Why are 9 inch guns so much more accurate than everything else?

[Dman1791]

It's pretty ludicrous how accurate 9in guns are compared to everything else, at least later on. I find that 9in is often 150-200% as accurate as 6in, 8in, or 11in guns outside of very short range.  they're usually the most accurate gun at any particular range by a significant margin. Only in years where 9in guns are comparable in mark to 12in guns do they seem to ever get beaten. I don't think I've ever seen any other gun get base hit chances above 1% at the gun's maximum range. It makes 11 inch guns kind of useless since they offer effectively zero DPM improvement while being much larger and heavier, only improving things if the 9in can't quite punch through enough armor.

[neph]

I complain about the 12 & to a lesser extent the 15, but the 9's absurdly overtuned w/r/t accuracy. See the second chart, below.

  

On 2/23/2022 at 5:24 PM, neph said:

Seriously, just compare the stats. Regardless of mark, year, or # of barrels, the 12" is insanely accurate comparatively.

 

Comparison: penetration:

vs accuracy:

The coloring's slightly off; 13" are mark Vs.

You'll note that 9", 12", and 15" are all quite exceptional. 12" in particular is more accurate than any other weapon out to 10,000 m. After that, the 15" is better.

You'll also note that it's a relatively continuous increase in mass with caliber, but there's a serious leap at 18" and a huge one at 20". There's pretty much no reason to ever use 18", however--19" is almost the same mass, cost (not shown), accuracy, but much better punching power. Never noticed that before.

This is for a plausible 1940s build: TNT IV, Triple Base, Stereoscopic V+Gen II radar (so you'll note that this is with a buff to very long range), semi-auto, standard loading. All guns compared are twin turrets.

Thanks for taking a look.

 

[Plazma]

@neph could you explain why 12" are more accurate than 13"? Both are Mark 5. I little don't understand why guns have this kind of paraments...

I found 11" usefully but rarely. When the armor penetration is important, dmg output or range 10 000 - 2 500 km and simply for some reason you can't add 12"  

 

Also is important the mass of it. You put heavy guns and the balance of the ship could be different (pitch/roll). Small pitch/roll and 0 offset improving accuracy. Also I found the speed of firing is important for accuracy, if you guns shoot fast, the aiming will be improved much faster! 

 

Also I am not sure, but when in campaign you have this same generation of guns 15" and 16" the 16" are much better. 

 

In the end I prefer 9" 11" (because sometimes I can't fit 12") 12" and 15" sometimes 16". I will test 19" because from the chart it looks nice and for the meme purpose 20" is always superb. 

[neph]

23 hours ago, Plazma said:

could you explain why 12" are more accurate than 13"?

No, that's just the way the game is. It's strange to me & it is the reason I posted that thread originally.

[Candle_86]

yea 12's are weird because historically 15's and 16's where the most accurate.

[Hangar18]

I called this out 2 years ago

9-12-15 do not conform to the bell curve

[admiralsnackbar]

Is it possible that these weapons are not being balanced as a whole? i.e. the other weapons got nerfed but 9 inchers was not. 

I always sort of wondered what a 'Mark #' for a gun really means... We already can customize the fire control, reload type, rotation mechanism, and armor of these turrets. 

 

[Somhairle]

Mark # is the version. Each mark is an update of the one prior to it, with 'generally' better stats than the predecessor. Faster reload, longer range, better accuracy and damage usually.