Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

This looks as though the ship is more of a burned out hull than any real perforations in the hull. The structural integrity of the hull is weakened by the fires but the metal is still one piece. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

There was a lot of penetrations (you should see there is a 12% chance noted). And even more partial penetrations.

And a lot of fires of course.

By that time all watertight compartments should be compromised, water pumps out of order and damage control crew shattered or killed.

Not to mention extensive damage to the hull.

 

But seems like the game just does not consider it affecting below water line situation in any way.

Edited by rgreat
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to your screen you only had 3 pens against it. Not much of a chance to cause flooding. So the reality is all your damage was fire spreading. You turned it into a burning iron hulk which is to be expected for a monitor type ship with most of the hull below the waterline. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience those usually have absolutely magical pumps.
Like, it has no bulkheads, i score a pen, it floods down to 30%, but then in seconds pumps it all out and is at 100% again - before my guns even reloaded.
For historical results they should very slowly flood over time and even start the battle already leaking
For historically correct results in game's situation they should start the battle already at the seafloor, sunken by waves on their way x)

Edited by Cpt.Hissy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, madham82 said:

According to your screen you only had 3 pens against it

173 partial penetrations should also count for something, no?

Edited by rgreat
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rgreat said:

173 partial penetrations should also count for something, no?

Partial pen doesn't imply a hole, just that it wrecked the armor or structure. I happened to try this mission out today and noticed with the ammo set to Auto, it was firing HE only at the enemy. I'm betting this is what happened to you as well. Would explain the unholy hellfire on that ship, and why your pens were low and no flooding. 

Edited by madham82
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That's completely unrealistic as even partial penetrations should cause armor plate dislocations, structural damage, fissures and leaks.

Ship damage diagram shows below waterline part of the ships as completely destroyed, but still no leaks at all.

Not to mention repetitive partial penetrating strikes against same armor plates should cause their progressive degradation to the point of complete breakdown. 

For now as I could 'partial penetrate' same armor plate indefinitely, and it still will work just like new. 

Edited by rgreat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the armor model is simplistic at best in this game if you haven't seen the many threads mentioning so. It does not simulate the additive effects of repeated hits to the same area like you describe. This is easy to see in how torpedo protection gives a flat percentage of damage reduction based on the level selected. The highest levels allow ships to take dozens of torpedo hits to the same side with no change in damage dealt.  

Just to restate, if your ship was using HE the whole time as I suspect that is the reason you had no floods. In my play yesterday, my first hit with AP started flooding, so I know it will work. There appears to be some kind overmatch value for HE vs armor. If it doesn't meet that value, you get a partial pen and no chance of flood. If it exceeds it, then it counts as a pen with a chance of flooding. Best example of this is using a BB caliber HE against something like a DD. I have sunk DDs in one or two hits from 16" HE shell due to flooding in this case. 

I am not saying this is correct or what you stated is wrong, just trying to shed light so you know exactly what the game is doing. 

Edited by madham82
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, madham82 said:

Just to restate, if your ship was using HE the whole time as I suspect that is the reason you had no floods

I actually tried to manually change between AP and HE. AP gave out better results with better damage and near the same chance of fire.

And by the looks of it auto was equal to AP for me.

So most of the time it was AP.

Edited by rgreat
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, rgreat said:

I actually tried to manually change between AP and HE. AP gave out better results with better damage and near the same chance of fire.

And by the looks of it auto was equal to AP for me.

So most of the time it was AP.

There's another issue then, no way AP should be causing fires like HE. Maybe it was just my build making the AI think HE was more useful, which it is frequently in this scenario. Think most people who have won against a monitor, did so by burning it to nothing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 1/6/2021 at 12:32 AM, rgreat said:

image.png.56ed42fbb128aff6961887496bfa1c49.png

 

Why not a single leakage on a ship nearly turned into sieve?!

this shows why there is a desperate need for a crew mechanic in the game. this would have counted as a crew knockout. but right now the game treats ships as living beings that function entirely on their own instead of machines that need to be manned by a crew in order to function.

Edited by ReefKip
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
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...