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

Datamine: 0.9.9 - The destruction of main battery is now guaranteed with the certain number of hits.

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles

I'll be real clear before I start saying anything. I DO NOT take any credit for this and whether this is true or false is unknown.
This was linked to me from a friend on the WoWs/r Discord. Take this with a whole bunch of salt.

As the title said, in 0.9.9, the main battery is destroyed with the fixed amount of damage.Also, the HP of main battery is reduced to half.
The turret now takes exactly 10% of damage regardless of the fuse activation.
This is the list of turret HP:

CaliberTurret HP in 0.9.9
~130mm: 2000
131~160mm: 3750
161~210mm: 5000
211~379mm: 7500
380mm~: 10000

There are some exceptions for this.

ShipTurret HP in 0.9.9
Grosser Kurfuerst: 20000
Sov. Soyuz: 20000
Kremlin: 20000
AL Sov. Russia: 20000
Stalingrad: 10000

Short details:There was an RNG which made turret HP seem inconsistent, but it was removed in 0.9.9.

Examples:
If Des Moines AP(5000dmg) hits DD's turret(2000HP), 4th hit will destroy the turret.
Shikisima AP(19400dmg) can destroy the battery of light cruiser with 2 hits.

Quote the quote about RNG based module damage
for example, to exclude the type of thinking 'okay, if I shoot North Carolina turret with 3 shells, it's a guarantee to destroy it' - such scenarios are not desirable gameplay-wise."
from https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/132089-fun-and-engaging-science-part-five/

I personally like the removal of RNG but don't know why WG removed it. Maybe, it was necessary to fix the penetration-without-damage.

===================================================================================================================================================================================

Let's be honest, I think most of us won't be that happy or happy at all seeing this if this were to be the case.
Take for example Conquerer's HE that does 7200 and has a penetration of 105mm. Assuming the shell is able to penetrare a turret's armour plating, it will deal 720HP to a turrent.
<130mm: 3 hits
131mm~160mm: 6 hits
161mm~210mm: 7 hits

What I can say is DDs will be having an amazing time from this.

Edited by HoChunHao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
965
[-CAT-]
Member
2,045 posts
10,774 battles
3 hours ago, HoChunHao said:

I'll be real clear before I start saying anything. I DO NOT take any credit for this and whether this is true or false is unknown.
This was linked to me from a friend on the WoWs/r Discord. Take this with a grain of salt.

As the title said, in 0.9.9, the main battery is destroyed with the fixed amount of damage.Also, the HP of main battery is reduced to half.
The turret now takes exactly 10% of damage regardless of the fuse activation.
This is the list of turret HP:

CaliberTurret HP in 0.9.9
~130mm: 2000
131~160mm: 3750
161~210mm: 5000
211~379mm: 7500
380mm~: 10000

There are some exceptions for this.

ShipTurret HP in 0.9.9
Grosser Kurfuerst: 20000
Sov. Soyuz: 20000
Kremlin: 20000
AL Sov. Russia: 20000
Stalingrad: 10000

Short details:There was an RNG which made turret HP seem inconsistent, but it was removed in 0.9.9.

Examples:
If Des Moines AP(5000dmg) hits DD's turret(2000HP), 4th hit will destroy the turret.
Shikisima AP(19400dmg) can destroy the battery of light cruiser with 2 hits.

Quote the quote about RNG based module damage
for example, to exclude the type of thinking 'okay, if I shoot North Carolina turret with 3 shells, it's a guarantee to destroy it' - such scenarios are not desirable gameplay-wise."
from https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/132089-fun-and-engaging-science-part-five/

I personally like the removal of RNG but don't know why WG removed it. Maybe, it was necessary to fix the penetration-without-damage.

 

Russian Bias on both T9 and T10. Should only be T10 IMO.

WG haaaaaaaaates it when RNGesus it turns against them. :Smile_trollface:

(Can not insert RNGesus giving the finger picture in this page. Not allowed as per EULA. But you know what I mean / get the idea.)

Edited by S0und_Theif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[ULAG]
Member
283 posts
10,475 battles
1 hour ago, HoChunHao said:

What I can say is DDs will be having an amazing time from this.

