Figment

Aye, statistics have to be applied correctly. I remember a nice convo with a guy here, who claimed his wn8 proved he was better than everyone else at WoT. He just didn't realise things like scouting isn't taken into account properly at all in wn8 and kept argueing low average accuracy (due to playing artillery and units that fire on the move vs him only playing heavies) proved he was a better shot. When you have someone who has no idea what the stats mean (and don't mean) use stats, you have a pretty good chance of someone making extremely bad assumptions and drawing really dumb conclusions.

Depends on what they're saying. ;) If they make claims that are falsifiable/verifiable, stats are easy ways to dismiss those claims.

Not the only one, but what you get otherwise is people who take average statistics, fail to realise that statistics mean different things for different playstyles and classes and use basic statistics to bash other people (on forums and in game) anyway. I'd rather have the full picture given then. But other reasons are seeing if you're doing something wrong when you're performing poorly with a ship. At least to me average engagement ranges might show why some people perform much better than others in the same ship. Same for type of ammo used. One of the reasons is therefore L2P (for myself if not others anyway) and coaching. Ranges should perhaps differ for both torpedoes and various types of ammo btw. You might see some surprising statistics for those who think long range torps are OP because of long range.

Well mostly to counter the whining, tbh. A lot of people base their opinion on a ship on personal experience, where the ones whining are typically the ones who can't use said ships or apply the wrong playstyle for the ship.

I have a lot of issues with how these stats are displayed as it just takes over the stats from the profile page. That means: It doesn't separate stats for different classes properly (averages between classes like accuracy and all cannot be captured in a single accuracy stat comparison). It doesn't separate or compensate stats for tiers I'm not sure whether or not Wargaming compensates statistics for premium accounts when it comes to exp. Somehow I doubt it. A lot of important statistics are missing (also to be able to better compare ship efficiency for balancing). Draws Losses Average position in match results upon loss Average position in match results upon win Aircraft shot down compensated for AA quality of ship (aircraft per battle shot down is ridiculous if a ship doesn't have AA or just the one Oerlikon) Shots fired with what ammo type per ship class (to off-set with hitrate and damage rate) Average range of engagement Damage with secondaries Accuracy of secondaries Critical hits dealt per battle. Damage statistics (vulnerability to which type of ammo - would love to be able to compare how good someone is and can be at dodging torpedoes in a BB for instance. Would also show if some ships are too vulnerable to HE) Amount of time you're the only one to see enemy ships Ships scouted Scout damage

"Midway" is nice: "BBs? Hi, we're carriers, once we're done fighting, you're irrelevant." :p But tried "The Battle of the River Plate"? (sinking of the Admiral Graf Spee) For some reason, most ship movies are about submarines or real ships though (sailing vessels: if it has no sail, it is no real ship! :p ).

Think it would have beem easier if there was simply a battlecruiser class. Of course, if they can fill all the lines then becomes questionable, though I don't think you really need each line to be pure BB or pure cruiser / DD etc.

Typically it is a DD or cruiser in my experience.

If you add duds, you would have to increase the fire rate of torpedoes to compensate for the lack of DPS.

I dunno, I keep liking it. Seems to do as well if not better than the other two tier II's I had. And no, CBT experience went for both. Note that the Chikuma stats seem a lot higher due to one exceptional match of 48K damage, yet average remains at 23 over 4 matches. Chikuma kinda stunk. ALBANY: Overall Results Battles 7 Victories 5 (71%) Battles survived 3 Damage caused 187,113 Warships destroyed 13 Aircraft destroyed 0 Base capture 3 Base defense 160 Average Score per Battle Experience 771.57 Damage caused 26,730.43 Warships destroyed 1.86 Aircraft destroyed 0.00 Main battery hit ratio 53% Base capture 0.43 Base defense 22.86 Highest Score Experience 981 Damage caused 32,951 Warships destroyed 3 Aircraft destroyed 0 CHESTER: Overall Results Battles 5 Victories 3 (60%) Battles survived 2 Damage caused 126,401 Warships destroyed 4 Aircraft destroyed 0 Base capture 0 Base defense 31 Average Score per Battle Experience 692.00 Damage caused 25,280.20 Warships destroyed 0.80 Aircraft destroyed 0.00 Main battery hit ratio 42% Base capture 0.00 Base defense 6.20 Highest Score Experience 983 Damage caused 35,911 Warships destroyed 2 Aircraft destroyed 0 CHIKUMA: Overall Results Battles 8 Victories 4 (50%) Battles survived 2 Damage caused 185,398 Warships destroyed 11 Aircraft destroyed 0 Base capture 0 Base defense 370 Average Score per Battle Experience 672.50 Damage caused 23,174.75 Warships destroyed 1.38 Aircraft destroyed 0.00 Main battery hit ratio 42% Base capture 0.00 Base defense 46.25 Highest Score Experience 1,266 Damage caused 48,758 Warships destroyed 6 Aircraft destroyed 0

Have you ever tried counting to 8 seconds?

That's just one source, because it provides a sentiment of artificial injustice (random non-skillbased match making perceived as unfair). One of the major other sources is lack of skill combined with an ego-centric frame of reference: losing an engagement to "a lesser person, for I am great, how could I lose?". Or: "how was that even possible? I wasn't aware that was about to happen, so must be a cheat since it's possible it might have been a cheat" As I said before, as long as you have humans, emotions, ultra-nationalism, insecurity, immaturity, scapegoating, etc. You'll always have that, no matter how you adapt the game: as long as there's humans in, you get their filth as well.

The main reason for toxic chat is that we allow humans in there.

