World of Warships - Captain's Academy Episode 22 - Overmatch Mechanic
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- Episode 22 covers the overmatch mechanic. This mechanic is one of the major reasons why Montanas in the game struggle so hard to fight Yamatos. By understanding this mechanic might help you decide how you want to fight certain battles. Enjoy Captains!
If you have questions, please leave them in the comments section below.
♦ Join me on Twitch for more fun! ♦
/ ichasegaming
♥ Don't forget to like me on Facebook ♥:
/ ichasegaming
♥ Follow me on Twitter @iChaseGaming ♥:
/ ichasegaming
If you like this video don't forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE for more videos :)
www.youtube.co...
Meanwhile kurfurst player be smiling with their 60mm bow flipping the bird against yamato players
Good thing even WarGaming are saying publicly right now on their historical vid about the USS New Jersey that the AP shells from the 16"/55 was essentially comparable in penetration power with the 18.1 AP from Yamato, and in that video, they weren't even talking about the super heavy AP shells.
Thats why the USS Montana is a tier 12 cruiser
+Teleica Yup :P exactly
+iChaseGaming I think it should be like now is it :-) realistic i think
I prefer more realiscicness than ballance :P
+ Drag0n B This mechanic was balanced, because realistically the magic number should be 4
maybe
+Drag0n B Realistic?
When the Montana doesn't even have it's actual armor scheme...
I'd hardly call that realistic.
please do a comparison in between Kutuzov and 155mm Mogami. with and without captain skills.
And this is why I think all T8-10 battleships should have 33 or 34mm of bow and stern plating (it isn't exactly armour, but it functions like that). That way none of them can just go "lol angling" and thumb their nose. This way all of them have the same issues getting past heavy angling. This would as a consequence significantly reduce Yamato's mini-boss status, to just being better than Montana (which could use it's own work).
This issue isn't just a Montana vs Yamato issue. It is an issue for all battleships facing Yamato (except for Tirpitz which has 60mm waterline armour all the way to the bow).
Now I imagine a lot of people would say "well, Yamato *should* knock North Carolinas and Amagis around" and they wouldn't be wrong. But in the same sentence should be included "but they should have a chance to reduce the damage in return, like other two tier difference encounters." Yamato is pretty much unique in the way she utterly overpowers the other ships without sacrificing anything serious.
If an Amagi couldn't be just citadeled from any angle, the Yamato in question would just have to beat her like a Montana would... which they do rather easily I might add. So it wouldn't exactly infringe on Yamato's power relative to that of the tiers below her. It would just make her the still strongest battleship of all, just not T11-12 material.
Goes to show the difference in pen between the 18in guns of the Yamato and 16in guns of Montana. With that being said, the Yamato will shread the Montana at any angle and distance.
Somehow I feel that this ep is more like a rant than actual Guide that Captain's Academy series were for :/
Yes I do know you are really frustrated about Monty vs Yammy, but you can do a seperate video for that that's not labelled as "Captain's academy".
+Maree Printemps Well it's THE mechanic that's responsible for the massive disparity between Montana and the Yamato soo...something that people should definitely know
+iChaseGaming You're saying the Montana struggles against the Yamato and that both have 32mm armor which is kinda misleading.
Stats say both have the same, Yet Montana gets reliably penetrated by Colorados while Yamato gets reliably penetrated only by other Yamatos.
People need to know that Yamato is literally impervious to gunfire and Montana gets basically destroyed by everything else as if it didn't have armor.
+Foba Bett You are incorrect. A Colorado would bounce off the bows of either Yamato or Montana in the same situation.
CleverClothe Tried and tested :D
Chase, have you considered shooting AP into the superstructure instead of using HE? Sure, you wont get citadels, but consistent penetration damage. I've gotten good results this way, even with cruiser size guns. (of course you need to be close enough to reliably hit the superstructure)
What is the 14.3? I don't understand the relevance.
+AShadowboxsFSX The overmatch mechanic comes into play when a shell enters auto-bounce territory. So if the angling is extreme enough to auto-bounce, then if the shell overmatches the armour it'll pen
+AShadowboxsFSX If your guns caliber is 14.3 times greater than the armour you are shooting at, it can "overmatch" the armour and pen, regardless of angle.
Why is it 14.3 and not some other number? I don't know.
Nicholas Alexandrides
Ah, thanks very much!
iChaseGaming
Thanks Chase!
+Nicholas Alexandrides So let me see if I've got this right - if they lowered the magic number to something like 12.3 then the Montana would be able to pen the Yamato without giving the Yam an increase in the amount of damage it deals in return?
I realise this could cause balance issues with other ship match ups, but I think it may be worthwhile dealing with the Yam/Montana match up as an individual thing with its own set of variables.
Yamato also gets wave motion gun in about 200 years...
+442dudeathefront it pretty much already has it.
+iChaseGaming is this "magic number" similar for all ships? Because I was wondering why my Murmansk couldn't penetrate the deck of a Zuiho with AP today. I did the maths with it and it came out that 14,3*15 = 214,5. So even a cruiser with 203mm can't penetrate her deck? Or is there more to take into consideration?
My impression is that WG is really avoiding having to admit that an error was made with this and that it will somehow go away with the introduction of new BB trees. The Yamato vs Montana thread on the forum leads me to this thought.