Before they buff turret HP way back in the days DD's are constantly having turrets getting knockout, poor Atlanta/Gearing/Ognevoi and etc. 

Imagine a Friesland with one or none turret left:etc_swear: , this will be a nightmare for some ships out there

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles
5 minutes ago, rookieFTW said:

Before they buff turret HP way back in the days DD's are constantly having turrets getting knockout, poor Atlanta/Gearing/Ognevoi and etc. 

Imagine a Friesland with one or none turret left:etc_swear: , this will be a nightmare for some ships out there

What I would imagine is that scene from Venom in the end, "Ill eat your arms, legs and then your head................."
Basically this but in WoWs

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
568
[KOREA]
Moderator, Community Contributor, Super Tester_
765 posts
7,830 battles

So, They bring back again the Atlanta.. Her turrets were really easy to destroyed. even with Desteroyers gun

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles
Just now, Work_ln_Progress said:

So, They bring back again the Atlanta.. Her turrets were really easy to destroyed. even with Desteroyers gun

Lucky to have atleast 50% of your guns back then, I was there

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,358 posts
5,719 battles
3 minutes ago, rookieFTW said:

Before they buff turret HP way back in the days DD's are constantly having turrets getting knockout, poor Atlanta/Gearing/Ognevoi and etc. 

Imagine a Friesland with one or none turret left:etc_swear: , this will be a nightmare for some ships out there

This will also be bad news for ships like Dunkerque, Strasbourg, Richelieu, Jean Bart, Republique and Graf Spee (potentially also KGV and DoY) that have their main guns concentrated into a very small number of turrets.

Back to those days Ognevoi (at T6) was infamous for its vulnerability of losing turrets which would deprive at least half of her gun firepower output, leading to a rather disrespectful nickname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[WWS]
Member
291 posts
3,745 battles

qhgnngsneos41.thumb.jpg.436ed34375ff6b04c7a6156d192a3515.jpg

They really take a deep dive on datamining. That's not the only data mining work they're doing. I know because I'm also one of them. :cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[ULAG]
Member
283 posts
10,475 battles
16 minutes ago, HoChunHao said:

Basically this but in WoWs

Main guns first, torpedo tubes later, then put the poor DD to rest with a salvo to the boiler room

11 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

This will also be bad news for ships like Dunkerque, Strasbourg, Richelieu, Jean Bart, Republique and Graf Spee (potentially also KGV and DoY) that have their main guns concentrated into a very small number of turrets.

As a Jean Bart lover I absolutely object this change, poor ship already suffers from constant turret knockouts. If this was implemented more people will target those 2 precious quad turrets 😞

13 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Back to those days Ognevoi (at T6) was infamous for its vulnerability of losing turrets which would deprive at least half of her gun firepower output, leading to a rather disrespectful nickname.

Been there, done that. And tried absolutely my best to use those 4km torps as I have no guns left, gets brutally shredded. Free XPed her and never look back again

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[WWS]
Member
291 posts
3,745 battles

This will make MAM1 upgrade even more useful tho there's no other choice which you can mount on a BB unless you want those secondaries last.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,358 posts
5,719 battles
2 hours ago, rookieFTW said:

Main guns first, torpedo tubes later, then put the poor DD to rest with a salvo to the boiler room

As a Jean Bart lover I absolutely object this change, poor ship already suffers from constant turret knockouts. If this was implemented more people will target those 2 precious quad turrets 😞

Been there, done that. And tried absolutely my best to use those 4km torps as I have no guns left, gets brutally shredded. Free XPed her and never look back again

Since her addition to my collection of ships, Jean Bart has also been one of the economic pillars of my account as well as the primary provider of Elite Commander XP (together with a French 19-pointer BB captain). That is sad for me too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[ULAG]
Member
283 posts
10,475 battles
12 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Since her addition to my collection of ships, Jean Bart has also been one of the economic pillars of my account as well as the primary provider of Elite Commander XP (together with a French 19-pointer BB captain). That is sad for me too.

