|
Post by christian on Jun 19, 2019 7:24:41 GMT -6
what that important "ABOUT" means i will leave you guys up to determine (talk about loose wording) its 10% but maybe not 10% because This is simply geometry and depends on the impact angle of the shell. For example if the shell would otherwise hit at 20° from horizontal (and that angle is increased to 30° by the belt) the relative gain in LOS armor is 8,5%. If you increase this to 30°/40° without/with inclinded belt the increase is already at 13%
does not mean its modeled like that in game
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 19, 2019 9:13:28 GMT -6
I believe it is a flat 10% - since the game does not track actual vertical impact angle its a fair approximation as typical hits would be roughly a 8 to 12% difference.
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Jun 19, 2019 9:53:48 GMT -6
I believe it is a flat 10% - since the game does not track actual vertical impact angle its a fair approximation as typical hits would be roughly a 8 to 12% difference. Thanks very much! So, to clarify - one can calculate the effectiveness of an inclined belt by multiplying its thickness by 1.1, and substituting that value for the corresponding values at every range in the gun penetration table?
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 19, 2019 12:00:59 GMT -6
I believe it is a flat 10% - since the game does not track actual vertical impact angle its a fair approximation as typical hits would be roughly a 8 to 12% difference. There was discussion in another thread about ship angles mattering for penetration - if you hit the belt perpendicular, you'd penetrate better than if you hit it at a glancing (horizontal) angel. If vertical angle isn't considered, is horizontal angle considered? Or were we barking up the wrong tree?
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 19, 2019 12:05:26 GMT -6
I believe it is a flat 10% - since the game does not track actual vertical impact angle its a fair approximation as typical hits would be roughly a 8 to 12% difference. There was discussion in another thread about ship angles mattering for penetration - if you hit the belt perpendicular, you'd penetrate better than if you hit it at a glancing (horizontal) angel. If vertical angle isn't considered, is horizontal angle considered? Or were we barking up the wrong tree? I think there is a lot of random which take all these possibilities. Instead of calculations ballistics, you just work with effects of hits. It is not precise but overall quite accurate especially if you have no "real" hull for calculations.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 19, 2019 12:07:11 GMT -6
There was discussion in another thread about ship angles mattering for penetration - if you hit the belt perpendicular, you'd penetrate better than if you hit it at a glancing (horizontal) angel. If vertical angle isn't considered, is horizontal angle considered? Or were we barking up the wrong tree? I think there is a lot of random which take all these possibilities. Instead of calculations ballistics, you just work with effects of hits. It is not precise but overall quite accurate especially if you have no "real" hull for calculations. I expect so, but I'd like to hear the dev's take.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 19, 2019 12:24:18 GMT -6
I believe it is a flat 10% - since the game does not track actual vertical impact angle its a fair approximation as typical hits would be roughly a 8 to 12% difference. There was discussion in another thread about ship angles mattering for penetration - if you hit the belt perpendicular, you'd penetrate better than if you hit it at a glancing (horizontal) angel. If vertical angle isn't considered, is horizontal angle considered? Or were we barking up the wrong tree? Certainly, the angle of the belt relative to the shell hit (i.e. from the firing ship) is taken into account in the penetration calculations in the game; so for example if you hit the belt at a 45 degree angle then the effective armor protection of the belt would be ~ 41% higher than the base protection rating shown in the game.
