Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'stats'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 62 results

  1. Hi all, Comparison of "Rentals" to "Ordinary" ships in last Ranked Season #12 from MapeSyrup WoWs stats site! Info from Reddit: Source All credits to original author: "notafakeaccounnt" !!! http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/season/index.html EU server season 12: RU server season 12: SEA server season 12: NA server season 12: Leo "Apollo11"
  2. natswright

    Win Rate - Improving it!

    I've been playing 3 months now, and am still mostly below average to average, with a few ship exceptions. As far as I can see from stats, win rate seems to very much affect your score. I can have some influence over that stat, but as an average player, I cannot carry a game, so consequently my win rate is low, 42% I had 10 straight defeats yesterday, and then 6 wins! I score some defeats had me as the best player on the team, but the win rate still takes a hit! Any hints and tips to improve win rate?
  3. Hi all, Stats for the 3 FreeXP Tier IX "Super Cruisers" ("Alaska", "Azuma" and "Kronshtadt")... https://wows-numbers.com/ship/3760109264,Azuma/ https://wows-numbers.com/ship/3760109552,Alaska/ https://wows-numbers.com/ship/3761157584,Kronshtadt/ are pretty close... BTW, there are currently: "Azuma" = 269 players with more than 40 battles "Alaska" = 2066 players with more than 40 battles "Kronshtadt" = 5644 players with more than 40 battles Also, according to MapleSyrup: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20190427/eu_week/average_ship.html there ware (last week on EU = 2019/04/27): "Azuma" = 196 active players (with at least 1 "Random" battle that week) "Alaska" = 530 active players (with at least 1 "Random" battle that week) "Kronshtadt" = 133 active players (with at least 1 "Random" battle that week) So... overall... the "Super Cruisers" are not played that much and even though they differ their stats are remarkably similar... Leo "Apollo11"
  4. Donnée 0.8.4 Test Torpilles Japonaise Torpilles Américaine Torpilles Allemande Torpilles Russe Torpilles Anglaise Torpilles Française Torpilles Pan asia Torpilles autres nations Tableau des résistances des navires aux inondations Calcul de la portée de détection des torp avec module et comp (Détection de base de la torp) X (module acquisition X comp vigilance) = portée de détection réelle Exemple torp F3 1.8 x 1.2 x 1.25 = 2.7 km Cas du sonars : (Portée du sonars) X ( comp vigilance) = portée de détection réelle Calcul temps de réaction (Distance en km / (vitesse de la torp en knt x 2.6)) x 1000 = Temps de réaction Exemple : torp F3 1.8 / (76x2.6) x 1000 = 9.1 sec Si comp vigilance et module acquisition 2.7 / (76x2.6) x 1000 = 13.7 sec Calcul inondation réelle (Nombre de base d'inondation de la torpille + flag ) X (la résistance en % du navire au inondation) = % d'avoir une inondation par torpille Exemple : on prend les 406% des type 93 mod3 du shima contre un yama et contre un pensacola 406* 15%(0.15)= 60.9% de chance de mettre une inondation sur un yama avec une torp de shima 406* 32%(0.32)= 129. 92% de chance de mettre une inondation sur un pensacola avec une torp de shima Type Deep Water Nation Pan asia touche tout sauf DD. Nation Japon/ allemande touche seulement BB et CV. Les Deep Water ignore aussi une partie de la protection anti torpille entre 20% et 30%. Note Mise à jour 0.8.4 Test , ajout de nouveaux navire et autre stats ST
  5. I've spent a lot of time recently reading a lot of continual threads arguing over if the Stalingrad is overpowered or not. Heck, I've participated in a few of them. However there's been a problem in all of these threads. Noone has the data necessary to make fair comparisons of the ship due to the nature of how it has been earned up to now. I'm not going to sit here and tell you I've got flawless data here and that whatever my conclusion is, is perfect. It isn't. However I do have a history in quality control. At one time I ran the quality control departments for two production facilities simultaneously. It wasn't always the case, but most of the time I legally had to follow a strict 6% variance policy. As long as our products were within +/- 3% of our target values, we were fine. Well, there aren't any "target values" for ships in WoWs, so I figured I'd work off of a 6% variance. I just took ye ole +/- 3% and decided to work with the whole spectrum of it. Now, how would I attain fair data? Well, to be honest it's quite impossible to actually get flawless data with what we're given in the API, but I figured I could get close... at least within reason. So I made a spreadsheet... yeah yeah yeah... another one. Blame the company I did quality control for, that's where I learned it. Here's how it works: 1) Auto-import the top 99 players from wows-numbers for a given ship. In this case, there were only 66 players that have the necessary 80 battles to qualify for the top list on wows-numbers, so 66 players it is. It turns out that those 66 players have (at the time of this study) played a combined 11,005 battles. 