Crysantos

I still think there is room for improvement on the IJN line fighter-wise and on the USN line when it comes to general layout and setups. WG needs to fix rewards for plane kills and spotting etc - then it'll be less hurting to go for support, not damage. The discussion about Tier IV-VII IJN CVs is an old one, I don't get why WG isn't simply adjusting torp damage to increase with each Tier, but on the other hand we can see the same issue with USN CAs, where Omahas/Clevelands do basically the same damage or more compared to their successors (due to fire).

Bitte versteh mich da nicht falsch, das ist nicht persönlich gemeint, aber bei dir ist noch viel Potential nach oben. Ich nehme an da variiert auch vieles stark mit dem Team und Schiff (ne Tirpitz hat ganz anderes Potential als ein lowtier Schiff da Premium und Tier 8), daher sind da große Fluktuationen möglich. Liegt also nicht an den Stattools, sonder neher an dir ;)

Sie war schon schlimmer. Präzision ist Mist, aber man hat deutlich an ihrer Panzerung und an dem RoF/Drehzeit verbessert. Also Arschbacken zusammenkneifen, die NC ist den Grind wert. "Gegen einen Kreuzer sofort tot ist" - mit solchen Aussagen entziehst du hier aber dem Thema sehr schnell die Grundlage für eine vernünftige Diskussion.

Das eine hat mit dem anderen nix zu tun - die Frage war ob WG was generft hat (im üblichen stealth-mode). "Gefühlt" ists bei mir momentan auch etwas seltsam mit der Präzision, kann aber auch ein subjektives Gefühl sein - hab ich aber schon von einigen gehört. Muss aber nix heißen, man vermutet hinter schlechten Leistungen ja meist andere Faktoren als seine eigene Unfähigkeit an manchen Tagen

WG hat glaube ich die alte Berechnung wieder eingestellt (ohne Premium, ohne Confedflaggen).... Edith sagt: Oh darky war schneller

q.e.d.

Linked in the original post ;) You don't know many aweful players we have on the EU servers

Yeah, just wanted to use "consistent" stats to have a well balanced picture and the same source for better comparison. CVs are a tad more difficult to analyze - no other ship is influenced that much by the choice of weapons (plane setup) and the mirrored enemy. Fighters are superior at Tier IV and V but yeah, I think the ability to strike twice is superior for the IJN CVs. I'm one of those evil sealclubbers (need my confed flags) in the Hosho and I see a lot of Bogues going for a strike-setup, always making me sigh. I think it's an okay-ish approach to make the lines more strike and defense oriented, but WG needs to make shooting down planes worthwhile - and that's what all of these stats show, ships that have the bonus feature of "good AA" perform way inferior than their dmg-focused counterparts. What you're saying is true for many ships repsb, like the way an Omaha or Cleveland can outperform a Baltimore and make way more credits due to repcosts, but we all know how "balanced" your feedback here is. Thx for the positive feedback, good to know that you appreciate it ;)