The formula is quite simple, the effective armor protection is equal to armor [ Base Thickness / cos(X) ], where 'X' is impact angle off in degrees.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jun 19, 2019 12:27:04 GMT -6
There was discussion in another thread about ship angles mattering for penetration - if you hit the belt perpendicular, you'd penetrate better than if you hit it at a glancing (horizontal) angel. If vertical angle isn't considered, is horizontal angle considered? Or were we barking up the wrong tree? The angle of the belt relative to the shell hit (i.e. from the firing ship) is taken into account, so for example if you hit the belt at a 45 degree angle then the effective armor protection of the belt would be ~ 41% higher. Is this angling bonus guaranteed in the sense that only ship's relative angle off each other is taken into account, or that there is a degree of randomness to account for the shell may hit at a slightly different angle? Also will this be further affected by range as it would in real life or is it abstracted by the increasing chance to hit Deck/decrease in pen with range? Also, in the other thread there were discussion about weather ship approaching bow-on would be hit at a very steep angle, or if we'd simply treat the traverse bulkhead as "belt" and thus the angle would actually be perpendicular.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 19, 2019 12:34:35 GMT -6
The angle of the belt relative to the shell hit (i.e. from the firing ship) is taken into account, so for example if you hit the belt at a 45 degree angle then the effective armor protection of the belt would be ~ 41% higher. Is this angling bonus guaranteed in the sense that only ship's relative angle off each other is taken into account, or that there is a degree of randomness to account for the shell may hit at a slightly different angle? Also will this be further affected by range as it would in real life or is it abstracted by the increasing chance to hit Deck/decrease in pen with range? Also, in the other thread there were discussion about weather ship approaching bow-on would be hit at a very steep angle, or if we'd simply treat the traverse bulkhead as "belt" and thus the angle would actually be perpendicular. The 'net' penetration (after all other modifiers) has a small random variability to account for real-world variability in penetration due to a number of factors not directly modeled by the game.
If the angle-off-the-belt is very low (less than roughly 30 degrees or so IIRC) then there is an increasing chance/the lower the angle/ that the transverse bulkhead would be struck, which would mean that the effective impact angle would then be closer to 90 degrees of course. So no, you wont very likely be striking the belt at a < 5-10 degree angle, etc.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jun 19, 2019 13:04:52 GMT -6
Is this angling bonus guaranteed in the sense that only ship's relative angle off each other is taken into account, or that there is a degree of randomness to account for the shell may hit at a slightly different angle? Also will this be further affected by range as it would in real life or is it abstracted by the increasing chance to hit Deck/decrease in pen with range? Also, in the other thread there were discussion about weather ship approaching bow-on would be hit at a very steep angle, or if we'd simply treat the traverse bulkhead as "belt" and thus the angle would actually be perpendicular. The 'net' penetration (after all other modifiers) has a small random variability to account for real-world variability in penetration due to a number of factors not directly modeled by the game.
If the angle-off-the-belt is very low (less than roughly 30 degrees or so IIRC) then there is an increasing chance/the lower the angle/ that the transverse bulkhead would be struck, which would mean that the effective impact angle would then be closer to 90 degrees of course. So no, you wont very likely be striking the belt at a < 5-10 degree angle, etc.
Thank you for the clarification! I strongly suggest that when the game is more stable, the team spend some time updating the manual to better explain how the game handles the more intricate mechanics with regard to design factors, effects of battle damage, damage calculation etc. There is no need for actual formula to be given, but It will be helpful to know what is modeled by the game and what isn't, and if the game choose to abstract certain things, how are they being abstracted. For a very long time we know angling matter, but I don't think I really understood the exact implication until this post. I'd assumed that bow-on approach would make you more prone to belt edge hits, where as another pointed out the theory about counting hits on the transverse bulkhead as at close to 90 degrees. Bottom line is that there are multiple ways the game can abstract things in order to balance realism and gameplay, but it shouldn't be up to the player to guess how this is actually done.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jun 19, 2019 13:05:22 GMT -6
So if I understand correctly: - The chance of hitting belt vs deck vs transverse bulkhead is modeled based on range and relative angle of the target ship, and - The angle of impact is modeled based on relative angle of the target ship and which part of the ship's defenses were struck, but - The angle of impact is not modeled based on the angle that the shell is descending at, other than to see which part of the defenses are hit. I assume angle of descent is factored into the gun data instead, so that belt/deck penetration at a given range is already assumed to factor in relative thickness due to angles, and thus it doesn't need to be done again in combat? Thanks for the into
|
|