There is also the issue of many USN ships that are just not competitive which something else WG will have to deal with.
But when and how??????
+Paul Reuten Gearing is pretty atrocious aswell, I have about 80 pics(Not kidding, That's the actual number) of me getting both guns (2/3) disabled permenantly by the first shot that hits.
'that's not all a one way street though. the izumo is a steaming pile of crap. people have to grind in that floating coffin to get at yamato. there should be some reward. or they have to buff the izumo. if you don't correct this and nerf the yamato then the US line is suddenly better. the yamato is the biggest bb in history. this will be the all time final boss. and if you nerf it you also need to nerf shimakazes, which kill yamatos ridiculously easily at the moment
Space Cadet Izumo was re-balanced and is pretty decent right now, No idea what you're on about lol.
Foba Bett what?? i spent six weeks grinding in that pile of turd. it's made of glass. guns are good, but it's long, slow to turn, slow in reverse, and is a huge square unmissable target and can't even shoot behind itself, making it DD bait. you sound like one of those experts who hasn't used one but has lots to say
Space Cadet I still have mine tbh, It used to be a steaming piece of shit but it's fine after the re-balancing.
Read what the guy above me wrote for clarification.
Saying that The Yamato could pen The Montana and Iowa at any angle Just yells me the game is broken. I don't think that was really possible IRL, though there wasn't any 1v1 engagement. Sorry but IRL the armor of a Iowa os just massive and even of you consider 17-18" runs it's not so simple to just pen it every time. Also, the bigger the caliber, the bigger the air resistance and higher risk of accuracy problems, even if it has higher muzzle velocity! WG algorithm is just baby talk to any engineer or other technical person.
The penetration formula seems very simplistic. By taking just armor thickness, and projectile size. giving a unknown constant for numerous variables. Such as shell densities armor impurities and manufacturing defects...etc. I worked through some of the ballistic and armor formula and looked at some of the manufacturing info I could find from Japan, the US and British. It was interesting to find some of this data is still restricted. It appears to me that WarGaming used the old tried but true WAG method of computation for there armor failure model. Also projectile velocities and stability model is questionable. Again the armor tensile and ductile strength are difficult to determine without the chemical and manufacturing process data available. So basically I'm saying why not 14.3 works for a game anyway.
Just give the Montana 1 more mm of armor and magic happens: Tier 10 balance. But WG just says screw you Yamato OP because we said so.
Can the Montana pen lower tier ships such as the izumo and does the yammato lack in any area at all that the montana doesnt or is the yammato superior in every way possible?and how do you make the bots hold still? i have the mod but they always end up moving.but other thank that keep up the work chase! i love the editing and time you take in the videos.
+Mateo Huizar It's one of the settings when you choose what bots you want.
you get a choice of Armed (they'll fire at you), Active (they'll sail to the objective point), and Armed and Active(they'll go to the objective and attack)
Would it be fair to say this is a reflection of how they use to design battleships? I know when the US would design a battleship the golden rule was the armor on the ships needs to be tough enough to take hits form the same kind of caliber of gun the battleship is equipped with. Simply put the Montana needs to haven enough armor to fight another Montana and the Yamato just has guns that are to big.
i find it funny that whenever you bring up game mechanics/ridiculous invisible ships, and realism, everyone says
"IT'S NOT A SIM - IT'S AN ARCADE STYLE GAME"
but as soon as we're talking about yamato there are
suddenly 50 metalurgists on hand who want realism
and are very familiar with a ship that was never built
I fully agree with your comment up to the point where you say "was never built". You should add that you mean the Montana, because there were two ships of the Yamato class.
gerryka probably should have been more precise. peace out
+gerryka actually there were 4 ships of the yamato class, 2 were built as battleships, the third was converted mid build into a carrier, 4th was never started.
+Space Cadet Yeah, reminds me of the massive "War Thunder versus WoT/WoWP" debate. See, some things just need HP to be fair, but other times you just need physics. I like to think that, in terms of damaging or destroying other vehicles, it's WoT>WT, but WT>WoWP. War thunder's air combat was fun (I used to play it all the time), and a lot better than HP. However, ground forces was frequently a load of crap. I never found it fair enough to be fun. Now, I personally like realism a LOT. I like the immersive experience. having health bars and the like kinda ruins that, but it's worth it to have a truly fair fight.
Now, with WoWS, you're right about the not sim, arcade thing. You have to give Wargaming a lot of credit for what they've managed. They are trying to make a fun, arcadey game where it is as balanced as possible, but at the same time they want it to be somewhat realistic. If detection range wasn't a thing, and everyone was visible, carriers would have a much harder time surviving, and DD's would find it much, much harder to sneak up on enemy BBs. But there are still always those people who are really sick and tired of a Minekaze popping up 6.1 km away from them in an open ocean.
I would bet everyone here money that WG will never, NEVER make WoWS fair AND realistic enough that it makes everyone happy.
That's really stupid.
The reason the american never put 18 inch guns on their battle ships is because after 16 inches penetration actually drops.
You see because Kinetic energy = mass and velecity ^2 there comes a point where the mass of the shell slows the shell so much that kinetic energy is actually loss. This meant that the Yamato got less penetration from her 18 inch guns NOT more.
