Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Any reason to use a propellant other than ballistite?


Recommended Posts

1. It increases range the most which increases accuracy. I feel like accuracy is by far the most most important factor in winning a battle in the game. Changing shell size can give more damage bonus than using a different propellant

2. Its cheap

3. The detonation risk is not worth it to change with another propellant since it can be easily counteracted with barbettes and citadels. Even then, the detonation chance is quite negligible

 

Can anyone give me a reason to use any other propellant? TNT has too minor buffs, tube powder and cordite lower the range and thus accuracy massively( I guess you can use them to have more plunging shells, but good luck hitting anything at range with them, white powder is just ballistite with weaker bonuses, and lyddite could make sense but the penetration penalty is too much. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You actually have a good point - ballistite is pretty good. I go with White Powder because it doesn't have that risk. The hit chance difference is miniscule, but you do get that whee bit more armor piercing performance (another half inch of vertical penetration at 25000m for the 18 inch shell). Cordite is basically for people who want to set fires but don't want to give up quite as much as Lyddite, while Tube powder has the best pen (not worth it most of the time, though).

Yeah, really if ballistite has been working for you, I can't see much theoretical reason to change. Only disadvantage is that your heart will blame you if it does blow up, which is probably why they recommend White Powder instead.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/3sAxA16d7fewUzPe9

Above: A set of photos with all the powders for comparison.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that having a higher HE fire change by using High TNT or Lyddite I is a stronger choice for smaller caliber vessels, however you do make a good case for the Ballistite as it has the greatest + modifier to shell range despite being one of the earliest and cheapest explosives availible. As for the penetration debuff with Lyddite, in most cases firing large calibre guns at small ships will result in an overpen, so having a shorter fuse will, somewhat counterintutively, increase you chances of having a penetrating and thus higher damaging hit on smaller targets, again, for the large calibre stuff I think that Ballistite may be the best option availible in large ship vs. large ship engagements. I guess when we finally have the chance to test designs against each other we can see definitive proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a test calculating the theoretical DPM of a triple mk3 18" gun on a stationary target at various ranges using all explosives. This test does not calculate pen chance or HE damage/fire affect and assumes we are shooting AP only.

 

 

Alright, so here are the results:

v66et1.thumb.png.dacae31c14253af8e9065957934a6ad0.png

 

As you can see, Lyddite Shells offer the best theoretical DPM on stationary targets (with AP) given that 100% of all shell penetrate. Since I do not know how penetration, partial pen, non pen, etc. affect damage there is no way for me to make this test with armor as a variable. As it stands, the absolutely massive +57.5% bonus to shell damage that Lyddite I has makes it by far the best suited for this task, totally negating the bonus to range that Ballistite gives.

 

 

Some more things to consider are that these test results are swayed both by the modern fire control on the towers, the stability of more modern hulls, and the high damage output of the triple 18" Mk. 3, It is probably very likely that the performance of these explosives would differ if different caliber guns or more antiquated fire control were used, but the only time to consider using all of the possible shells in the game would be in the late-game, and so as a result I am not sure the extent to which these confounding variables skew the result.

Edited by Ignominius
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ignominius said:

This is a test calculating the theoretical DPM of a triple mk3 18" gun on a stationary target at various ranges using all explosives. This test does not calculate pen chance or HE damage/fire affect and assumes we are shooting AP only.

 

 

Alright, so here are the results:

v66et1.thumb.png.dacae31c14253af8e9065957934a6ad0.png

 

As you can see, Lyddite Shells offer the best theoretical DPM on stationary targets (with AP) given that 100% of all shell penetrate. Since I do not know how penetration, partial pen, non pen, etc. affect damage there is no way for me to make this test with armor as a variable. As it stands, the absolutely massive +57.5% bonus to shell damage that Lyddite I has makes it by far the best suited for this task, totally negating the bonus to range that Ballistite gives.

 

 

Some more things to consider are that these test results are swayed both by the modern fire control on the towers, the stability of more modern hulls, and the high damage output of the triple 18" Mk. 3, It is probably very likely that the performance of these explosives would differ if different caliber guns or more antiquated fire control were used, but the only time to consider using all of the possible shells in the game would be in the late-game, and so as a result I am not sure the extent to which these confounding variables skew the result.

Yeah, you're right about lyddite being useful against and on lighter ships, but given the terrible accuracy on small hulls, its still reasonable to use ballistite, especially when a single 3' shell hit is likely to flood an early destroyer hull to something like 40-50% even with max bulkheads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's a very good point actually, i never realized it but now that i think about, i've personally only ever used 3 of the explosives that are in the game:

TNT/HighTNT when available, otherwise, White Powder if available, otherwise, Ballistite.

alot of the explosive choices are just redundant or straight up worse, and not worth using ever.

i also think it's Bogus that you are forced to use the same explosive for propellant and for shell warhead, personally, and that all your guns of all calibre need to use the same explosive too, for both AP and HE shells...

overall the explosive choice system clearly needs to be looked into and rebalanced/revamped.

