Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

Too me it seems that the armor upgrades in game are a bit drastic. Getting any of the Krupp tier armor makes putting a ton of armor on too easy and it also makes the ships absolutely impenetrable, throwing 500mm of armor with Krupp IV makes the ship only vulnerable to torpedoes and the absolute largest guns. Does anyone else feel the same way? It just feels like smaller weapons even on battle ships, and I dont mean 5 inch guns, i mean the 13-14 inch weapons are just not viable for very long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ye, i think armour is getting a proper rework either alpha 7 or 8 (the sooner the better), but most peeps are aware of armour needing a drastic rework due to how simplistic it is atm (which is fine because you need a testbed of somekind).

I hope it does anyways, would make the game far more interesting and will also make crew a vital mechanic as well.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just limit maximum armor values on each type of armor?

For example:

With Krupp IV, maximum belt armor is 320mm.

With Krupp III it's 340mm and etc.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HusariuS said:

Why not just limit maximum armor values on each type of armor?

For example:

With Krupp IV, maximum belt armor is 320mm.

With Krupp III it's 340mm and etc.

 

Problem isnt the limit but the massive bonuses the armour types grant in general, with no other drawbacks or nerfs that would make peeps think twice.

Also the damage model is quite simplistic as it still allows you to go bow in and tank all day long against AP (i did this in the 'there can only be one' mission with HMS king and the enemy italian BB which had 15 406mm's and reduced me to 44% structure, but i was able to sink him using 18inch HE shells (tnt i think the filler was)).

So it shows it needs a lot of work as any red compartments still get treated as a 'active' componenet rather than 'ignored' allowing shells to pass through the compartment and hitting deeper in the ship (which makes sense).

Also i think we are missing some armour types as well.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Problem isnt the limit but the massive bonuses the armour types grant in general, with no other drawbacks or nerfs that would make peeps think twice.

Also the damage model is quite simplistic as it still allows you to go bow in and tank all day long against AP (i did this in the 'there can only be one' mission with HMS king and the enemy italian BB which had 15 406mm's and reduced me to 44% structure, but i was able to sink him using 18inch HE shells (tnt i think the filler was)).

So it shows it needs a lot of work as any red compartments still get treated as a 'active' componenet rather than 'ignored' allowing shells to pass through the compartment and hitting deeper in the ship (which makes sense).

Also i think we are missing some armour types as well.

True, but that doesn't change the fact of ability to create warships with 500mm belt armor xD

EDIT: With Krupp IV armor type!

Edited by HusariuS
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HusariuS said:

True, but that doesn't change the fact of ability to create warships with 500mm belt armor xD

EDIT: With Krupp IV armor type!

Yeah, i see what you mean. Me thinks the campaigns budget will give a middle finger to 600mms of belt, 18inch guns with 36 knots and 300mms of deck armour lol.

I wonder if armour degration will be a thing? so after soo many shots or hits armour degrades from its starting performance and other areas become weak and warped after so many strikes (depending on the shell size and caliber plus speed of course), could also help defeat thicker amrour, but then that would depend on yer ship as well.

alpha 7 will be vereh interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Problem isnt the limit but the massive bonuses the armour types grant in general, with no other drawbacks or nerfs that would make peeps think twice.

Also the damage model is quite simplistic as it still allows you to go bow in and tank all day long against AP (i did this in the 'there can only be one' mission with HMS king and the enemy italian BB which had 15 406mm's and reduced me to 44% structure, but i was able to sink him using 18inch HE shells (tnt i think the filler was)).

So it shows it needs a lot of work as any red compartments still get treated as a 'active' componenet rather than 'ignored' allowing shells to pass through the compartment and hitting deeper in the ship (which makes sense).

Also i think we are missing some armour types as well

There is the cost component which is an almost non existent factor in the game right now, but will be important in the campaign. Also in alpha 6 there will be a displacement rebalance so perhaps that will leave less room for heavily armed and armored fast battleships. 

That said, I really would like to see a general armor model rework that incorporates the armor layout designs (citadel) options in a much better way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/8/2020 at 1:34 PM, HusariuS said:

True, but that doesn't change the fact of ability to create warships with 500mm belt armor xD

EDIT: With Krupp IV armor type!

