Unique Upgrades for Henri IV and Petropavlovsk

[Frostbow]

I would like to solicit your opinions on the Unique Upgrades for the Petropavlovsk and Henri IV. 

How do you find them, at least on paper?

If you already have either, have you used it in Random Battles with CVs and submarines? How was your experience with it?

I mainly play cruisers. If there are other Unique Upgrades that are more compelling to get, please advise.

Many thanks.

[Justin_Simpleton]

Flamu recently did a video with a Petro UU.  He seemed to be okay with it and didn't complain much.

[Yedwy]

IMHO both are pointless...

Henry makes you unable to really disengage as you are prob playing lighthouse build or its nonsensical to take it...

For Petro 10% AP damage and 10% better dispersion ??? in exchange for one heal less and giving up the reload module? I dont think so

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

Unique Upgrades are a long way away for me...even after 4k random battles and lots of OPS play.

Maybe someday I'll be able to review what you all say on this topic for whether they will be something I wish to pursue.

Thinking ahead, does it make sense to create a thread covering Unique Upgrade reviews? That way I can come back to a place with people's thoughts in an easy to find format...

[Wulf_Ace]

1 hour ago, Yedwy said:

IMHO both are pointless...

Henry makes you unable to really disengage as you are prob playing lighthouse build or its nonsensical to take it...

For Petro 10% AP damage and 10% better dispersion ??? in exchange for one heal less and giving up the reload module? I dont think so

sound little but that 10% dispersion buff is crazy, almost like dead eye. watch some videos, it is really worth it

[Yedwy]

3 minutes ago, Wulf_Ace said:

sound little but that 10% dispersion buff is crazy, almost like dead eye. watch some videos, it is really worth it

Well Petro already has cruiser dispersion and at what? sub 13km? ranges its even enhanced IIRC so I am not convinced this would make her that much different but I can try it... 🤔

[Wulf_Ace]

1 minute ago, Yedwy said:

Well Petro already has cruiser dispersion and at what? sub 13km? ranges its even enhanced IIRC so I am not convinced this would make her that much different but I can try it... 🤔

try it. in most cases you really dont even have time to use all heals and radars. games end fast. maybe only in clan battles.

[iDuckman]

FYI  Unique Upgrades in the wiki.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

16 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

FYI  Unique Upgrades in the wiki.

Eh, I meant here in this community.

My trust in the WG team is really, REALLY low.

[iDuckman]

Just now, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Eh, I meant here in this community.

My trust in the WG team is really, REALLY low.

WG has nothing to do with the Wiki.  *I* wrote that article.

[Utt_Bugglier]

23 hours ago, Frostbow said:

How do you find them, at least on paper?

I find them in the Armory. You can’t get them on paper.

[Nevermore135]

21 hours ago, Yedwy said:

Well Petro already has cruiser dispersion and at what? sub 13km? ranges its even enhanced IIRC so I am not convinced this would make her that much different but I can try it... 🤔

The special Soviet CA dispersion utilized by Riga and Petropavlovsk is significantly worse than standard cruiser dispersion at longer ranges (>8km). It’s actually most similar to that of Azuma and Yoshino, which similar to Japanese CAs also have superior dispersion compared to most other CBs (the exceptions being Siegfried and Sevastopol, which have standard cruiser dispersion).

This chart is dated, but most of the information (and the relevant info in this case) is still accurate.

 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Frostbow]

21 hours ago, iDuckman said:

WG has nothing to do with the Wiki.  *I* wrote that article.

Thank you for writing that article. I've bookmarked it for years already. 

[Project45_Opytny]

1 hour ago, Nevermore135 said:

The special Soviet CA dispersion utilized by Riga and Petropavlovsk is significantly worse than standard cruiser dispersion at longer ranges (>8km). It’s actually most similar to that of Azuma and Yoshino, which similar to Japanese CAs also have superior dispersion compared to most other CBs (the exceptions being Siegfried and Sevastopol, which have standard cruiser dispersion).

This chart is dated, but most of the information (and the relevant info in this case) is still accurate.

 

What really plays the critcal role regarding the dispersion patterns of Mikoyan, Tallinn, Riga, Petropavlovsk, Novosibirsk and Napoli (and all Soviet battleships using the trademark Soviet dispersion) is their special Vertical Dispersion (VD) formulae.