+Douglas Oak Its actually the same senario as the German Tiger vs Panther case.
Yes the Tiger has an 88mm gun, but it has less penetration than the Panthers 75mm :P This is all physics, but sometimes they dont apply to developers :D
iChase, something you should put out in a video about current carrier play, fighter barrage kills any planes friend or foe within the target box. so when you have a friendly carrier, you have to be careful. friendly 6 plane squadron JUST flew into my box as my barrage started, killed all 6 friendly planes instantly and only killed 3 enemy planes of equal tier. i have accidentally killed and been killed by friendly barrage. like they say, bullets have the right of way......
+Nicodemus Maximus yeah, I'll get to it
word. i figured it was important as most people i have seen so far do not seem to be aware of it and it caught me by surprise.
WG hasn't released any of the info about the shell velocity mechanics (the stuff that actually determines penetration), claiming that it was too much data for the average user to consider. Yamato should actually have a harder time penetrating Montana instead of the current situation. Also, a larger shell diameter should make it harder to penetrate but cause more damage upon penetration. Or is physics too difficult for WG?
+Brofisticus Too hard :P
+Brofisticus this is such a broken logic if its to much information for people then don't read the info but it should be there for those of us who want/need to know it
i wonder if it can be found in the game files?
+iChaseGaming +BGnome94 +Nguyen Johnathan Just so I'm not blowing hot air...
Ard's Claim: forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/48941-1650-guns-are-completely-useless-against-the-yamato/page__st__280__pid__1224681#entry1224681
In-game truth: forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/65360-torpedo-detection-ranges-and-shell-velocitykrupp-as-of-052/page__pid__1602594#entry1602594
Reality: www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.htm
Its a side effect of chopping ranges in half. At the "max" ranges of most ships in-game, those shells should still be pretty flat and very peppy. Peppy enough for a 16" shell to pen a Yamato. Navy fans more than twice my age have been doing the math on that since the ships existed. While national fervor may cloud the opinions of some, math doesn't pick sides.
So a Pjotr Weliki with 75mm bow and 125mm bow armor cant be overmated by any shell type? (1072,5 and 1787,5mm shells must be shoot).
Please tell me Im wrong.
I will be on the tournament with you chase.
How do 406mm guns fail to penetrate only 32mm of armour?
The armor piercing capabilities is completely inaccurate, the US 16 inch guns had super heavy firing shells which had the same and sometimes better penetration than the Yamato's 18.1 inch guns.
if in January 1945 the Yamato where to have battled any of the four iowa-class battleships is it destiny would have been the same which happened to it a couple months later at the bottom of the ocean
Struggling a bit to get the point - essentially weak (but angled) bow armor is enough to bounce 16" shells, but not strong enough to bounce 18" shells? 14.3 = ?
+Old_Guard Yes , because of mechanics. 32 mm x 14.3 = 457.6 wich means it will bounce shells up to 457.6 mm when angled . Yamato has 460 mm guns wich means that they ignore this mechanic in this case. Montana has 406 mm and as such they wont penetrate the 457.6 mm angled armor
+Old_Guard Basically if ur guns are 14.3 times larger than the armour, it can be penned at any angle
Do u think war gaming should do the Iowa and Montana guns with the same penetration as Yamato like in real life
+MLG Gamez same pen but maybe with different raw damage potential since it can put a lot more shells in the air. you may not see this much against bb on bb scenario, but against cruisers, that extra turret will make it easier for monty to track and destroy a cruiser even when the cruiser tries to do some evasive maneuvers. just my opinion though.
+hbme2103 i agree with u. I think that they should have the same pen but Montana does just a little less damage but since she has more guns the dps should be the same
yeah, hope wg will fix this, it wont make yamato obsolete, she will just have to kill monty faster before she can flank and get a good broadside. complete possible because of the alpha damage yamato guns can put.
yamato class is the only super battleship ever put out to sea, ironic isnt it, japan was one of the earliest to recognize the significance of air power, pearl harbor, sinking of hms repulse and prince of wales, midway (disaster), yet they still pursue super bb design. germany on the other hand abandoned h class after bismark got sunk by swordfish torp bombers aka stringbags, and opted for u boats instead.
thats why i said one of the earliest, if im not mistaken (do correct me if im wrong), the battle of toranto in 1940 saw the first use of aircraft carrier vs surface ships. it was between royal navy and regia marina.
Sorry didn't articulate the engineering models.
A.) TAR= That's about right.
B.) WAG=Wild ass guess.
C.) SWAG= Scientific wild ass guess.
All are valid principles in modern engineering, and have worked through history. ie.( Challenger, Columbia, Chernobyl ...etc ).
the Montana should have better range because of its more advanced radar and fire control irl the range of these huge guns was limited more by the range at which you could spot a target and your shell splashes then ballistic range of the shells
Good Lesson
And this is why World of Warships is struggling to retain a community. No ship should massively outclass another ship of the same class and tier. What's worse, the Montana would have had better accuracy and similar penetration in real life but both of those characteristics were somehow handed over to the Yamato...because reasons? WG devs bought hook line and sinker into the hype about the "mythological" Super Battleship Yamato, when in actuality, the Iowa class was far superior in every way that would have mattered.
couldn't agree more
+Lemmiatem78 Anyone else getting tired of this statement? I don't see any lost in the number of players in WoWs, instead there is an increase.