Love you long time, superb contest

Okay, here we go with part 2 of the battle of nations analysis. How do players perform on each ship? How does the average player's performance reflect top player performance, is it able to show a general "potential" of a ship? I've taken a look at the average player statistics and top 10% player statistics of maple's website - and I've parsed the Top10 players in terms of damage at warshipstats.com - the only "issue" are the CV stats, I had to take the top10 maple players (reason is simple, the top10 in terms of damage are pre-nerf for IJN CVs) - and maple has a different equation to measure top players, focusing mostly on winrate (certainly a factor, but if we want to see what a ship is capable of, I'd focus on XP and damage - winrates are often blurred by divisions for top players). So please read the following things with caution and put it in perspective - like the last CV nerfs, Mogami/Myoko should perform a tad worse now than represented in the top10 stats. We're still suffering from WG's XP shenanigans, making them a bit "off" with the premium account / confederate flag stuff counting in, so be careful about that parameter- but I think WG is going back to the regular base XP calculations with 0.5.1. First of all - the battle of nations in terms of XP and damage for each ship: IJN ships in detail (sorry, I know it's not the perfect way to show this, but wanted to have this in one image) USN ships: comparison of the Top10 players of each ship: I had this chart for the averge players in my last analysis, now I wanted to show how top players cope with better or worse ships... IJN: USN: So, what's different to the usual player base statistics? The only major difference is in the performance of the Kawachi vs. South Carolina - only the top players seem to be able to make use of the South Carolinas power (my guess would be the clever use of their range advantage). The Tenryu - St. Louis situation is improving with increasing skill, but the American CA is still able to deal more damage and gain more XP. The usual suspects Izumo, Colorado, Myogi and Furutake are still underperforming and the gap is actually increasing with better players. The TX dominance is not as overwhelming as for average players, but Zao and Shimekaze are still dealing 25% more damage, Yamato is still doing better than the Montana but in a more healthy region of 8-9%. Take a look for yourself, make up your own mind - I can only give you a hand how to interpret these statistics and it's still only my personal opinion - but at least we can see a pretty consistent and clear image of how players, no matter whether they're just the average Joe or the absolute top player, perform with these ships. In all cases besides the Kawachi (which is the first BB of the line) the average player's performance can be translated into rough estimations about the ship's capabilities.

This is why I always tell people to see things in context - when they complain about the Nagato, they should see how these other people are struggling with their Colorados. Yes, these statistics simply show how the average Joe is doing with each ship, bad and decent players. Does this make ships bad when people play them? Not necessarily but it shows that something with the ship is off = harder to play = less fun for the majority of the game. Most of the ships that underperform are the usual suspects like the Izumo, Colorado, Furutake, Myogi - remember, this is a DIRECT comparison to its counterpart. So when you see an Aoba underperforming, it's not because it's a bad ship but because the Cleveland is able to outperform it due to its strength in certain areas. Same thing goes for the Nagato, it's not incredibly strong but it's way stronger than the Colorado. Most of the things we can see here are pretty much what we expected, right? The St. Louis seems to be a bit off but in my personal experience that ship has a pretty strong armour for that Tier, it has way more guns (10x vs. 4x on the Tenryu) and most Tenryu captains probably try to get in to shoot torps and die while doing so. These low-Tier ships are very much influenced by the skill or rather the lack of it, a ship heavily relying on gunpower (with these firerates and fires started) is easier to play than ships that can torp but need to be careful when trying to get into good torprange. I don't want to see an OP / UP discussion here with the usual [edited] bitter posts. I'll try to get the average Joe / top 10% / top 10 damage + XP stats per ship done today, then we can see the actual "potential" of ships and the difficulty for players to max out their ships' performance.

It's the delicious tears woven into each line

<3 Nyx

I'll do one tomorrow or the day after, I'll try to show average guys, top 10% and top 10 for each class (at least damage and XP). @Jägerbombmeister: Nope, I disagree. WG is working with expensive TX and premium ships to make you buy things. @Orlunu: Yeah well I guess it's not the St. Louis that shines but the Tenryu that sucks, people try to get in close to torp and rely less on guns - and the St. Louis is perfect for HE spam and fires.

Yes, we can see a roughly 20 % bump in player numbers (last term was the launch) , Tier 1 ships have a 25% increase. Not huge numbers but we all know that the launch wasn't a real launch, just the removal of beta term. Let's hope WG is able to step up their promp efforts to keep players coming.