 

PS: if you're asking for a reason to use something other than Ballistite, i recommend TNT/HighTNT over it if available, because don't forget that it affects all your guns, and the TNT gives you an amazing balance of having high damage for your secondaries HE, and good AP penetration + AP Damage for your mains at the same time. White Powder or Ballistite is more of a question of personal preference, both are viable and they aren't that different.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2019 at 10:26 AM, Ignominius said:

This is a test calculating the theoretical DPM of a triple mk3 18" gun on a stationary target at various ranges using all explosives. This test does not calculate pen chance or HE damage/fire affect and assumes we are shooting AP only.

 

 

Alright, so here are the results:

v66et1.thumb.png.dacae31c14253af8e9065957934a6ad0.png

 

As you can see, Lyddite Shells offer the best theoretical DPM on stationary targets (with AP) given that 100% of all shell penetrate. Since I do not know how penetration, partial pen, non pen, etc. affect damage there is no way for me to make this test with armor as a variable. As it stands, the absolutely massive +57.5% bonus to shell damage that Lyddite I has makes it by far the best suited for this task, totally negating the bonus to range that Ballistite gives.

 

 

Some more things to consider are that these test results are swayed both by the modern fire control on the towers, the stability of more modern hulls, and the high damage output of the triple 18" Mk. 3, It is probably very likely that the performance of these explosives would differ if different caliber guns or more antiquated fire control were used, but the only time to consider using all of the possible shells in the game would be in the late-game, and so as a result I am not sure the extent to which these confounding variables skew the result.

do you mind releasing this as a google spread sheet for the community?

I would assert a lower caliber with a higher rate of fire would be better able to take advantage of different munitions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think accuracy needs to be rechecked as increases are a bit too good. I hope they buff higher tier weapons in accuracy. I pick TNT quite a bit as 5% piercing and weight reduction is quite nice. But ballisite is just a solid performer all around.

Edited by Zak MacKay
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hangar18 said:

do you mind releasing this as a google spread sheet for the community?

I'll release it when I have done a few more tests, currently trying to figure out the exact calculations for damage on PEN vs. Partial Pen, Overpen and then I'm gonna make a couple more models with 15", 11", 8", and 5" guns

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2019 at 8:55 AM, ston5883 said:

It might have just been what I was facing but I have used High TNT and shot nothing but HE from 14 inch guns to devastating effects. It took down as expected CLs and CAs but the real shocker was what it did to the integrity of BBs or Dreadnoughts. 

HE used to be pretty OP. havnt tried the spam now.

If you go HE spam, go for something else than TNT, one of the HE damage ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanger18 I did it again today. I played the mission where it is your high tech battleship against one of theirs (I think it was called there can be only one). I ran 18 inch guns in triple mounts with High TNT and super heavy shells. I started the battle and switched to HE then sped the game up to 5x to make contact.  My ship fired it's aiming shots from the two front turrets and I slowed the game back down to normal. Upon the second shot which would have been my first full salvo it destroyed the other ship. I have no clue what happened or even how and with the RNG of gunnery I have no way to replicate the situation other than using my same set up. You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge about this game already so I'll ask, is there a possibility of having a Hood type of situation happen in this game?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ston5883 said:

Hanger18 I did it again today. I played the mission where it is your high tech battleship against one of theirs (I think it was called there can be only one). I ran 18 inch guns in triple mounts with High TNT and super heavy shells. I started the battle and switched to HE then sped the game up to 5x to make contact.  My ship fired it's aiming shots from the two front turrets and I slowed the game back down to normal. Upon the second shot which would have been my first full salvo it destroyed the other ship. I have no clue what happened or even how and with the RNG of gunnery I have no way to replicate the situation other than using my same set up. You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge about this game already so I'll ask, is there a possibility of having a Hood type of situation happen in this game?

Performance of HE in this game was and remains entirely over the top and absurd when firing at armoured targets.

Even worse when you consider HE "plunging fire" is a contradiction in terms in that the HE would arm on the first decently significant surface it struck and then explode.

It's ridiculous that AP shells will bounce but then HE shells 40 seconds later will strike the same place and nuke the ship down to the keel. Complete and utter nonsense.

I expect the dev team to look at the damage model at some point. It's as important to define "things that must NEVER happen" as it is "things that MUST happen" when defining measures of success and fitness for purpose. The scenario I stated about plunging AP then HE is one of those cases of "must NEVER happen".

The reason I bothered to write a long post a while ago in the hotfix feedback thread was to highlight what ought to be going on and how and why I think they went WAAAY over the top on secondaries with this hotfix.

I raise it here as the damage model is one of the major components of the tactical model (obviously), and one that has bothered me for quite some time.

Given how little comment my post garnered, however, I suspect either nobody bothered to read it, or didn't understand, or thought it was crap, or don't care.

Yet some of what I've read in some instances over the intervening pages of that thread troubles me.