Just got around to this video; I guess this is why WG is reducing the bow armor on Tier 10 BB's.
this is especially bullshit because, at least at long range, the montana's mk 8 superheavy shell had better penetrating power than the yamato's did. but because it's a WG game, we're just left with "herp derp 406 mm guns means it can obviously only pen 406mm of armor, because all 406mm guns are of the exact same capability and essentially fire the same shell, right?"
on paper the montana is a superior ship to the yamato, but not in this game. don't even get me started on the massively understated deck armor the montana has (in game= 150mm, real life design=-236mm)
+- FreeFlow - "on paper the Montana is a superior ship to the Yamato" The Montana only existed on paper, it was never built. Yes there were blueprints, but comparing these 2 ships is stupid. The Yamato and Musashi actually saw combat, The Montana never made it past blueprints just like the German H-44 which would would have had 2 layers ( spaced) of deck armor up to 150mm over the citadels. Imagine the crying that will occur if WG implements that, 300mm of spaced and sloped deck armor over the citadels on the H-44.
+Surtur04 let alone the ridonculous guns those things were supposed to have... but yeah H44 is way out of the picture, H39 and H41 is where it's at. And if the Torpitz is anything to go by, the guns on those will be a looot of fun to use
Surtur04 ...the montana's design was a complete design. they layed down the ship, but then they scrapped the idea for CVs instead. the montana is essentially the iowa with better armor, the iowa saw combat. that combined with the armor stats on the montana, its not stupid to compare them. the H44 will not be put in the game according to WG.
+- FreeFlow - that is false though both Yamato's guns and the super heavy shells had the same pen at range (not more for super heavy) the Yamato's guns had much more pen the closer u get. Also the Yamato has 50 mm more deck armor and 20 mm more belt armor im sorry but no historically the Montana wasn't superior though for the game they need to find a way to balance them.
N3V3R FORGOTT3N if what you're saying is true, then the yamato should be only slightly better, not just better in every way
Wait a second here. I need more context. That overmatch mechanic, what exactly does it regulate? It can't be just AP shells penetrating armour thickness, otherwise with a 14.3 multiplier we'd never see any citadel penetrations against all but the flimsiest ships if at all.
I mean, the Kongo has minimum 25mm bow and aft armour, which would need ~357 mm caliber to penetrate according to the math. Kongo and New York main battery caliber is 356, so they shouldn't penetrate the Kongo bow/aft armour, yet when fighting against other Kongo/New York BBs, that obviously doesn't match the gameplay reality. So it can't just be that you need 14.3 times the caliber size to penetrate any given armour strength.
What is the overmatch mechanic about? Calculating penetration values at maximum angling?
+Aotearas The overmatch mechanic comes into play when a shell enters auto-bounce territory. So if the angling is extreme enough to auto-bounce, then if the shell overmatches the armour it'll pen
+Aotearas Repaste from someone else's post "If your guns caliber is 14.3 times greater than the armour you are shooting at, it can "overmatch" the armour and pen, regardless of angle.
Why is it 14.3 and not some other number? I don't know."
+iChaseGaming
Okay. I was a bit confused on what exactly the overmatch mechanic governs. It would seem ridiculous if 406mm shells couldn't penetrate 32mm of armour. Regarding the Montana vs Yamato discussion, how reliable is the AP damage against the Yamato's superstructure vs using HE?
+iChaseGaming
An angle on how to possibly balance out this issue could be another mechanic that modifies armour rating based on how many shots any particular part of the armour has recieved. Even if a heavily angled 32mm armour section might bounce a 406mm AP shell, the impact is still transferring some energy. I'm not sure how real armour behaves in such conditions, but I can imagine that such impacts stress/deform the armour surface, reducing its effectiveness against future impacts.
Ingame, this could for example translate into a steady decrease of effective armour rating depending on how much energy a part of the armour belt/hull soaked up (the energy obviously depending on the number of hits and shell caliber, so armour could stay effective longer against smaller calibers, whilst taking the brunt of a 406mm salvo might decrease the effective armour rating enough so a next salvo hitting the same surface could penetrate).
That way a Yamato would still have the initial advantage in armour and firepower, but a Montana could be balanced by having a faster rate of fire and exploiting the above mechanic would render the armour advantage void after a couple salvoes (which the Montana could fire in faster intervals than the Yamato).
Just a thought.
+Aotearas my understanding was warthunder had a system like this it worked great for preventing the "IS steel wall" from just sitting in one spot taking shots
in terms of WoWS this would be great idea but i doubt WG would go for it probably to much work
This mechanic was reworked a few times, moght merit an update
Problem is ... according to Naval history records ... their model is wrong. While the 18.1" round did more damage once it penetrated (larger charge), the 16 inch "heavy" round of the Montana / Iowa had as much penetration. Its their game and all ... but its still not correct.
ok... that might expain why I got 1480(over pen) when showing broadside, and get citadel when running away... :(
when I'm in DM
where did you get the number of 14.3?
