deck.

Edited by CompanionCav

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true although I theory crafted a max secondary based build for the Bismarck and you're forced to give up either super, BoS or BFT.  I think a lot of people will go full ham secondary which will prevent them using fire prevention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OnboardG1 said:

That's true although I theory crafted a max secondary based build for the Bismarck and you're forced to give up either super, BoS or BFT.  I think a lot of people will go full ham secondary which will prevent them using fire prevention.

That's the key, luckily.  You either lose some secondary reload speed or some survivability.  You can specialize more in this patch but it costs you in another area that you've probably taken for granted, like survivability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freedom of choice is a funny thing - people clamor for it ALL the time - yet when it is finally obtainable , there is a panic as to what it really means.  I have read multiple articles laying out what the current bonuses mean for ships ion general, yet I still feel a bit paralyzed as to which choices to make for the many different captains and ships I have in my personal client.  There are only a handful of ships that I feel comfortable with in deciding the Captain skills, mostly because I have had enough battles in them to understand the "hardware" of a ship, and what type of skills will benefit it. The rest ... TBD - "To Be Decided", I think that it will be quite a while before I play some of the ships in my port that are not "iconic", because there are no clear cut choices for ship optimization ... yet.

I would have warned Wargaming that there is a bi-fold chance when they choose to make such sweeping changes to their game client;  Obviously, that people will embrace the changes and make the game more competitive and enjoyable from single ship customization, or ... that the trust a player has in understanding what ship he has and it's role will be broken if there are too many undefined variables thrown at them.  This was not an incremental change, and people who did not play the test client are not invested in these changes, they should be prepared for a small probability that these changes are SO DISLIKED, that they might have to roll back the entire change wholesale.

Extreme Prediction?  Perhaps, but I am an old fart ( 55 years ), and I have seen more reactionary behavior from smaller changes than this - time will tell.

\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mesrith said:

That's the key, luckily.  You either lose some secondary reload speed or some survivability.  You can specialize more in this patch but it costs you in another area that you've probably taken for granted, like survivability.

One of my clanmates made a good point, which is that the secondaries always fire at centre of mass, so at range this skill is great but its utility drops off as you close in because they're going to be hitting belt a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, OnboardG1 said:

Saw the Reddit post. I didn't realise DE secondaries also had the d/4 calibre rule. Bismarck is going to be even more of a low skill-floor potato boat with this change. Don't especially like that.

On a positive note, does this make Yamato secondary spec actually viable?

Sadly 105mm secondaries get normal caliber/6 rule

This restricts HEAP effects to affecting tier 8+ DD (starts penetrating a la Akizuki syndrome) and tier <7 cruisers (ditto)... unless you find your 150mm hitting USN Fast BB decks often.

10 hours ago, CompanionCav said:

I'll edit my above post to apply "round to nearest integer and subtract one" to German rule as well as per Flametz's forum post.

 

Ok, done editing above IFHE calculation post.

 

I don't think Yamato secondaries will be improved unless Yammy's 127mm gets the German treatment. 155mm fires AP anyway and is unaffected.

 

Anyway, if the IFHE indeed becomes prevalent, then combined with fire prevention, German BBs might become extremely tanky against cruisers - unless they bow-on camp of course. Cruiser shells aimed at BB superstructure can stray into freeboard and shatter. IFHE in effect makes sure that these shells too do damage. However, German BB freeboard is still immune as well as half of their bow deck.

After a bit of testing, that rule was actually incorrect. I amended it in my new topic where instead it's simply rounded up/down, and that you need a greater value to penetrate (same value is still a non-penetration)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2017 at 8:17 AM, OnboardG1 said:

DDs are also going to have to ask themselves if their damage output comes from fire or from raw damage. Because losing 3% fire chance HURTS. 

Easy question in the Akizuki. My days of getting bow-tanked by Bensons are over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Flametz said:

After a bit of testing, that rule was actually incorrect. I amended it in my new topic where instead it's simply rounded up/down, and that you need a greater value to penetrate (same value is still a non-penetration)

 

Since we're dealing with integers after rounding up/down, seeing if the result is larger than the target plate thickness is essentially same as subtracting 1 from the result and seeing if it is same or larger than the target thickness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...