Edited by Steeltrap
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Steeltrap said:

Even worse when you consider HE "plunging fire" is a contradiction in terms in that the HE would arm on the first decently significant surface it struck and then explode.

To be fair, there is such a thing called "base-fused HE" shells which retain some penetrating capability. But it is questionable about them ricocheting. In fact, maybe we should just get rid of the whole ricocheting concept for main gun rounds - they either penetrate, partially penetrate (the damage can be very small, but it should probably never quite hit zero) or over penetrate. Those three categories should cover it.

And you are preaching to the choir about the "merits" of the current hotfix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arkhangelsk and Steeltrap it was an extreme range plunging fire though I don't think the game models these base fused HE. Also I think the deck had to be at least 4 inch since if I remember correctly that's what the game give us base wise when we start building a new ship. This is just a guess though since I never even had time to identify the ship. I think historically and I could be wrong the idea was to start out firing HE at long range and then switch to AP as the target got closer. I have been trying to follow that standard but with the way it sets up I devastate my targets before they get close enough that I'm comfortable using AP. This only seems to work though using High TNT and with the later guns such as 14in and up. I have not tested it on 10 to 12 inch guns using a earlier HE powder. The other powder I have gravitated towards is white powder since it adds so many small bonuses without any real trade offs. With it my AP seems to work better and my HE becomes marginal. So maybe it's all in the powder we choose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the concept of "unsafe handling of cordite" to take into consideration. I recommend the online book "Naval Firepower, Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era" by Norman Friedman. Especially interesting is page 98 in this regard. It is very likely that three British battlecruisers were lost at Jutland because High Command placed more importance on a high rate of fire than on safety. There has also been speculation that the Hood was lost in the same way. Basically, a german shell hits a turret, ignites the cordite that is stored inside the turret (should not have been stored there), and the resulting fireball travels all the way to the magazine through safety doors that were left open in order to facilitate a higher rate of fire.

So for this game, i think there should be a small chance of "Hooding", especially in the early parts of the 20th century.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I just ran a test with 10 inch guns and lydite the one with the +50% HE damage, super heavy shells and I used it against a BB with 1900 tech. I did not see the same effects I got with the 14 inch and up with high tnt. It did bring the structure of the ship down and covered it in flames but it didn't do it in large chunks. Also with the aft of the ship facing me I seen quite a bit of rounds bouncing off where as with the bigger guns I see pens. Next test will be lydite with 14 inch to 18 inch guns.

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

And you are preaching to the choir about the "merits" of the current hotfix.

It made smaller caliber guns relevant. 

 

15 hours ago, ston5883 said:

Hanger18 I did it again today. I played the mission where it is your high tech battleship against one of theirs (I think it was called there can be only one). I ran 18 inch guns in triple mounts with High TNT and super heavy shells. I started the battle and switched to HE then sped the game up to 5x to make contact.  My ship fired it's aiming shots from the two front turrets and I slowed the game back down to normal. Upon the second shot which would have been my first full salvo it destroyed the other ship. I have no clue what happened or even how and with the RNG of gunnery I have no way to replicate the situation other than using my same set up. You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge about this game already so I'll ask, is there a possibility of having a Hood type of situation happen in this game?

Just got done running a test a lot like that. Using ballistite and AP, it took me a solid hour to kill the other ship. 

reload with lydite II,and nothing but HE i was done in less than 10. 

EDIT: and i've replicated that with ease. lydite II with 18" guns is easy mode. 

You detonated the magazine of the main battery. The bigger the gun, the more explosives they have in them. so i imagine a 16"-18" magazine detonating would doom a ship. Theres no way to really replicate this, at least being on the good end. Shell hits a barbette, or citadel space, penetrates, and explodes, along with all the ammunition inside.

Edited by Hangar18
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hangar18 said:

It made smaller caliber guns relevant.

I'm mostly a realism player, and the evidence on the side that they were more or less accurate before this patch was much more convincing. If smaller guns cannot "win" on their realistic merits, the solution is NOT to artificially inflate hit rates or penetrations, but to present scenarios to the player where they might be useful. And if all fails we can use it as an accurate simulator to write essays on "Naval Secondaries: Never Really Correct?" and post on Naval History or something. Since even Steel Panthers have been used as a basis for military-related essays in the past, there is no reason UAD can't be as long as we keep up the dedication to realism. Let's leave it at that. :)

Quote

 

Just got done running a test a lot like that. Using ballistite and AP, it took me a solid hour to kill the other ship. 

reload with lydite II,and nothing but HE i was done in less than 10. 

EDIT: and i've replicated that with ease. lydite II with 18" guns is easy mode. 

 

I hadn't tried Lyddite II in the newest hotfix - is it still that effective? Part of the problem is the damage model, where for some reason it seems like destroyed compartments (usually all at the top) are indestructible objects, so your structure damage stops decreasing after awhile. Maybe the fires are reaching into more areas.

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...