In my personal opinion TIX and TX are bit "more" dangerous to analyze right now due to low player number. But we can assume a pretty even player "average" skill, the higher the Tier (without premium ships) - I can add the expert (top 10% player base) statistics, but I'm sure they'll show a pretty similar picture, especially at low - and mid-Tier. There's a reason why certain ships perform the way they do and most of the time it's not the player's fault

True - the Yubari simply sucks though - compared to any other ship on that Tier. I liked the ship during CBT but right now I honestly regret buying that ship everytime I see it stuck in my port (it got hit hard by the armor calc rebalance and it's basically a floating citadel with low range torps, only 2 guns and absolutely no fun potential) - and I can't even sell it for gold. I love the Murmansk, Gremyachshy seems to be a very capable ship - Sims depends on the situation, should be better with the long range torps now. I do understand the issues with tweaking premium ships and I'm on WG's side, if they see a need to do so, they should do that. What I don't like is that you're not able to sell a Premium ship for dublons now, just for credits (and I'd much rather trade in my Yubari for any other ship available...)

Hey there, After a few months of playing now I'd like to offer some suggestions on how to make the game more balanced. 1. BB range nerf: First of all, I would like to cap the BB max range at 20km. Why? The longer the range, the higher the tendency of BB captains to snipe to deal damage without danger. BB dominated battles end up in a lot of draws due to that, it kills the "fun" for a lot of cruisers and it means less action. 2. Fire nerf: In general I think fire is too powerful and too easy to start right after you've just extinguished fires. Decrease the percentage of dmg done per fire, give it a cooldown for 5-15 seconds after the repair kit use. See next point for CAs and just increase the damage done by DB for CVs. 3. CA HE / AP buff: Especially at high Tiers USN CAs do pretty badly - their AA focus can't help them when it comes to performance. With the decrease in fire damage and chance, CAs could use a buff in HE damage, making it up for the lost fire damage and feeling more powerful without relying on the fires. With BBs coming closer due to nerfed range, they'll be able to do way more damage. 4. remove detonation: I can't understand why this is still part of the game, it's just depressing for the players and it has nothing to do with skill. 5. Border grinding: Good old border grinding, still giving people an advantage - either make it island-like (but I know you don't like that) or simply turn off all turrets, launchers and AA, reset their timer. 6. plane spotting mechanics: Reduce the spotting range for DDs and torps, this will help DDs so much - disable dead CV's planes right away 7. increase rewards for spotting, capping and shot down planes Just do it, it'll help reward teamplay and move away from pure focus on damage 8. MM and split team I still have quite many games consisting of low numbers of players on higher Tiers on huge maps, could you move these fights to smaller ones? The split team maps are still bugged, often there are 7-8 guys on one side, 4-5 on the other one... 9. stats Just a minor thing, but go back to the old XP calculation thingy. And I think it would make more sense to show % of enemy HP destroyed than pure dmg, would give people a better experience and decrease the frustration with battles like 6 vs. 6

Sir, it's pointless discussing with you. You don't have any facts to present besides "your stats" which still prove my point, not yours. I've shown you the complete stats for the EU server, which show that DDs are performing worse than any other class in every regard and have the least players at TX. Okay my average damage is higher because I play them currently (which isn't true for the Hosho btw. - used it to grind my credits for the Montana a month back) and you're apparently not playing your ship and not posting your game from this week... riiight. At least you're believing your own stuff I'm not playing DDs a lot - did that during CBT though - and still argueing for a DD buff in certain areas, for the game's balance sake. It'll hurt my fav class but yeah, I'm whining for sure.

So what? Cut one third of the Zuiho damage after patch due to the lack of one TB squad (and you won't get matched against higher Tier CVs anymore), still means Hosho-like damage of 60-70k - still beats your DD by far. That still doesn't change the fact that you're comparing mid-Tiers (that are fine for most players and where we "farm" worse players) with high Tier, where most complains are made. And it doesn't change the fact that the stats for the average Joe or even the top 10% players are a clear indicator for the DD's lack of performance. Fun fact - I have higher damage/winrate on my Hosho and Murmansk than you on your Shimekaze. If you feel like DDs are as strong as CVs, that's good for you. If the general player base stops playing them at higher Tiers for certain reasons and they're the least played class in TX, something needs to be done, at least when WG wants to see more DDs.