In simplest terms, the special VD formulae used by the said ships are better than regular ones at ranges within ~12-km, then they become significantly worse (in practice means they will undershoot or overshoot a lot).

Cruisers Riga, Petropavlovsk and Novosibirsk can equip range module at Slot 6 to partially mitigate the problem by gaming the system: rather than horizitional dispersion which follows a linear function, when maximum range is increased VD pattern gets "stretched" over the entire lengthened range, thus also lengthening the originally ~12-km "killing zone" (that can be taken advantage of easily thanks to superior ballistics) and improving VD as a whole overall. Range build is also free from the turret traverse penalty of the RoF upgrade.

[Nevermore135]

20 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

What really plays the critcal role regarding the dispersion patterns of Mikoyan, Tallinn, Riga, Petropavlovsk, Novosibirsk and Napoli (and all Soviet battleships using the trademark Soviet dispersion) is their special Vertical Dispersion (VD) formulae.

In simplest terms, the special VD formulae used by the said ships are better than regular ones at ranges within ~12-km, then they become significantly worse (in practice means they will undershoot or overshoot a lot).

Yes, their vertical dispersion is unusual. Vertical dispersion also differs from ship to ship based on the gun, shell, and whatever other magic WG chooses to apply, whereas horizontal dispersion has different “buckets” that ships are grouped into. It is highly dependent on a ships ballistics, while horizontal dispersion is not.

This doesn’t change the fact that Soviet CA horizontal dispersion is quite a bit worse than standard cruiser dispersion outside close range engagements. It’s extremely noticeable when one switches from playing one to the other. So while yes, vertical dispersion does play a role, horizontal is still very important, especially when engaging angled (non-broadside) targets and cannot be discounted.

20 minutes ago, Project45_Opytny said:

Cruisers Riga, Petropavlovsk and Novosibirsk can equip range module at Slot 6 to partially mitigate the problem by gaming the system: rather than horizitional dispersion which follows a linear function, when maximum range is increased VD pattern gets "stretched" over the entire lengthened range, thus also lengthening the originally ~12-km "killing zone" (that can be taken advantage of easily thanks to superior ballistics) and improving VD as a whole overall. Range build is also free from the turret traverse penalty of the RoF upgrade.

I believe this is a general feature of all ships when built for extra range, not just Soviet ships. The way WG models the effect of MBM3 messes with every ship’s vertical dispersion.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Project45_Opytny]

6 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

I believe this is a general feature of all ships when built for extra range, not just Soviet ships. The way WG models the effect of MBM3 messes with every ship’s vertical dispersion.

Yes. Every ship benefits in VD with range increase, be the cause as spotter, range upgrade or commamder perk. It's Soviet heavy cruisers owing to their peculiar charactistics that benefit the most.

On the other hand it further exhibits why using stock range module is a bad idea for battleships.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

22 hours ago, iDuckman said:

WG has nothing to do with the Wiki.  *I* wrote that article.

Your wiki doesn't have REVIEWS of the unique upgrades, just a list of effects.

I'm looking for reviews.

Also, the wiki is literally hosted on a WG site. It has a connection to WG. Claiming it has nothing to do with WG is a bit strange to me.

Edited August 24, 2023 by Daniel_Allan_Clark

[Frostbow]

1 minute ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Your wiki doesn't have REVIEWS of the unique upgrades, just a list of effects.

I'm looking for reviews.

I see the value of having reviews of each UU in the Wiki. Maybe it is their policy not to provide reviews?

From a certain perspective, it can be very time consuming and daunting to provide a pros and cons review for each unique upgrade, knowing how dynamic a PVP match can be, not to mention the need to update relevant parts of the Wiki should the stats of the UU change in the future.

[Yedwy]

On 8/23/2023 at 5:18 PM, Wulf_Ace said:

try it. in most cases you really dont even have time to use all heals and radars. games end fast. maybe only in clan battles.

