Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Aniket_Sengupta

Torpedo Damage Mechanics

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
181 posts
4,257 battles

Was wondering how the torpedo damage works in the game and therefore wish to get answers to the following questions.

- When do torpedoes deal the maximum rated damage and when do they not?

- What role do the armor ratings of torpedo bulge play?(less floods/less damage/both)

- Is there any overmatch mechanics at play for torpedoes?

- What does torpedo damage reduction actually perform? Is it in any way linked to torpedo bulges?

- Does flooding chance vary from ship to ship in the same class(damage reduction remaining constant)?

Eagerly looking forward to responses from the forum gurus and battle hardened players. Welp ! :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

- Torpedoes deal maximum rate of damage when hitting middle part of the ships 

- Torpedo bulges reduce damage and flooding chance, but does not reduce flooding damage

- no, but yes, i just dont know much about it

- see point 2

- Flooding chance vary to the torpedoes and the ship it hits, and can be modified with flags

 

Edited by Harpoon01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles

Thanks for the quick response Harpoon01, this leads me to compare two ships IX Missouri and X Montana.

Montana - torp bulge 25mm, Damage reduction 37%

Missouri - torp bulge 38mm, Damage reduction 25%(similar to GK)

Which one do you think is better suited to tackle torps and why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[STUN]
[STUN]
Member
79 posts
2,112 battles
18 minutes ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

Thanks for the quick response Harpoon01, this leads me to compare two ships IX Missouri and X Montana.

Montana - torp bulge 25mm, Damage reduction 37%

Missouri - torp bulge 38mm, Damage reduction 25%(similar to GK)

Which one do you think is better suited to tackle torps and why?

one's better at not flooding the other is better at not taking so much damage from torps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[STUN]
[STUN]
Member
79 posts
2,112 battles
27 minutes ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

Interesting, but how so?

I'm working on the assumption that a more well armoured bulge will decrease flood chance, but hey I'm not 100% sure.  

Refer to: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Flooding 

for more information. (although reading through it seems like monty is better over all?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

well in any case, being hit by torpedoes is, nonetheless, bad

if possible you should doge every torpedoes coming your way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,542 posts
7,978 battles

For non destroyer targets, torpedoes hitting areas not covered by torpedo bulge may or may not give full damage of torpedo depending on total hp on those section and damage saturation.

Torpedo bulge will reduce the max torpedo damage by mentioned percentage. This acts in a similar fashion as a citadel hit when it comes to healing back.

Flooding damage is not related to torpedo, it is tied to the target ship's hp. For example, a full flood on bismarck will be same regardless of it caused by a fubuki or a shimakaze. 

 

For destroyers, hits on bow and stern takes reduced damage, while the broadside takes full damage, subject to damage saturation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,340 posts
8,848 battles

Also when it comes to repairing torpedo damage, torpedo hits on a ship's broadsides counts as citadel damage, which means only 10% of the damage can be repaired (for BBs).

But hits on the stern or bow counts as normal penetration damage, so 50% of the damage can be repaired. The downside is that hits in those areas almost always causes a flood, and you don't benefit from any torpedo damage reduction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,011 posts
7,459 battles
3 hours ago, Harpoon01 said:

well in any case, being hit by torpedoes is, nonetheless, bad

if possible you should doge every torpedoes coming your way

That’s good advice.

 Rather than trying to make a ship “torpedo proof”, learn how to anticipate torpedoes. I say anticipate, rather than dodge. With T9/10 BB’s you will find it quite difficult to dodge torpedoes. The trick is to be aware where torpedoes could come from and position or manoeuvre your ship before you even see the torpedoes.

 I would suggest you are aware what the torpedo protection is, but you don’t pick your ships solely on torpedo protection.

 If your ship gets hit by full torpedo salvos, you are likely to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Super Tester
1,287 posts

As Thyaliad mentioned, you can only repair 10% from a torpedo citadel hit.

Although, if you do take a hit to the turret magazine, a detonation is common.

Happened to me more than a few times......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles
6 minutes ago, PeterMoe1963 said:

That’s good advice.

 Rather than trying to make a ship “torpedo proof”, learn how to anticipate torpedoes. I say anticipate, rather than dodge. With T9/10 BB’s you will find it quite difficult to dodge torpedoes. The trick is to be aware where torpedoes could come from and position or manoeuvre your ship before you even see the torpedoes.