They're not ships with 500mm of belt armor.

They're ships with the equivalent protection level as 500mm of belt armor of the most basic type would provide compared with the (much thinner) actual plate of a much better armor quality you're using. Completely different things, they do make sense, and they're neither unbalanced nor unhistoric. Historically there were huge leaps of protection quality each time a new advance in armor technology was achieved.

to put it in perspective: In a period of less than 15 years you went from battleships with 18 inches of belt armor to ships with belts of 12 inches of belt armor, yet actually better protected against penetrations. And that was just the transition to Harvey armor. Then came Krupp-pattern armor plate (which was even stronger) and then the progressive improvements on the basics of the Krupp method, the use of Krupp cemented, different kinds of face hardening, introduction of structural steel armor (this was mostly the US with STS though), etc.

But remember that you're seeing -in game- is equivalent armor thickness: it says how thick your armor is calculated on terms of how thick your armor plate is when calculated with the protective capabilities of the basic armor tech. The actual armor thicknesses you're putting on are much thinner. 

Why does the game do that?. Because it has to do it somehow. 12 inches of harvey armor do not have the same protective capability than 12 inches of Krupp Cemented armor. The game has to handle it somehow, and the way it does it may seem strange, misleading or counterintuitive, but it's neither of them at all once you get wind of what's going on.


The armoring system is in need of a rework indeed, but from the aspect of armor layouts and distribution - not from the calculation of thicknesses. And maybe labelling the different post-krupp armor techs as something more than "Krupp I, II, etc", but that one would be for flavor mostly, because on a practical sense, and in that aspect, the system that's in place works well.

Edited by RAMJB
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Waterline belt for Yamato:  450mm

Turret armor for Yamato:    610mm

KGV, main belt                       375mm

(Wikipedia)

Judging by the stats of these historical ships, knows as two of the best protected BB's of their era, Ships with 500mm main belts are excessive.  

Torpedo bulges created drag, which slowed the ship, but which provided major protection from torpedos.  

There is too much armor available to stop shells.  There is not enough torpedo protection.  While many Battleships were "sunk" with torpedoes, they had been reduced to wreckage and were repeatedly torpedoed while stationary.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't really think armour is that big of a problem. Maybe top values can be a bit lower than they are for some ship types, but the game is designed not to be 100% recreation of history, but to give players as much freedom and variety in designs as possible. Obviously some designs will feel way too powerful, but we also have very limited testing ground and we can't tell how campaign missions/goals will interact with current design options. Surely you can build heavily armoured warship with big guns but you have to sacrifice the speed and many other things to fit that stuff in or if you don't the whole project will be overwhelmingly expensive. Custom battles are also not the best testing grounds atm because you can't design enemy ships to find out what results you'll get when clashing various designs with each other.

Edited by Latur Husky
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Latur Husky said:

I don't really think armour is that big of a problem. Maybe top values can be a bit lower than they are for some ship types, but the game is designed not to be 100% recreation of history, but to give players as much freedom and variety in designs as possible. Obviously some designs will feel way too powerful, but we also have very limited testing ground and we can't tell how campaign missions/goals will interact with current design options. Surely you can build heavily armoured warship with big guns but you have to sacrifice the speed and many other things to fit that stuff in or if you don't the whole project will be overwhelmingly expensive. Custom battles are also not the best testing grounds atm because you can't design enemy ships to find out what results you'll get when clashing various designs with each other.

I think its the coverage, as belt atm covers from top to bottom rather than in strips, segments, bars etc. more or less a giant block atm having an armour viewer like Warthunders and world of wardanks would be very useful for that and maybe the ability to move the belt up or down or even have some unusual belt styles for ships.

Think that would help, although me thinks the next patch should help with excessive speed however.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BobRoss0902 said:

In b4 60in conning tower.

Think (is dat prince of wales?) could use it to hit atago for annoying her 'w'

I want to build super georgia, yorktown, california, London, La-Galissonaire and others at somepoint. Plus any supercruisers and ships i've missed out. although having a more in-depth armour editor wouldn't hurt.

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...