Jump to content


Safe stowage useless


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

TestBed_PL #1 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:09 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17866 battles
  • 131
  • [POWNY] POWNY
  • Member since:
    07-28-2011

Played 4 games in my m46 Patton 3 of those ive been ammo racked with safe stowage perk on 100 what a waste of a skill. :( (i dont expect it to make ammo rack invincible but cmon ******).

In other news water is wet. :bush:

Can WG and west German Patton :) 

 



IncandescentGerbil #2 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:16 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35775 battles
  • 1,453
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
Getting repeatedly ammoracked in most tanks I play is an increasingly bad joke. Is there such a thing as a league table of tanks which suffer the least in this regard? I'm pretty sick of it and it would change my future buying decisions.
Tried fitting a wet ammo rack to my Cent recently. Got taken out twice in first three minutes.

TestBed_PL #3 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17866 battles
  • 131
  • [POWNY] POWNY
  • Member since:
    07-28-2011
Yes very true, i guess its part of the game and we have to lap it up and not say a word.

Balc0ra #4 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:24 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67397 battles
  • 17,110
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
On some tanks I suspect it makes little difference. But on the Bulldog and IS-3 to name some, I got ammo racked every other game before that came to 100%. 

Spurtung #5 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:38 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 65982 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
It also depends on what is shooting at it.

Cobra6 #6 Posted 10 October 2017 - 03:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16344 battles
  • 16,007
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

Weak ammo racks should just go all-together. Give the module more health than the average damage of a gun of the same tier.

 

Leopard PTA and Str 57 autoloader for instance both get their ammo rack damage by quite literally any shot from any gun frontally and it hampers your ability to play greatly.

You effectively get punished more than other tanks for the same "crime".

 

Cobra 6



Thejagdpanther #7 Posted 10 October 2017 - 04:06 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34913 battles
  • 4,470
  • [TKBS] TKBS
  • Member since:
    07-16-2012
So "the first shot you get it's a module/crew damage" it's not a new feature?

Bennie182 #8 Posted 10 October 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 54905 battles
  • 1,773
  • [WGL-A] WGL-A
  • Member since:
    03-13-2012
a lot of tanks are prone to module damage. Learn to not show ammo racks if possible. several tanks have the ammorack on the side for example. if you get hit in the ammorack on Patton it's your own fault, since it's in the turret. some tanks it just happens, so deal with it instead of only whine.

IncandescentGerbil #9 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:19 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35775 battles
  • 1,453
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015

View PostBennie182, on 10 October 2017 - 04:15 PM, said:

a lot of tanks are prone to module damage. Learn to not show ammo racks if possible. several tanks have the ammorack on the side for example. if you get hit in the ammorack on Patton it's your own fault, since it's in the turret. some tanks it just happens, so deal with it instead of only whine.

Having an opinion does not necessarily constitute a whine. Whining about whining does.



japtank #10 Posted 10 October 2017 - 05:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27663 battles
  • 1,046
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

I remember getting ammoracked by a Bulldog first shell (is that 170 alpha or something?) in my CDC with safe stowage AND a wet rack that I was trying out just to see whether it made any difference at all.

 

The skill doesn't work, that's my conclusion from experimentation.

I highly suspect its coded with a simple random test without any parameter taken into account.



tajj7 #11 Posted 10 October 2017 - 07:09 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25814 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014
It's not to stop you getting damaged, it's there to minimise the risk of getting detonated. 

Erwin_Von_Braun #12 Posted 10 October 2017 - 07:59 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39100 battles
  • 5,259
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-25-2014

I give it to all my loaders, just because...

Not sure if it makes much difference but most of the other skills are pretty useless once you have BIA/Repairs/Camo (depending on the vehicle ofc)



CaptainThunderWalker #13 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:31 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18937 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    09-25-2015

Ke-Ho never gets ammoracked except for big rounds from howitzers which one-shot you anyway. I am not even considering to get Safe Stowage in that vehicle until I have 5 skills (ie; never).



Spurtung #14 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:38 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 65982 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

I just ammo racked a poor guy. It was complete luck, he was climbing tundra hill all sideways and I auto-aimed the poor thing.

http://wotreplays.eu/site/3875330#tundra-spurtung-object_263



Rimsplitter #15 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:40 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23989 battles
  • 587
  • [TKNZ] TKNZ
  • Member since:
    06-15-2016
All of my loaders get Safe Stowage, but the Excelsior has to have a wet ammo rack too.  Works very well on that tank.

Spurtung #16 Posted 10 October 2017 - 08:52 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 65982 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostRimsplitter, on 10 October 2017 - 09:40 PM, said:

All of my loaders get Safe Stowage, but the Excelsior has to have a wet ammo rack too.  Works very well on that tank.

 

That skill doesn't add, having it doubled is a waste.

Schmeksiman #17 Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:13 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 16434 battles
  • 6,601
  • [INC] INC
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012

Read up on how it works, you'll see that its use is very limited.

 

First off it's a perk, so it's useless unless you have it on 100%. Tho since all loader skills are pretty bad I can see why some people pick it, still it's probably only third of fourth skill you should take.

 

Next off, it increases the durability of your ammorack by 12.5%. Ammorack has hit points too, they just work in a different way than your HP. Correct me if I'm wrong here but say your ammo rack has 100 HP, safe stowage buffs that to 112.5. Say a standard 90 mm shell doing 240 alpha damage does 60 damage to modules (it's a hidden stat, based on gun calibre I believe), if that shell hits your ammorack and RNG decides it will take the damage, it drops below 50% turning it yellow or damaged. If it drops to zero you go boom and your turret flies off.

 

While these numbers are highly arbitrary it shows you the usefulness of safe stowage, it's not a great perk and won't save you as often. Still your best bet is not taking damage as said above.



Derethim #18 Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:29 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17775 battles
  • 1,997
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostCobra6, on 10 October 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

Weak ammo racks should just go all-together. Give the module more health than the average damage of a gun of the same tier.

 

Leopard PTA and Str 57 autoloader for instance both get their ammo rack damage by quite literally any shot from any gun frontally and it hampers your ability to play greatly.

You effectively get punished more than other tanks for the same "crime".

 

Cobra 6

Same with the british tier 8 and 9 heavies.



Aikl #19 Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:51 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 26054 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostSchmeksiman, on 10 October 2017 - 10:13 PM, said:

Spoiler

 

 

Correct math, but wrong assumptions, corrected version will follow later in thread.

 


Edited by Aikl, 11 October 2017 - 09:50 AM.


RockyRoller #20 Posted 10 October 2017 - 11:58 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 34083 battles
  • 1,333
  • [NR-NS] NR-NS
  • Member since:
    06-15-2016

My 131 Tiger suffered badly from ammo racking until I got SS and WR.

The Type VI Tiger wasn't as prone to AR, so I did not need to invest time in protecting it as much.

I can't remember what the T7 Tiger was like with racking.

 

I digress but my overall impression is all tanks have a baseline to get (insert name) damage, but there is a variable that WG alters to make it happen more one battle than another. Too make you spend money in game to fix it.

It is the only way I can personally explain the inconsistencies week to week, especially with shots going wild some battles but hitting the wings off flies the next day.  It's like they have a wind effect blowing shells off the line of fire that goes up or down in strength or direction.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users