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

The Moar Dakka Paradox

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
213 posts
4,335 battles

So I just got enough XP in my Fuso for a Nagato and am currently grinding the credits to buy it.  

Having a look a the stats though... 8 guns vs 12, slower reload time, similar dispersion...same speed... MEEHHHHH.. I WANZ MOAR DAKKA.

 

Its already pretty established that in World of Warships MOAR DAKKA is King (see St. Louis, Cleveland, Fuso, Mogami) ~ I was wondering if there is a way to fix this but couldn't think of a way:

The issue is this:

  FUSO NAGATO  
DPM         244,800   191,520 128%
Rounds fired/M 24 15.2 158%
Max Broadside Damage         12,400   100,800 121%

 

Wow, so that is a big DPM difference.

But what about Alpha? and penetration? Well, these are the big advantages of 16" guns. No doubt that one-on-onea Nagato beats a Fuso and a Colorado beats a New Mexico. 

The trouble is how they perform against almost every other ship in game.

For the sake of game play, WG have made every class roughly equal in value (this is a good thing, and yes I am aware they are currently failing at this).

IRL destroyers and cruisers were basically useless against BBs except at night. Hence BB's priority targets were other BBs ~ hence bigger guns were better.

 

In game, destroyers can torp you and cruisers can turn you into a blazing wreck in seconds. Hence your priority targets are the ones you can kill the fastest; DDs, CAs THEN BBs.

 

Since 14" guns go through any CA or DD in game without issue, penetration is relevant only when engaging other BBs. Further more against a CA or DD, 10,200 Alpha is crippling~ the extra 2k is like breaking a guy's little finger after you've smashed in his head and both of his kneecaps -not really necessary. 

 

Hence the priority is getting as many shells on target in the shortest timespan possible. Further more due to the density of combat, having the smallest time between reloads allows maximum flexibility and fire correction.  Doing the WoW wiggle (zig zagging diagonally whilst alternately firing forward and rear turrets) allows a Fuso to fire a 6 gun, 61.2K damage  every 15 seconds. I chase down destroyers in a Fuso and blow them out of the water at short range ~ I can't imagine ever risking this in a Nagato. 

 

So point being, Nagato is probably better at killing about 6 ships it might encounter in game, the Fuso is better at killing the other 34. I think this is the case for almost every more guns vs. bigger guns situation. 

 

How can they fix this? If they buff accuracy or reload on the ships with less guns - they will just become better at what they currently do ~ killing other BBs and will still suck at killing anything else.

 

The solution? Bring me HMS Victoria!!

62 8" guns will turn your Yamato into a blazing wreck whilst your HE shells overpen causing 450dmg!

 

BTW THIS IS NOT A FUSO>>NAGATO ,BUFF MY SHIP!! THREAD. I have never played Nagato and hence have no personal experience on how it plays.  I just wonder if anyone else thinks that the game mechanics uncorrectably favours ships with moar DAKKA.

  


 

Edited by Gorbon_Rubsay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
161 posts
5,905 battles

On Nagato, play style seems changes when you get the Nagato from Fuso, when you get her unlock hull combine with a right modules and the right captain skill those secondary are pretty damn impressive and compensate or even more for the lose of 2 turrets. Her bouncy amour help angling and ruddershift time encourage aggressive play, BB on BB isn't all about the number of Dakkas but the number of shots that actually hit and penetrate.

 

But I can kind of agree with you that moar Dakka is king on CA regarding HE spam and fire damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
724 posts
2,176 battles

Nagato used in 12km range + AP shells + 1 well placed salvo = any full health CA/CL and sometimes even BB down.

 

But still would glad to get a long range accuracy buff for the Nagato.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
213 posts
4,335 battles

Don' want this to turn into a Fuso VS. Nagato thread (there are many already). But using them as an example, 

In a BB VS CA situation:

Penetration is irrelevant -14" punches through CA just as easy as 16".

Armor is irrelevant. Fuso blocks 8" AP just as well as Nagato. 

Fuso has a more 26% more DPM. Nagato would need to be 26% more accurate than the Fuso to achieve the same real DPM ~ she is not. 

Lets say it takes a Fuso 5 hits to kill a 26,000 HP Aoba (1 or 2 crits). If we give a 20% chance of a hit it (so the Fuso needs to fire 25 shells to kill an Aoba), the Fuso will on average, kill an Aoba in 1:00 min. 

Lets say it takes a Nagato 4 hits to kill the same ship, given the same conditions, the Nagato on average would take 1:36 mins to kill an Aoba. 