Simply speaking, is that armor thickness x 14.3 = smallest caliber to penetrate?
Then is angling can make a magic of reflecting shells?
Actually I want you talk more about it in the video.
+Asher Tse Basically if ur gun caliber is 14.3 times more than the armour u will pen regardless of angle :P
iChaseGaming Then what is the use of angling other than hiding citadel?
+iChaseGaming And do you know how the shell bouncing system works?
+Asher Tse so basically the overmatch mechanic primarily deals with armour that's angled at an extreme enough angle that would normally cause auto-bounces. However, if the shells overmatch the armour then it will go through
+iChaseGaming Thank you. And finally, the shape of Yamato is really beautiful.
Wait, isn't 32mm shorter than an inch? And giant high speed 18in shells can penetrate it? What kind of metal did the ijn. Use? :O
+Ty Prince Gundanium
An inch is 25mm roughly
If they use the N3 for the British this will get interesting
I would consider having a chat with the IJN CV captains to understand why this episode has come out lol
What would you do about this imbalance? I mean historycaly Yamato was the biggest BB ever built with the biggest guns so nerfing its firepower is a no no. Maybe give the Montana defensive torps or something?
Bugging Montana's armour and pen would be great. Yamato armour and gun can stay the same if the Montana get armour and gun buff
+George Enache The Montana was never made, the Yamato was. Had these 2 ladies ever have fought in RL, The Montana with the Mark 7 16 " guns, they WOULD have been competitive vs the Yamato. One thing this game REALLY REALLY fails to account for is the USN had and incredible radar guided fire control. The Yamato has a BETTER dispersion than a radar fire controlled Montana or even an Iowa Class? What in the flying fuck is going on here? The Yamato is better in EVERY aspect (Firepower, survivability, Repairs) than the Montana other that the Montana gets a tini bit better AA, and given the current Meta with CV's (there are hardly any at this tier or any) The Montana looks like as Chase once said is a tier 9.5
+George Enache Simple-----get a Shimakaze/Gearing to fire countless torp waves against the Yamato or get a Midway aircraft carrier.
+Nguyen Johnathan This is a strawman logic (by WG) if I ever saw it. So when these new BB's released, if they are worse than the Montana, how the heck are they supposed to compete against the Yamato?
Nguyen Johnathan
Hence why I included the "(by WG)" I never intended to blame you. And as people have pointed out, the Montana is more than capable of competing against the Yamato if WG would actually balance it worth a darn.
If most ships cannot pen a forward angled bow, then there should not be one exception that says "trollol, your armor is butter" That is not balance.
Well down chase, even though i watched this 5 times I didn't understand the first 3 XD
+Elo Veltix Lucky for you that it is only a 5 min. vid :p
I have to admit that this is the first Captain's Academy episode that completely failed to explain what it was talking about. If you read this Chase, I recommend redoing it.
... the meaning of Life is 22!
+iChaseGaming so whats the fix? Someone suggests increasing the Montana armor, would that be a balancing factor? Because right now the game is broken, and somehow I feel that the US line gets the dirty end of the stick in at least the BB and CA categories.
+Nguyen Johnathan 16" guns? They aren't really going to give the tier X German BB 16" guns are they? I thought the talk was that it'd be 19-20", bigger than Yamato.
Well, if the reload and handling goes the way they did with the Tirpitz, i'm ok with it. This is only a comparison with one ship, and you won't find this issue against anything else in the game. Montana can easily just blast out the Yamato's turrets, and make it useless.
Schmeethe88 Haha, that was funny, good luck with that, how close do you have to get to destroy the turrets? I mean, actually hit them, not by chance (that's RNG territory). And by then, will the Montana still be alive?
Nguyen Johnathan Well, removing Overmatch is the root of the issue, but this would affect the whole mechanics of shell impact. Weird stuff will happen (think AMX ELC bouncing ISU152 shells).
Adding a bit of armor to *one* model would be a specific fix to this specific issue (I don't believe they can bring arguments about historical armor representation).
And I also don't believe that adding another 2 contestants to this shooting contest would suddenly make the Montana come out as "not that bad" just because "there are worse tier X now". It won't change the facts in this video, it won't balance the Montana with the Yamato, the problem is that right now, *there is no contest*, only predictable outcome. One shoots bullets, the other shoots arrows.
*OR* they could adjust the number until the Yammy can't overmatch the Monty, like 14.5. But that's another change with a big impact, over all ships. Somehow I don't think WG likes changes like these.
what is overmatched exactly you never explained
+AsDarkAsDeath Basically if ur guns are 14.3 times larger than the armour, it can be penned at any angle
meanwhile in wot u can overmatch 30mm armor with 91mm & higher caliber gun
*not related but i came from there*
does training room still work ?
How does 32mm of angled armor bounce a 406mm AP shell... A 96mm gun in WoT can overmatch that
+_S3MPRIAN_ Lol...not a clue :P
32mm of armor sounds awfully thin. A T-34 tank has front armor of 45mm.