... We agree in most points and I think the reduction of fire would be such a relief for BBs that it would make up for the range nerf, especially on high Tiers. You could change the AP penetration dmg a bit to help the BBs, but in general I think it would be worth a shot, the thing wearing you down is the pressure of fire, torps or too many other BBs knocking at your citadel. Historical things... yeah detonation happened. CVs used to attack hundreds of miles away, fights took hours and there were no cap zones - why stick here to reality when it's got nothing to do with skill and just leaves you extremely frustrated. Citadel hits should be more than reward enough for a decent shot, imho - and most detonations I've caused and suffered had nothing to do with skill at all. One torp of my divi buddy sank a full HP Montana with detonation nothing skilled about that and it cost that other player 350k credits for...nothing.

First of all, one battle isn't representative and you does not equal all players. But hey, let's take a quick look at your stats and compare the Gremyashchy (which is a well balanced ship and performs pretty awesome on that Tier, most people complain about HIGH TIER DDs, not Minekaze Tier...) to your other ships. Gremyashchy: Experience: 1.788 Damage caused: 46.980 Warships destroyed: 1.90 Winrate: 69% Compare this fight to your average stats... no, you don't. Kongo: Experience: 1.842 Damage caused: 55.253 Warships destroyed: 1.38 Winrate: 50% Zuiho: Experience: 2.584 Damage caused: 97.251 Warships destroyed: 2.95 Winrate: 73% Considering your vast experience with DDs as main class, you're a very capable captain and ... still not even at 50% of the damage caused that you did with the Zuiho, you're not even better than the Kongo. The Gremyashchy is even doing better than your Tier VI, VII and VIII DDs. I rest my case, sir. If you're interested in the current stats of the EU servers and class comparisons - check out my thread here

Wow, dude! Great game, too bad you guys didn't win but awesome job. I had a 180k dmg game today in the Murmansk, didn't think an Omaha could beat that. Keep it up!

It depends a lot on the situation, I think the situational awareness skill is vital for every captain, even BBs. To know you're spotted although nothing is in range is the perfect example to tell you to keep maneuvering and changing speeds to throw the DD offguard and lure him in to make sure his torps hit. Load HE, wait for your opportunity - but I usually kill the DDs at 4-6 km, if it's closer than that then I deserve to die or I chose to go balls deep because of torps etc. I can't say that I felt the buff, it's mostly RNG at least in the higher Tiers. If you see a Shimekaze or Gearing at below 4km range you should be already prepping the recue boats for the crew.

Come on, that's not true. CAs that try to get within close range without being an IJN CA are plain stupid. Everything else can spam their HE out of detection range if played correctly and with decent maneuvering a CA can stand a long battle with a BB. Yes, the BB is in advantage, like a DD would be vs. a BB but the latter one still stands a chance. CVs are operating from long range, out of sight and on the regular map (not counting crappy Hotspots) no BB is going to actually see the CV and on TX it's quite hard to citadel the CV even when you spot it (even checked it out in the training room on various ranges and situations), with over 60k HP the CV can stand some fire and has the speed and agility to dodge long range fire. Take a Midway with double TB setup and tell me again about the funny odds a BB has against a CV, plus the fire you'll set with the USN DBs, even Essex has no problem taking out a BB when on its own. I love my BBs and I think they're doing very well, fire in general is too powerful for all classes but besides that and certain Tier-BBs the whole class is the most consistent and steadily improving class right now. I think it's just as naive and wrong to call BBs OP as calling CVs OP after 0.4.1. Neither 20 km nor 25 km are the perfect ranges for BBs and anything that decides to use their A and B buttons and adjusts speeds when being spotted doesn't have too much trouble dodging most shells. Don't get me wrong, I think most ships should be closer together when it comes to max range to avoid the usual sniping crap you see in BB dominated battles, just cap the max range at 18-20 km and see how much fun it can suddenly be for everybody.