The Fuso wins,  even when giving the Nagato an unrealistic 20% advantage (4 hits vs 5)

 

In a BB vs Destroyer situation

The difference is even more dramatic.

Say it takes either ship 3 HE shells to kill a Minekaze.  If there is a 15% chance of hitting that destroyer (sneaky little bastards),

the Fuso takes 48 secs to kill a Minekaze. The Nagato on the other hand takes 1.18s.

 

Statistically the Fuso also outdamanges the one tier higher Nagato 56k vs 55k (for top 10% players SEA 8/26 )

Mogami out damages Ibuki 59k vs 52k

Cleveland out damages Pensalcola 41k vs 36k

New Mexico out damages Colorado 53k vs 46k.

 

I maintain: MOAR DAKKA!

 

Edited by Gorbon_Rubsay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

There are TWO major issues as I see it:

 

1. As you said, more shots are better if for no other reason than RNG. More throwing of [redacted] at the target, however inaccurate any individual throw is, means more hits.

 

2. The effectiveness of 16" guns compared with 14" or lower is GROSSLY understated. If anyone chooses to look around in THIS SITE they'll see just how more destructive the 16" guns should be.

A few examples:

Nagato's 16" AP rounds had 14.9kg bursting charge. Colorado's had 15.2kg.

The Fuso's 14" had 11.1kg. New Mex had 10.4kg.

In other words, the minimum increase in bursting charge was ~34% (Fuso to Nagato). The greatest is New Mex to Colorado, a whopping 46%. That's before we consider the penetrative abilities.

IF the guns were to reflect their correctly greater damage potential, the loss of tubes might well be less telling. IMO, however, they don't.

 

The Colorado is particularly awful due to the top speed being something of a crippling problem once you can face tier 10 ships. The New Mexico I liked in CB, the Colorado I couldn't wait to get rid of. The ONE aspect in which the Colorado was good, rather absurdly, was AA; I regularly killed 20+ planes in it, LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
512 posts
308 battles

For the sake of game play, WG have made every class roughly equal in value (this is a good thing, and yes I am aware they are currently failing at this).

How can they be equal if WG is failing at it? Even the game itself admits battleships and carriers are king, in domination you get 60 points for killing a battleship or carrier, yet cruisers and destroyers offer half of that (or something close to it, haven't played for a while now, so memory is a bit patchy), carriers are only vulnerable to other carriers until the end of the game if they aren't AFK, destroyers can only beat a battleship if the battleship doesn't change course and/or speed, while cruisers will get rekt by battleships unless they start 3+ fires, and even then they're likely to lose most, if not all of their HP.

 

2. The effectiveness of 16" guns compared with 14" or lower is GROSSLY understated. If anyone chooses to look around in THIS SITE they'll see just how more destructive the 16" guns should be.

However if they introduced the correct capabilities for all shells they'd be throwing balance out of the window, though the Colorado could definitely get a buff, though I'm sure WG would rather improve their bottom line, than have a game that is balanced as well they can (example: tier 7 mediums).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

 

However if they introduced the correct capabilities for all shells they'd be throwing balance out of the window, though the Colorado could definitely get a buff, though I'm sure WG would rather improve their bottom line, than have a game that is balanced as well they can (example: tier 7 mediums).

 

I know. I was simply commenting on why having fewer 16" guns translate generally as worse than more of a lower calibre. Playing this game might make you wonder why they made 16" guns at all, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
213 posts
4,335 battles

How can they be equal if WG is failing at it? Even the game itself admits battleships and carriers are king, in domination you get 60 points for killing a battleship or carrier, yet cruisers and destroyers offer half of that (or something close to it, haven't played for a while now, so memory is a bit patchy), carriers are only vulnerable to other carriers until the end of the game if they aren't AFK, destroyers can only beat a battleship if the battleship doesn't change course and/or speed, while cruisers will get rekt by battleships unless they start 3+ fires, and even then they're likely to lose most, if not all of their HP.

If all classes were not roughly equal in ability to contribute to the battle no one would play the lower value classes.  WG is currently failing because no one plays high tier destroyers.  But ~ kind of missing the point here. The point is target priority - if you are facing a Minekaze at 6km, a Cleveland at 10km and a New Mexico at 15km ~ in what order do you kill them?

However if they introduced the correct capabilities for all shells they'd be throwing balance out of the window, though the Colorado could definitely get a buff, though I'm sure WG would rather improve their bottom line, than have a game that is balanced as well they can (example: tier 7 mediums).

Yes... hence the paradox. 

Edited by Gorbon_Rubsay

Share this post


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

×