+Stephen Chu (朱朱)
That is for the "un-armored" parts of the front... The main armor was 410mm for Yamatos side plates (angled 20deg) and 650mm for the Turret face (angled 45 deg)
This again show World of Warships favors Japanese ships. Yamato's type 91 AP (3200 lbs) shell had about 4.9e9 joules verses the Montana's (2700lbs) 4.4e9 joules compared to HMS Nelson 3.1e9 joules or the HMS Prince of Wales 2.2e9 joules and finally USS Des Moines 1.0e9 joules. Reports show that both ships could penetrate each other's armor,. The advantage was with the Montana, not because of the guns or armor, but because of the the US's better fire control system and radar. Shot dispersion would be the final answer, but again World of Warship favors the Japanese. History shows that during WW2 the Japanese were not very good shots.
oh damn....i wonder why i went for the uss tech tree.....well that sucks, im already at the colorado. so is the montana any good???????
The worst T10 BB
You did it for the Iowa. The Iowa makes it all worth it. Montana is good but it's just not the kind of upgrade you get when you go from tier 8 to 9. I like to say all my favorite ships would be Japanese if they could just steal the Iowa.
LNX Gaming Same here
I think 100/7 is easier to calculate.
Does the 14.3 apply to all the ships?
+Kichirou Okazaki The overmatch ratio applies to all ships (reason why highly angled cruiser belt armour can auto-bounce BB shells :P)
so for an montana to get an yamato its to over manover him and shoot he blrh
are ijn ships like this against the usn ships?
So basically, one should not play the Montana and just get the Yamato since the Montana cannot compete against the Yamato. WG sure has it well-balanced towards the Yamato, that's for sure. I'm glad I stopped after getting my Iowa which I don't play often.
These numbers show some incredibly convenient coincidences. Both the Yamato and Montana had the exact same thinckness of armor? An odd number like 32mm, which makes no more sense when converted into English units? And this amount of armor is just under what the Yamato needs for an overmatch, when 33mm would be too much? What BS.
As soon I see a Yamato in my Montana I shoot HE. My average dmg in my Montana is 100k.
Why do you keep comparing the Montana and the Yamato?? I mean... statistically, Yes the yamato has bigger guns and better armour. But consider the fact that it does not all depend on ship's characteristics, it also depends on player skills. No offense by the way! Luv ur vids!
New intro?
How you get that match creater? Or room that you can choose what goes on?
That you where using*
+jamzsmp Aslain's mod pack (training room enabler)
+iChaseGaming CHEERS!!
+iChaseGaming I would appreciate a full Academy episode on the Training Room. I've never quite figured out how to make it work. Seems like there are a lot of undocumented (or to me, yet unfound) features. It's been frustrating to the point that I just left it disabled. I have seen videos of people using it, but when I've tried it just doesn't do what I want.
I think the system is faulty here. There is a probability of pen for X gun against Y armor at Z angle, especially for BBs which were essentially all prototypes. Did you hit a seam or the centre of a face-hardened plate? Did the steel foundry perfectly mix the ratio of hardening agents and anneal at the correct temperature for the correct time? Was the tempering done correctly? Metallurgy is not an exact science and was a lot less exact in the 40s. Availability of vanadium, magnesium, molybdenum and nickel (to name a few important elements in the process) was restricted by access to allies who mined the good stuff. These are the elements that turn steel into battleship armor: thickness is not everything. God Bless 'Murica had the South Africans and Canadians. The Japanese invaded the nearby Pacific Rim countries specifically to get their hands on these raw materials, none of which occur in Japan in quantity. Fun fact: when the war ended the Japanese became experts in smelting high quality steels with imported ores so a lot of the world's high quality and stainless steel is now manufactured in Japan.
well for all the fanboys of both side here what i have to say:
1. montana gun can pen Yamato armor but the raw damage are the same as 18 inch
2. Montana = yamato they both equal they both have they flaws and good points so stop comparing both of them
3. yamato armor is good enough to withstand numerous attack from torps and bom so that why wg decide to make yamato the way she is now
4.If people say yamato is worse than montana because fire control, amor etc, they wrong usn not so superior as you think my friend plus yamato was design to be ship that able to deal with multiple ship at the same time
Thank you for reading this
ichase never explained overmatch and it's mechanics
+AsDarkAsDeath Basically if ur guns are 14.3 times larger than the armour, it can be penned at any angle
sorry about the typos with using auto speech
What if the Montana is tier 9.5, then what will be the legit American tier 10 battleship, I really love some opinion here? :)
+Khang KT Tillmanns? Really, the Montana would probably have been a substantially better battleship than Yamato had she been built. Montana took all the strengths of the Iowa and built on them while improving the weakish armor.
+Snagabott
IRL
no Radar nor GFC
1v1, Yamato will win most of the time just simply the armor and gun caliber. 7 to 3, because amurican can still used scout plane to aim (Yamato AA is like non exist)
2v2, I would say 5 to 5 simply amurican had better shell, better gun, better armor.
If it is fleet op, Yamato will always lose.
the unfinished Iowa class battleship, like the one in SO
Nguyen Johnathan
Data also show that Plunged Fire is a myth IRL, at 30km++, nothing is tech nor skill based simply shell, at the range will fly like shotgun shel.
But Yamato really had a advantage at 30km~20km because at this range, Yamato gun can hit Iowa pretty good (0.001% vs 5% different) and rip through the citadel at almost every angle, but Iowa gun had to get into 21km to do the the same thing. At 20km, almost all armor is a joke.
