whould like clarification about armor quality multiplier bonus?

[Accipiter]

pretty much what the title say, when you choose the thickness of your armor in the ship designer, does the game takes into account the armor quality multiplier you have chosen and gives you the equivalent thickness in steel, or does it just puts whatever thickness you entered and gives you the multiplier on top?

for exemple: if i chose 300mm belt, with the maxiumum armor quality multiplier of +100% (Krupp IV i think)

do i actually have a 150 mm belt, which is equivalent to 300mm of base steel with the multiplier?

or do i have a 300mm belt + the multiplier, which means i actually have a belt equivalent to 600mm steel?

if it's the second option (and i suspect it is) then no wonder in the current build of the game armor seems so OP and Battleships cant Penetrate each other for sh** even when they are broadsiding each other from 1.5 km away...

[Guest]

From what I understand the weight and quality are separate. And it just lists the thickness not your effective thickness.

[Fess21]

All armor is in thickness and all quality mods are multiplicative of it. 12" armor of 40% quality is 16.8" effective

[Accipiter]

ah, then it's as i suspected.

no wonder then armor is currently so overtuned! most missions gives you acces to a 60% Multiplier or more, if you concider 270-310 mm was the typical range of belt thickness for most dreadnoughts, with that multiplier they end up with an effective belt thickness in the 450-500+mm range! this is more than the freaking Yamato had, think of that for a moment.

no wonder they cant penetrate each other even from 1.5km with their WW1 12-14 inch guns...

this armor quality multiplier needs to be way re-adjusted whenever they re-balance the armor, i think it's the source of most problems. rather than a flat bonus, i'd rather see it actually model individually what those different armor actually does (exemple: face hardened armor gives you a better chance of shattering the shell on impact, late "all or nothing" armor schemes that use inernal belts like on the Iowa class have the outer shell of the hull acting as a de-caping plate that can disrupt the AP Cap of the shell before it even hits the belt, things like that.)

if that's too much work, at least reduce the quality multiplier to like +30% maximum, otherwise it's making armor way OP

Edited October 21, 2019 by Accipiter

[Guest]

Honestly it’s the guns that need a rework IRL the best historical armor was 2.4-2.5 times stronger than iron plate and the numbers are based on irons strength. The maximum multiplier is a small faction of historical armor strength. And those penetration values of the Yamato and Iowa’s were done against the best armor of their own nation not wrought iron plate.

so that means that ITL Yamato’s 16” belt would have been equal to a 38.4-40” iron belt. And the 25.6” faceplates the thickest armor ever put on a ship would be equal to... 61.44” to 64” of wrought iron armor.

[Christian]

13 hours ago, Absolute0CA said:

Honestly it’s the guns that need a rework IRL the best historical armor was 2.4-2.5 times stronger than iron plate and the numbers are based on irons strength. The maximum multiplier is a small faction of historical armor strength. And those penetration values of the Yamato and Iowa’s were done against the best armor of their own nation not wrought iron plate.

so that means that ITL Yamato’s 16” belt would have been equal to a 38.4-40” iron belt. And the 25.6” faceplates the thickest armor ever put on a ship would be equal to... 61.44” to 64” of wrought iron armor.

Quote

IRL the best historical armor was 2.4-2.5 times stronger than iron plate

 

the problem in game is the base quality modifier for Iron Plate in game is 1 when in reality armor quality 1 means it has a thickness to effective thickness modifier of 1

 

the standard which sets said quality modifier is RHA (rolled homogenous armor) and is almost the same quality wise as american class B armor from 1945

 

Iron plate should have a 0.5 quality modifier instead of a 1 quality modifier and krupp 1 should have 0.8 and so on

this means 1 inch of iron plate should be 0.5 inches effective armor

 

the problem we have is Krupp IV armor gets a quality modifier of 2 aka its TWICE AS GOOD as ww2 armor

most armor overperforms by 2x of what it actually should

 

further link to my current discoveries 

 

 

this also means 18 inches of Krupp IV is 36 inches of effective thickness