2) Look up another ship. By selecting a second ship, the sheet looks up every single of the 66 players and finds all of their t10 ships. From that data I was able to extract their data for the selected ship. 3) Purge data that doesn't correlate. Any player that had data on the second ship that didn't have at least 80 battles was purged from the list. Their stats were purged from both the Stalingrad list as well as the secondary ship's list. This of course drops the sample sizes. 4) Weight the data. Stats brought in on both ships were weighted by the number of battles in order to create a single variable for each statistic brought in. This way (for example) a single Stalingrad win rate variable may be compared to a single win rate variable from the secondary ship. Once the above was completed, I started looking through the data. Now, while the 6% variance seemed to work quite well for win rate, average frags (kills), and average damage, Some of the older ships had an insane number of average battles. Due to this I was generous and increased the variance for average battles to 15%. Better to err on the side of caution. I have only taken screenshots of the compiled and processed data. I've left out the parts with the individual player names. I started out by comparing it to the Des Moines and the Zao, since they are the two oldest CA's in the game. Their data is of course the oldest and most out of date. These two ships would be a lot of the applicable players first T10 ships. I was very shocked to say the least (sarcasm of course). The Zao completely dominated the third season of Clan Battles, the meta during Season 3 almost entirely revolved around countering the legendary mod Zao. However yes, the Zao using these metrics is completely thrashed by the Stalingrad. I was actually shocked a bit (no sarcasm) to see that the Des Moines wasn't nearly as dominated by the Stalingrad as I thought. Despite being one of the oldest ships in the entire game, and having years of players making it their first T10 ship in the game, it was within the tolerances for both win rate and average frags (kills). The next few ships I looked at I like to think of as the middle generation of tier ten cruisers. This would be the Hindenburg, the Moskva, and the Minotaur. When I first saw the Hindenburg data I was blown away. I couldn't believe it. I average somewhere around like 160k on my Hindenburg, with a brutally good win rate too. I thoroughly did not expect to see the Hindenburg thrashed like that by the Stalingrad. Then I remembered that for like half of the Hindenburg's life, it didn't have the 1/4 HE pen buffs. But either way, It is statistically defeated by the Stalingrad at this time. The Moskva is the first of the T10 CA's that actually meets the bloated battles tolerances, and despite going the vast majority of its existence without its amazing legendary mod or its fantastic 50 mm lower bow plate, it's win rate is actually within the tolerances. Shocked again I was. The Minotaur is substantially newer than either the Hindenburg or the Moskva, and her stats prove this out. Her average damage is substantially lower than the Stalingrad's, however its win rate and average frags are both within the tolerances. The last three are the newest tier ten cruisers out there. They are the Henri IV, the Salem, and the Worcester. Then Henri IV was recently buffed dramatically with its uber monster dpm buff of a legendary mod as well as its Clan Battle meta defining Main Battery Reload Booster. I'm really not sure if those buffs are reflected here or not. Only the players that played these ships and Wargaming would know that. Either way, She is within the tolerances for every statistic except for average frags, which of course makes sense due to how far back one needs to play the Henri IV. The Salem data is only here as an attempt at being thorough. There was only one single player that was a part of the 66 Stalingrad data set that also had over 80 battles in the Salem. This data is straight up worthless. The Worcester is the only ship that beats the Stalingrad. They're within the tolerances for both of the ships, but unlike every other example where Stalingrad is edging out the other ships, it is the Worcester that edges out the Stalingrad in every category except for battles. The Worcester is also the only ship to be within 2% of the Stalingrad average battle count. Their data is the most similar, as well as the newest. - TLDR - I don't really know if the ship is overpowered or not. Personally I don't think so. Though the data (like all data), I retrieved can be manipulated and interpreted in many different ways. Plus, it's fundamentally flawed since large swaths of it are going to be sorely out of date with me having no way to logically excise that out of date data. Yes, the Stalingrad seems to be stronger than the vast majority of other tier ten cruisers out there. However she is not the top dog of T10, as that crown rests with the Worcester. The other trend I noticed, is that as one travels through the data from oldest ship to newest ship, the Stalingrad goes from brutally overpowered, to right in line, to slightly behind. Plus, you know... this all comes from random battles. I tried to be brief! Link to later post in this thread where the same sampling process was applied to EU data instead of NA data. Link to original thread on NA.
  6. Hi all, WoWs EU reached 30K+ players OnLine again... https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/eu/EU Leo "Apollo11"
  7. Azakeit