 I would suggest you are aware what the torpedo protection is, but you don’t pick your ships solely on torpedo protection.

 If your ship gets hit by full torpedo salvos, you are likely to die.

you? suggesting me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles

Grateful for the valuable suggestions though I created this thread for academic purposes and wished to know more about how torpedoes work.

7 hours ago, icy_phoenix said:

Torpedo bulge will reduce the max torpedo damage by mentioned percentage. This acts in a similar fashion as a citadel hit when it comes to healing back.

Then why do both Missouri and Grosser Kurfurst have less damage reduction despite having significantly powerful bulges?

7 hours ago, icy_phoenix said:

Flooding damage is not related to torpedo, it is tied to the target ship's hp. For example, a full flood on bismarck will be same regardless of it caused by a fubuki or a shimakaze.

I was asking about the role that bulges and damage reduction factor in preventing chance of flooding.

5 hours ago, PeterMoe1963 said:

Rather than trying to make a ship “torpedo proof”, learn how to anticipate torpedoes. I say anticipate, rather than dodge. With T9/10 BB’s you will find it quite difficult to dodge torpedoes. The trick is to be aware where torpedoes could come from and position or manoeuvre your ship before you even see the torpedoes.

True, its a must especially for GK captains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
225
[151ST]
Member
1,013 posts
4,521 battles

Each section of the ship has a 'HP'. ie multiple hits on the bow will result in less damage.

Torpedo bulges like on BBs also reduce torpedo damage.

Nice to know, but doesn't really influence much aside from niche situations. (We all know landing torps is never a guarantee).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,542 posts
7,978 battles
1 hour ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

Then why do both Missouri and Grosser Kurfurst have less damage reduction despite having significantly powerful bulges?

Because Wargaming decided to put those numbers as per balancing measures.

1 hour ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

I was asking about the role that bulges and damage reduction factor in preventing chance of flooding.

Those are hidden parameters which we aren't certain about. As far as I know, there is no direct relationship. It's mostly the chance of causing flooding from the source of torpedo. For example, IJN DD torps will almost always cause a flood, regardless of your bulge.

P.S. Forget about realworld scenarios, game works by the parameters set by the devs. There is no real definition of a "Stronger torpedo bulge" here.

These should answer all your questions.

Edited by icy_phoenix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles
2 hours ago, icy_phoenix said:

There is no real definition of a "Stronger torpedo bulge" here.

Well let me rephrase it significantly powerful considerably thicker bulges(38 vs 25mm). Anyways guess those figures are irrelevant and its all down to the damage reduction factor as even the very informative thread reposted by amade or even the damage thread doesn't talk about bulge armor.

I actually felt the relatively newer scheme of torpedo protection as that of Missouri would have its own set of pros and cons which isn't the case at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
1 hour ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

Well let me rephrase it significantly powerful considerably thicker bulges(38 vs 25mm). Anyways guess those figures are irrelevant and its all down to the damage reduction factor as even the very informative thread reposted by amade or even the damage thread doesn't talk about bulge armor.

Thicker buldge doesnt mean its better at absorbing shocks. or have better explosive resistance rating

diffrent nations have diffrent TDS design. Yamato TDS for example were..... all TDS compartement were void, while some design like KGV have  liquid loaded compartment in betwen 2 Void compartment.

there also how deep or shallow the TDS extend its protection. While some advantage like Void filled TDS would have negative bouyancy that reduced ship deplacement, while Liquid which mostly used oil can be doubled as Fuel storage and better at absorbing shocks etc etc

compared to other BB Bismarck TDS designed with only 2 compartment that were not very deep and shallow compared to other Battleship. French Riclenau use Bouyant Solid Foam in capsuled packet in their TDS - and apparantly aclaimed as the best TDS in the era. older US design also made use less rigid alloy which intended to absorb the brunt of explosion energy (they switch to more rigid alloy in South dakota though)

some ship like Yamato might have fatal weakness in her TDS design, but the sheer volume and area it cover (also its stunning weight) made very favorable resistance for torpedo damage - despite low efficiency compared to the weight cost entailed

 

so.........most if not majority of Naval historian, rated german design have poor underwater protection, compared to other nation. while French TDS design being dubbed as the best

prob WG, balancing were based on somewhat those kind of rating

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles

@humusz You are talking about bulge performance in real life. I want to know how it works in game. True German BBs have weak TDS, but when you compare the TDS of Iowa, Missouri and Montana, you tend to suffer from PTSDs and quit researching further on in game TDS.