This is a 91AP vs Mk8 AP, if Yamato switch to Type 1 AP, the accuracy will be way more better. Yamato and Iowa 1v1, I said Yamato came out alive 8.5 out of 10.
Also, plunge fire on USS vs IJN, US armor tend to be harder and less flex, while IJN armor are softer but more flex. Harder means absorb initial impact better, more flex means it is less likely collapse when absorb hits.
But I'm talking about Yamato vs Montana, which is almost same thing as I mention above, but the different is Montana got better armor, better construction, and 3 more barrels.
IRL, USS will always get to take the first shot, due to radar and GFC, and IJN cannot return fire reasonable until reach the 25km or less. And IRL, it is all about Co-op, which means both side will reck each other with planes (IJN had any planes left after coral sea? )before they even get to shot first round.
But this is just all theory, if someone build a simulator and 1 woild like to watch how things will go eventually.
And are you japanese?
Nguyen Johnathan
It is good to know another language, I had a friend know English, Spanish, learning German and Latin. And I'm chinese, know "american" but still cannot read a book without getting my translater, can talk with people, most of the time. And now learning Spanish and possible Japanese. And I know chinese, at least 3 dialect.
That is why I burn Yamatos with HE, which works more than good.
War Thunder won't have this problem when they add ships
seems realistic then. Frustrating, but realistic.
+Adam Webb Not really. The Yamato had worse armor, despite the same thickness, due to inferior manufacturing quality. That was the one big weakness it had (other than atrocious air defense, which it was duly chastized for.)
+Jerald Lutney do people remember the beta?, Yamato used to be a tin can, now beastly
+Adam Webb I agree
+Adam Webb Realisitc would be if the Montana had it's actual armor scheme... WG has denied it that luxury, probably so it could get more people to Free XP down to the legendary invincible yamato(people do this, I'm not kidding)
Chris Lin There's that too, but the main issue breaking big tier gameplay is the Armor on the Montana and the Yamato's ability to ignore it simply bc of it's shell caliber.
I think they actually share similar pen abilities in WoWs, but it's the overmatch thing that makes the Yamato's firepower so much better.
POOR MONTANA....
What I'm taking away from this is that there's no point playing anything other than Japanese BBs.
can you review yamato
+Kshitij Aggarwal When I get it and play with it, I will review it
+iChaseGaming ok thanks
I dont even know why people are making a huge fuss about this yamato vs montana. i personally think montana is a much superb ship than in yamato if you dont consider an "yamato vs montana" kind of situation. but recently people driving the montana get into this "yamato vs montana" situation more frequently. why? lack of carrier. *we need more carrier in high tier matches or more carrier overall in all tier* since when did yamato park their angled ship so it will become impenetrable? ever since most CV players stopped playing their CV. since when yamato started to become tanky? same thing. because people stopped playing CV and there is only limited ways to DMG an yamato.
im not a CV player so im not sure what WG did to CV to made it unplayable but they need to fix it asap so we will have more CV.
I think people forgot what wows was supposed to be. "rock paper and scissor" like you can see in one of the wows trailer. if a montana cant kill a yamato, midway will drool if they see a yamato. all we need is a huge change to CV so it will be playable and this problem will be fix. and buff montana citadel since that thing is a floating citadel. and nerf yamato turning time since that thing turns too much imo.
I want each (tech tree) nation/ship to be unique and their own play-style and role. i dont want to be wows to be simple like WoT where heavy tank take dmg and break the front line. light tank scout. artillery give supporting fire for your team etc. where your role is already been decided by your tank classes. i want all ship in wows to have its own role. its own play style. just like the yamato is great against battleships(especially montana)and montana is great at killing aircraft and a huge firepower and very highly effective against anything (except for the yamato)
chase. you might not agree with me but this is how i feel about the current game. its kinda broken right now. in fact its *very* broken. its still a solid game. but this current state is nothing compared to the state during the closed beta and the early stages of release where i had the most fun at wows.
Can HE over match the armour?
+DennisLego No HE explodes on impact the overmatching is relavant if you are firing AP
+nikos13ole then, why was I seeing some of my HE shots just going through the enemy ship? :(
DennisLego was it desync? happens from time to time
+DennisLego If the HE shells were hitting the upper deck superstructure (all the building stuff above deck), then there IS a mechanic in place by WG that limits total damage that can be dealt to it. It's most noticable after repeated HE hits that will eventually hit but do no damage due to the game hitting a damage point and going "ok, the superstructure is more or less a charred husk, there's nothing left to damage" usually equaling about 2/3's of the ship's max HP. (unless it's been changed... again...)
+Bakuryu0083 I think he means about HE Citadel pens. Ive seen those myself on low tier cruisers and carriers.
Bro can you confirm with me? that they have changed something in game?
My Battleships cant hit nothing any more......
lol at "US always best" comment. US Propaganda too stronk.
Many topics already discussed the "safe distance" or "immunity zone" of Iowa vs Yamato in detail. The result is obvious. But many people still have "US always best" delusion.
Iowa wasn't designed to be some ultimate massive heavily armored BB but to "kill" IJN's existing faster BBs/BCs whose speed was seen as threat to carriers.