I tried it now and my first impression "from the paper" seems to be correct, IMHO its meh at best... I see no special increase in number of cits or my damage per salvo, one gets 10% AP shell damage for losting the 12% of reload (not mointing the reload module) so basically a net 0 since one uses AP most of the time and only real benefit seems to be a bit better turret traverse and A CHANCE to get one more cit from a salvo here and there in excahnge for one consumable across the board...

I mean I ll give it some more chance but honestly a line regrind at double bonus for this is laughable IMO

Edited August 24, 2023 by Yedwy

[iDuckman]

3 hours ago, Frostbow said:

Thank you for writing that article. I've bookmarked it for years already. 

To be honest and fair, I didn't write is from scratch.  It existed before me.  But I've rewritten the text and kept it up to date.  Now, the Research Bureau article is one I wrote from scratch.

My main point is that the Wiki is NOT a product of Wargaming.   It is a product of many dedicated volunteers, some indentured to myself, Sir Ducken.

 

Thanks for kind words, Fishy.

 

[iDuckman]

2 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Your wiki doesn't have REVIEWS of the unique upgrades, just a list of effects.

I'm looking for reviews.

Ah!  We do do reviews of ships.  If someone want to write reviews of accoutrements, I think we could find a place for them. 

But you give me an idea.  Perhaps the ship reviews should include UU configurations.  Currently that's up to the individual reviewer.  Let me see what the guys think about making it a principal.

Quote

Also, the wiki is literally hosted on a WG site. It has a connection to WG. Claiming it has nothing to do with WG is a bit strange to me.

Don't be petty.  The fact that WG thinks enough of our work to pay to make it available to all players should not cast doubt on the quality of the work. 

Edited August 24, 2023 by iDuckman

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 minute ago, iDuckman said:

Don't be petty.  The fact that WG thinks enough of our work to pay to make it available to all players should not cast doubt on the quality of the work. 

It's not my intent to be petty about it.

Just pointing out that the wiki is hosted by WG. It has a connection. It's a good connection, and so far seems to be untouched by some of the more petty views of certain WG staff.

2 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Ah!  We do do reviews of ships.  If someone want to write reviews of accoutrements, I think we could find a place for them.

This would be cool.

I'd be interested to see it happen, provided of course that WG doesn't start trying to influence review content.

I'm also interested in reviews hosted here if possible. More viewpoints deeply expressed helps to provide a holistic view of these kinds of things.

[iDuckman]

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I'm also interested in reviews hosted here if possible.

I doubt that's likely to happen, given the fate of LWM's reviews.

Perhaps I should have been more specific.  WG has nothing to do with the content of the wiki, other than to create and update the game that it's about.  Neither the Wiki Team nor Wargaming wants that to change. 

 

[MidnightPhoenix07]

Henri's UU is really only useful for lighthouse builds, since it both increases ship detectability by itself and prevents you from running the concealment module. It's necessary for max lighthouse Henri builds, but not necessarily an ideal fit if you're going for a more normal build (for example, your typical heavy cruiser build). It's one of those "sidegrade" UUs that improves some aspects and sort of provides a different play style or game impact, without being a must-have or must-avoid choice.

Petro's UU seems decent on paper (and I thought it was rather decent), but it's less beneficial than you might think. As Nick30075 outlines here, the dispersion buff is only better at closer ranges. Base Petro (so ASM1 only) obviously has worse dispersion than either. UU Petro loses one charge of each consumable for +10% AP alpha and better dispersion under 11 km. Range Petro doesn't lose the consumables, has 16% more range, and better dispersion above 11 km. If you're only fighting at closer ranges (co-op, brawls, maybe ranked), the better close-range dispersion and higher AP damage is probably better. But for randoms, you'd want the better dispersion a bit farther out (and the extra range is nice but not really necessary). For clan battles, you might also want the extra consumables, for an extra radar charge and the extra potential health from another Repair Party.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

47 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

I doubt that's likely to happen, given the fate of LWM's reviews.

Perhaps I should have been more specific.  WG has nothing to do with the content of the wiki, other than to create and update the game that it's about.  Neither the Wiki Team nor Wargaming wants that to change. 

 

I missed something...given the fate of LWM reviews?

Why can we not review things here? Especially if it hasn't been posted elsewhere?

Edited August 24, 2023 by Daniel_Allan_Clark