Jump to content

Captain_Jack_Aubrey

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [TLS]

About Captain_Jack_Aubrey

Recent Profile Visitors

238 profile views
  1. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    I'd say we should know if WG thinks the ships are fine after 2 patches. They should have enough data then. Maybe 3 at most. Personally, I find the 8 x 457mm acceptable.
  2. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    If I may protest, my calculation of the chance of fire was logically sound, leaving out the combinations of skills, upgrades, or flags. Even with the formula given by WG, taking away all those variables, it is only lacking the ship's fire resistance.Forgive me for wishing for a spherical cow. In any case, I agree, the conqueror's a damn fine ship to sail. It is fun with its manoeuvrability, and quick turrets. I admit, I've used the 457mm more than the 419mm just because the idea of slinging 1.8t HE is amusing.
  3. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    It's probably better to look at the ships with no modification. The combinations of skills, upgrades and signals would change from captain to captain.
  4. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    Those penetration values are greater than i expected. IIRC, there's a youtuber that made a video about how the fuse works, something along the line of shell velocity upon impact * fuse time, to see if it penetrates before exploding. Don't quote me on that, I don't have the video atm. Any idea where I can get the fire resistance data?
  5. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    That is a fair point. Well, another factor for WG to consider when they review the ships.
  6. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    As I've said before the discussion started with the percentage of fire set by each BBs, so I said the 10% difference between 70% and 80% is not much. Then I went on to add that that percentage difference includes both the 457mm gun and 419mm gun, which gives different DPM. Assuming you're talking about damage per salvo, I then ask whether it was a fair comparison between a BB that would uses HE more often than AP, to BBs that uses AP more. In short, is it fair to compare damage per salvo between the 419mm HE damage per salvo to other BB's AP shell, if we are discuss their damage per salvo, since it would be very rare to find the yamato, montana or GK, using HE as a main method of inflicting damage. It is interesting to see that with the 457mm that brings the conqueror AP performance to being something good, the HE damage per salvo drops to be in line with other BB. So then, I surmise that the high HE salvo damage of the 419mm is to make up for its poor AP's performance.
  7. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    I made the case that there is little difference between 70% to 80% chance of setting another ship on fire. Note, that these percentage includes both the 457mm and 419mm guns, which offer wildly different salva alpha damage. As pointed out by The RN BBs have poorer AP's performance than their counterparts, and as such their effective damage per salvo would be affected. So in comparing damage per salvo would it then be fair to compare it based on HE to HE or HE to AP?
  8. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    A quick check on wowsft shows, USA and Japanese BBs gets 65k HE dmg per salvo, German 60k per salvo, conqueror is 65k(457mm) and 87k(419mm).
  9. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    No. The fire chance per broadside/salvo is listed up there
  10. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    Their winrates are pretty good right now. I'm not sure if that's the same with every new ships, where their stats are just startling good for a couple of weeks.
  11. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    On battleship's HE and population's outcry - a noob rambling

    I see what you mean, but looking at 70% and 80%, i think the jump alone is not big enough to reflect the community's reaction. I haven't looked at HE penetration too. I don't know how that would affect the end results
  12. With the introduction of RN BBs the player base has been introduced to battleships that are essentially floating flamethrowers, the like of which hasn't been seen since since the invention and lost of the greek fire by the byzantine empire. Community contributors quickly reported on their abilities to set other ships aflame, and the forum's quickly filled with post of the ships' superiority compare to their counterparts. A week later, the waves of posts have subsided, the win rate for the Conqueror sits at 54% on EU,52% on SEA , and 55% on NA[1]. But is this the cause of the superb HE shells? We'll look at the chance of setting a ship on fire(at least 1 fire) per turret(Assuming all the HE shell hits): Großer Kurfürst with 420mm : (1-(1-0.41)3) = 0.795 Großer Kurfürst with 406mm : (1-(1-0.38)3) = 0.762 Montana with 406mm : (1-(1-0.36)3) = 0.738 Yamato with 460mm : (1-(1-0.35)3) = 0.725 Conqueror with 419mm : (1-(1-0.48)3) = 0.859 Conqueror with 457mm : (1-(1-0.63)2) = 0.863 I've chosen to use a per turret value as we already know the chance per shell, and it is NOT possible to only fire 1 gun on each turret. Noting that dispersion value of each ship would affect the effective chance of setting fire, we can say it's been "balanced" to be roughly similar. Although, in the event that only 1 shell hits, the probability would favour the shell with higher fire chance. Next, we'll look at the chance of setting fire per ship salvo making all the previous assumptions Großer Kurfürst with 420mm : (1-(1-0.41)12) = 0.9982 Großer Kurfürst with 406mm : (1-(1-0.38)12) = 0.9968 Montana with 406mm : (1-(1-0.36)12) = 0.9952 Yamato with 460mm : (1-(1-0.35)9) = 0.9792 Conqueror with 419mm : (1-(1-0.48)12) = 0.9996 Conqueror with 457mm : (1-(1-0.63)8) = 0.9996 From the 2 data sets[2] we can see the RN BB managed a lead of roughly 10% in the chance to set fire per turret, however, per salvo, the difference is almost negligible. So, if the difference is only roughly 10%, why the sudden outcry? I put forward my hypothesis that it is the emergent properties of a whole branch being encouraged to use HE and the influx of players jumping on to this branch in the relatively short span of time, and the confirmation bias of other battleship's captain. From what I can tell, WG hasn't made any changed to the RN BBs in 6.11 as they wait for the statistics to "stabilise". A major point not discussed is the penetration of HE shells and how they affect fire chance. [1]http://wows-numbers.com/ships/ [2]http://wowsft.com/
  13. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    Smoke Detection Changed No point of RN cruisers

    I see a lot of minotaur packing radar. I've switched to radar after having been blindshotted by BBs in smoke and being run down by radar ships while in smoke. For clarification, the BBs didn't spot me before I smoke up
  14. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    The DD Hunters - Gunnery Guide

    When firing at a DD from a cruiser(USN,RN, Get) I find that unless they are sailing perpendicular to me, doubling the distance they are from me and using that as the lead time give adequate results. For BBs the number would be roughly 1.5 times the distance. I don't fire on them if they are beyond 10km range and are aware that I am trying to hit them though
  15. Captain_Jack_Aubrey

    Conqueror's bofors, more like no more, amirite?

    well, silly me.
×