And if IJN hadn't managed to keep real design of Yamato so well protected secret USN would have built Montana class BBs.
Though those resources would have really gone to waste considering dominance of BBs was over. (just like Yamato class was waste for IJN)
Or they can just balance the ships
Well , after all that suffer with the shitty Izumo, pwned every game by a Iowa, Yamato has to have some advantage
interesting.
ichase answer me it Latios777 in WOWS
+Robert Brown Not on Warships right now, if u got a question ask here as I'll be on for a little bit more
iChaseGaming when are you going to post a review on the new cruiser before it goes away its me Latios777
+Robert Brown Probably in the next few days (before it leaves shop) I just need more games with her to decide
yeah that needs To be fixed.
+Niko Karau No idea why WG chose 14.3...but it's the reason there's this massive imbalance between Montana and Yamato...
+iChaseGaming indeed i would allways perfere yamato right now and that shouldnt be the case
Conclusion, WG is Axis biased
This is just lazy. Caliber isn't equal penetration. A 5,56 mm rifle caliber can penetrate over 50 mm of steel (depending on angle, distance, yaddayadda of course). Either Wargaming failed on that or, dear Mr Chase, your explanation is accidentially fitting but generally false. I really hope the latter is the case (no offense I'm not subbed for nothing, right?) and until i see some kind of numerical evidence i'll assume that's the case.
How can this kind of unbalanc BS entered live game..... This should be fixed.
Too much truth.
why
+Robert Brown why what?
U no like me and where is the review on a cruiser man I get paid tomorrow I need to know if I need to get it or not
+Robert Brown The Kutusov? truth be told I'm still not sure if she's a good or bad ship yet. She's very average in my opinion but if you like her then get her, otherwise I would say hold back for now.
That mechanic is a big pile of stinking crap. If WG focused on the metallurgy and real world ballistic performance than we would have seen a completely different and way more realistic representation of each ship. Especially US ww2 era ships that employed STS plates for hull construction and super heavy shells. And at 3km firing range 32mm of steel wont bounce anything off not even 3 inch shells. How fuckin drunk was WG staff when they made decisions for this game.
I really dont see the point of this video, doesnt every high tier BB play knows its not viable to use AP against a well angled Yamato ? Hell, its not viable to use AP against ANY high tier BB when they are well angled. and I am tired of how many players keep crying about how the Yamato is "BETTER" than the Montana and even you iChase ! the Yamato is a "AntiBB-BB" of cause it will do better against another BB, but on the other hand, killing BB is the only thing that the Yamato is better the Montana, ONLY THING ! the Montana is a prefect all-arounder that can smash anything with her 12 x 16inch guns besides the Yamato. WHAT ELSE YOU WANT ? Dont you dare to tell me you want the Montana to beat the Yamato in close battle with AP, then what is the point of the Yamato ?
+Yi Ge Peng What ichase was getting at is the fact the Yamato has large enough guns that you CAN'T angle against it, meaning ONLY the Yamato can actually hurt another Yamato that's angled.
If the Yamato hits you, regardless of if you're angled or not, the shells will pen and do damage, usually hitting a citadel or three in the process.
Bakuryu0083 and Why would you use AP against a Yamato anyway ??? it tells you first at the beinging : its a Huge battleship with the thickest armor and her specialty is to kill another battleship. try HE next time, believe or not it work like a charm.
+Yi Ge Peng If I may take a guess here. I don't think that this was meant to be limited to the Yamato - Montana scenario (it's just the best example). This same thing can be applied to any other ship in the game, and explains how the mechanic works. It's extremely useful to myself in case of German Cruisers, because now I can work out which ships I can angle against, and which are going to penetrate me regardless.
+Nguyen Johnathan Yes, there are alot ways to ruduce the combat effectiveness of the Yamato. but people seem to ignored the weakness of the Yamato but focus on the only thing that the Yamato do best -- Anti BB.
Wapanese
Just remove the Yamato from the game :D
+Son Nguyen or just slap it with some nerfs
da fuq is wrong with u
+iChaseGaming My opinion would be just revert it back to it was like in close beta. The Montana should be better than the Yamato anyway
Montana was not built to rival to Yamato so Yamato is supposed to be better than the Montana
+Robert Brown Regardless wether the Montana was meant to rival the Yamato or not the should would be superior regardless. She got better FCS than the Yamato. She would have better damage control party and her shells perform nearly as well as the Yamato's
Wow... that is one lame mechanic.... I can understand having an overmatch mechanic in WoT to help prevent light tanks from bouncing shots that they shouldn't, but in a ship game.....
Nope, words fail me.
how is this helpful? Sorry but you never did explain anything really
first...
+Storm Zerx lol...6 in a row now?
+iChaseGaming it's helps when your telling me when you upload :p
+Storm Zerx I never said it was up, I just said I was rendering lol
iChaseGaming why are we doing this, if we are in the same ts room?
+Storm Zerx lol
can you give some more exsamples maybe? cool video, explain a lot.
in that situation v Yamato, shouldn't you be aiming at the mount of that second turret from you!
In your stream, the Kutuzov AP shell can deal 2-3k per salvo to Yamato, lol