Turret getting knockout during reload booster's duration feels like being c**kblocked *pepehands*

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,977
[CLAY]
Member
2,644 posts
11,986 battles

This sounds like a bad idea. We are talking about... Well, the major point of the game, shoot at ships. Seems silly to introduce mechanics which will limit that. While having less RNG is a good thing, knocking out a turret should be very hard. It should be something you put significant time into. You are robbing a ship of its ability to fight back, that’s very powerful.

Spoiler

How many times do you need to hit a CV’s deck before you knock out its ability to fire, aka launch planes? 😛 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
645
[LBAS]
Member
2,944 posts
14,140 battles

"Nooo you can't kill my main Battery turrets" 

Haha AP bombers go Booom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[IC]
Member
398 posts
11,096 battles
11 hours ago, HoChunHao said:

What I would imagine is that scene from Venom in the end, "Ill eat your arms, legs and then your head................."
Basically this but in WoWs

Weirdly enough, this quote from Jack Reacher: Never Going Back also fits - "I'll break your arms (turrets), I'll break your legs (engine), then I'll break your neck." And when that happens to me, I remember a quote from Airwolf as well. "String, we've just lost our teeth." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[IC]
Member
398 posts
11,096 battles
1 minute ago, Sting_Ray_05 said:

Weirdly enough, this quote from Jack Reacher: Never Going Back also fits - "I'll break your arms (turrets), I'll break your legs (engine), then I'll break your neck." And when that happens to me, I remember a quote from Airwolf as well- "String, we've just lost our teeth." 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[IJN]
Member
133 posts
4,224 battles
15 hours ago, HoChunHao said:

Grosser Kurfuerst

Supreme spelling.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles
Just now, hurricaneflyer said:

Supreme spelling.

Copy pasted from the Reddit post.
And to be honest out of everything, you nikpick on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[IJN]
Member
133 posts
4,224 battles
Just now, HoChunHao said:

And to be honest out of everything, you nikpick on that?

Protegent Antivirus' "Yes" | Know Your Meme

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles
8 minutes ago, hurricaneflyer said:

 

If your intentions here are to nikpick, create a ruckus, attempting to derail and/or not having anything to comment on the topic at hand, it would be best for you to head off somewhere else.
Necropost elsewhere please, cheers.

And before nikpicking on spellings, please do note that is indeed an actual word and might be a direct translation/pronunciation to English
image.thumb.png.d6243017da3f81ba276bddf87dd253f7.png
Thank You

Edited by HoChunHao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
981
[AUSNZ]
Beta Tester
1,273 posts
10,817 battles
5 hours ago, hurricaneflyer said:

Supreme spelling.

That is the correct spelling of Kurfürst if you don't wish to put an umlaut, or aren't able to do so with your keyboard.  The way to correctly represent a letter with an umlaut on an English keyboard is to write "ue" instead of "ü".

Also, the name is actually Großer Kurfürst, but the eszett is usually replaced on English keyboards with a "ss".

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[REPOI]
Member
183 posts
12,335 battles
12 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

That is the correct spelling of Kurfürst if you don't wish to put an umlaut, or aren't able to do so with your keyboard.  The way to correctly represent a letter with an umlaut on an English keyboard is to write "ue" instead of "ü".

Also, the name is actually Großer Kurfürst, but the eszett is usually replaced on English keyboards with a "ss".

The more you know, cheers Moggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,977
[CLAY]
Member
2,644 posts
11,986 battles
1 hour ago, Moggytwo said:

That is the correct spelling of Kurfürst if you don't wish to put an umlaut, or aren't able to do so with your keyboard.  The way to correctly represent a letter with an umlaut on an English keyboard is to write "ue" instead of "ü".

Also, the name is actually Großer Kurfürst, but the eszett is usually replaced on English keyboards with a "ss".

This is why I just get lazy on go GK.

Honestly though, much as I nitpick over spelling of everyday words by the media (they should know better), picking on spelling in an online forum, which includes people with English as a second language, is kinda pointless.

But the real point, when it comes to foreign names with odd spelling, you pick the spelling which gets the point across. Not like we don't have bunch of nicknames for ships anyway.

Share this post


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

×