@OP: The problem you're refering to is the same as the traditional not contributing tier 8 premium heavy tank liability in WoT: People with no experience buy random high tier units (where premium units are usualy equal to stock units of the same tier), thinking they are smart and skilled enough to instantly win lots of exp and silver without having to grind there. They simply make the mistakes other players might (might) make in tier II-IV. They don't know about torpedo range, how to avoid friendly fire, or even what it is, don't know what ammo to use on what at what distance, etc. Nothing new, simply Wargaming not tieing the possibility for an account to purchase premium warships to already having a minimal amount of experience before allowing the purchase of a high tier vessels. It is the same marketing team that realises a lot of (inexperienced / not too bright) new players prefer to spend money to skip a grind and jump into high tier battles, that currently allows players at Gamescom to jump into tier X and go afk. Isn't that obvious? :|

If you lose a New York to a Phoenix, you used HE. I use a Wyoming and Myogi and Arkansas Beta at the moment, I kill Phoenixes, Kuma's, Omaha's, Tenryu's, Clevelands with one to three salvoes of AP (two hits on the citadel) on a regular basis. BBs don't need buffs, you need to learn when to switch to AP: When facing the front of a ship, use HE, when seeing its side, use AP. With the volume of fire of BBs in one salvo, you likely deal at least 3K to 20K damage per salvo firing AP and a more steady 4-5K with HE. I see a lot of BBs never use anything but HE, in which case you're giving the opponent too much time to set you on fire. I also see people use the repair function timed badly (instead of repair, you can also use heal to compensate for a lot of fire damage).

Sounds like you try to stay at extremely long range. I find IJN BBs to be better brawlers than snipers, at which point they can be extremely deadly. With the Myogi especially, you have to ensure the six cannons hit, so ensure the range is optimal. Yes it can engage at 18km-21, that also means it is firing at maximum dispersion range.

Think it has to do with auto drop at specific extreme angles, where the game may lag a bit on deciding the target's heading and adjusted flight on the extreme ends of the squadron a fraction of a second after the drop of other units since the extreme ends take a little bit more time to make a course change.

@Zen_Monk: I see constant jabs at (bad) WoT-players whenever they see a WoWS player do something silly like hide behind an island / sit still / sail in a straight line / whine about BBs / complain / be rude. "Oh noes the WoT population is coming here!" As if these people can't come from other games or as if this couldn't be their first game. There's a lot of stereotyping going on and it's pretty unhealthy IMO.

Fixed that for you. Please leave the WoT-people-are-inhuman-beings obsession outside guys. Most of you are WoT-players as well and part of that community as you are part of this. It's folly to pretend all bad comes from WoT, just because you've observed it there. Here's a hint: WoT is VERY late to the internet party. Addicus, on 06 August 2015 - 04:30 PM, said: You might be missing the point I was making. Any player thinking just because XVM said that since the win % was 46% that they were as good as lost is an utter fool. Thought I agreed and expanded on your point? :p

A predicted win in XVM is pretty much [edited], a 70% win chance often results in a defeat because of the players getting overconfident, cocky or otherwise simply don't bother. Like going up against ten men in football, if you think you've won in advance, you're going to get it tough.

Dagnabbit! D: I mean, проклятие!

AP barrage of 8 cannons in melee (below 9km) virtually always results in one or two citadel hits. Overall Results Battles 18 Victories 12 (67%) Battles survived 9 Damage caused 717,819 Warships destroyed 25 Aircraft destroyed 1 Base capture 0 Base defense 209 Average Score per Battle Experience 775.22 Damage caused 39,878.83 Warships destroyed 1.39 Aircraft destroyed 0.06 Main battery hit ratio 30% Base capture 0.00 Base defense 11.61 Highest Score Experience 1,298 Damage caused 89,135 Warships destroyed 3 Aircraft destroyed 1

St. Louis and South Carolina are excellent ships. The Wickes though. Not so much without a proper smokescreen to cover it, while the detection range is far too large for what it can do, should be 5.9.

Jezna, I don't use mods because of the principle of Fair Play. If something enhances someone's aim through a tool then that does matter and it is cheating, not on the level of rate of fire hacks, but xvm is cheating too by processing information for the player in game where other players do not have that luxury at the same time. The information is something others have to derive by experience and keen observation. If they got access to the same markers then it would be fine, but if they have to download some mod, they don't. Your notes are different because you don't have the game derive, proces or generate the information for you, nor do you have the game speed up the mental processing process. Different markers containing different information on depth perception do provide that. If it were up to me, mods would only be allowed to make things look prettier (present same information with colours, different font), not to change UI to add information or collect information that may influence the course of battle by improving someone's situational awareness (see xvm map mod), or accuracy (above mod). Now, I'm sure it is considered legal-ish by Wargaming at this time. Whether someone gets a 1% accuracy improvement or like in some games gets massive advantages doesn't matter to the principle of equality of players. From my pov, one simply does not artificially boost their chances compared to others. Being able to tell an angle and subsequent targeting adjustment is extremely important when you have units with a 30second reload and units that have to faint a move or stay hard to hit at range to survive... Very true for mêleeing DDs too.

The latter really, but what I mean is that you're close enough to fire at enemies, while close enough to get back to the carrier or other unit to screen. Point in case is that many CV players should more actively mess with their ship's position to be closer to friendlies. They shouldn't be that far away to optimize flight time anyway. If you stay within 6km (somewhat arbitrarily picked distance) of the front line, then a CA can easily fall back to protect it. Most CVs are 10-15km behind the front though.