@icy_phoenix I thought the belt armor of BBs extend well below the waterline for the application you mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
3 hours ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

@humusz You are talking about bulge performance in real life. I want to know how it works in game. True German BBs have weak TDS, but when you compare the TDS of Iowa, Missouri and Montana, you tend to suffer from PTSDs and quit researching further on in game TDS.

Like I said, prob WG balancing its not based on armor thickness like you inquiring

but prob number balancing were anchored on effectifity of real life - TDS scheme of real ships. like how they modeled armor scheme.

like some ships end up more survivable due to armor scheme rather than armor thickness (like zao or hindenburg)

other aspect of survivability like hitpoints also anchored on real ship displacement. so its not like its nothing new

 

so, they prob (Try) to anchor stuff to reality as much as they can (like how south dakota have great TDS, in game and in RL), this however were just speculation on my part

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
181 posts
4,257 battles
20 minutes ago, humusz said:

but prob number balancing were anchored on effectifity of real life - TDS scheme of real ships. like how they modeled armor scheme.

Iowa, Missouri and Montana belong to the same class/series so the TDS should be either be same or higher only if one gets a thicker bulge. Still

Iowa with 25mm bulge gets 25% TDS

Missouri with 38mm bulge gets 25% TDS

Montana with 25mm bulge gets 37% TDS

This explains why the above line you wrote isn't the case here. Heck I can understand Montana has better citadel armor (hence may be) justifying the higher TDS but what about the comparison between Iowa and Missouri(an Iowa with a 13mm thicker torpedo bulge) yet the same TDS. Now do you get what I am saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
59 minutes ago, Aniket_Sengupta said:

Iowa, Missouri and Montana belong to the same class/series so the TDS should be either be same or higher only if one gets a thicker bulge. Still

Iowa with 25mm bulge gets 25% TDS

Missouri with 38mm bulge gets 25% TDS

Montana with 25mm bulge gets 37% TDS

This explains why the above line you wrote isn't the case here. Heck I can understand Montana has better citadel armor (hence may be) justifying the higher TDS but what about the comparison between Iowa and Missouri(an Iowa with a 13mm thicker torpedo bulge) yet the same TDS. Now do you get what I am saying?

well I did say  - WG balancing its not based on armor thickness like you inquiring

ingames DesMoine have like 10% torpedo reduction despite dont have torpedo buldges, CMIIW Cesarre also dont have Torpedo buldges on viewer despite have like 30% torpedo damage reduction ?

the diffrence armor plate in armor viewer prob just for calculating underwater shell penetration

 

 

and oh yeah, since AFAIK the torpedo not calculated based on draft of ships

and Torpedo buldge placement were also varied betwen ships. some placed couple meters bellow the belt, while some fully covering the belt.

all while torpedoes on water is "seemingsly" at constant depth - most of torps were seems traveled at shallow depth on water too (the animation at least)

but does such TDS that placed deeper bellow belt doesnt give Damage reduction upon hit (because torpedoes hit near waterline ? not at the buldges)

it seems such TDS work just fine, or at least they not calculated like shells will. which pen, bounce, or shatter were dictated upon which area it hit

 

so  I belive there is no correlation betwen thickness and damage reduction for TDS.

just simple - TDS reduce damage by x value upon impact on midsection of the ships

 

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Senior Moderator
3,837 posts
2,602 battles

IRL, armor thickness doesn't factor much toward the effectiveness of bulges (38 mm plating isn't going to withstand a torpedo explosion any much better than 25 mm plating), the point of torpedo bulges is to mitigate the damage caused by torpedo hits. This is done by dissipating the shockwaves within the bulges itself instead of transferring it directly to the hull. What matters is the space inside the bulge, and how it is constructed.

TDS is not exclusive to torpedo bulges, other ships may use torpedo belts instead. The purpose remain the same, which is to mitigate torpedo damage. This is translated in the game as a section that benefits from a damage reduction against torpedoes. The damage reduction in-game is based on the (perceived) effectiveness of the bulges IRL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×