    Monitoring of low played ships

    Hello, Along with ships statistics (damage dealed, taken, etc...) and players and testers feedback, do you monitor how often ships are played and is that a factor in decision to buff them if they're not a lot played ? Take the Henry 4 and Grozovoi for exemple, only 9k battles played the last two weeks, approx half battles played less than the next in the chart (Khaba with 15k battles played the last 2 weeks). Source Warships Today.
  8. Hey fellow captains, something weird that I just noticed now that I logged in.. in the new profile summary (pretty sweet if you ask me) I have a different average xp number, significantly higher than the one in the webpage summary.. so what's going on, should I bring out the calculators or what?
  9. Takru

    Regional player population

    I am wondering how large the playerbase is in each of the four regions. Is there a statpage for that?
  10. _Saracen_

    Clemson Gun Modules Stats

    I noticed that there is no discernable difference in the stats between the stock guns on the Clemson destroyer and the upgrade, yet in the "after mounting" box it shows +8 to artillery? Is it a bug in the text of the stats or the +8 graphic? Overall I'd like to know what exactly I'm getting before putting xp and credits into something I'm not sure is even worth it? Seems pretty pointless otherwise.
  11. blanc091

    Clan wars stats

    Hello, The Clan Wars' individual performance, like number of battles, win ratio and so on, where does it show ? I mean, does it go under random battles' statistics in the user profile ?
  12. GeneralRichthofen

    [SITE] WoWs-Life.com

    Hallo, einige von euch werden bereits von meiner Seite WoT-Life.com gehört haben, wo Ihr eure Statistiken für World of Tanks verfolgen könnt. Nun stelle ich euch WoWs-Life.com vor. Was ist WoWs-Life.com? WoW-Life.com ist das World of Warships Pendant zu WoT-Life.com Der Fokus liegt auf Performance und einer dezenten Übersicht der Statistiken und Schiffe eines Spielers. Welche Features bietet WoWs-Life.com? sehr kurze Antwortzeit (Ø 100ms) häufige Aktualisierung der Statistiken Grafische Darstellung Übersicht über die gefahrenen Schiffe Multilingual Welche Features sind in der Umsetzung? Das bekannte Dashboard von WoT-Life.com zum aktualisieren der Statistiken. Welche Features sind geplant? Weitere Graphen sowie einzelne Schiffs Statistiken. Serverstatistiken, mit einer Liste von allen Schiffe und wie diese im Durchschnitt gefahren werden. Du hast Fragen, Feedback oder Vorschläge für Verbesserungen? Dann immer her damit. Ich freue mich auf jede Antwort und werde versuchen jede Frage zu beantworten. Du möchtest bei der Übersetzung helfen? Dann besuch die Übersetzungsplatform. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Christian aka GeneralRichthofen
  13. A few days ago I checked my stats on a well-known website. It shows graphs for several categories - Win Rate, Average Damage, Average Experience and Personal Rating. Since I had not played Random battles from late August to the present day the graphs for the first three categories was flat, but the graph for PR showed an improvement! Graphs Could this be because better players are not playing so much (or leaving) and worse players are playing more (or joining)?
  14. Hello les amis J'ai voulu, aujourd'hui, générer comme tant d'autres ma signature de bas de profil, contenant mes stats. Mais je n'ai pas réussi à obtenir ce que je voulais, c'est pourquoi je demande quelques conseils à ceux qui l'ont déjà fait. Déjà, ma page Wows-numbers n'affiche pas les stats récentes, seulement les globales. Pourtant j'ai joué ces dernières semaines régulièrement. Et ensuite, dans l'édition de la signature, j'ai beau mettre dans les filtres d'afficher les stats globales ainsi que récentes, et les rangs des classées (j'ai participé aux saisons 2 et 3)... ... le résultat final n'affiche toujours qu'une seule colonne avec les stats globales et aucun rang de classées. Quelles cases aurais-je donc oublier de cocher ? Et pourquoi wows-numbers n'affiche-t-il pas mes stats récentes ? Merci pour votre aide
  15. Hey @ all Da man sich hier bei fast jedem Heulthread irgendwelche Statistiken reinziehen darf, hier mal ein paar Dinge zur Auswertung: Damage: Damage kann nicht als alleiniger Wert über die Qualität eines Schiffes aussagen. Dafür müssen nämlich auch der HP-Pool der potentiellen „Opfer“ dieser Schiffsklasse und das quantitative Verhältnis der beiden zueinander eingerechnet werden. Beispiel: 5DDs vs. 2BBs und 1CV (Rest der Teams ist für die Betrachtung obsolet) Damit kann der DMG der DDs im Optimalfall (DDs greifen nur ihre Lieblingsopfer an) maximal bei dem HP-POOL der 3 Schiffe geteilt durch 5 liegen. Ergo hat der reine DMG-Wert keine Aussagekraft über die Qualität eines DD. Winrate: Winrate sagt etwas über die Qualität eines Schiffes aus. Dies muss allerdings in Relation zu den potentiellen Gegnern gesetzt werden. Bei CVs darf es nur mit gleichstufigen verglichen werden! Spieleranzahl: Die Spieleranzahl sagt maximal etwas über die Beliebtheit des Schiffes und/oder des Baums aus. Es können aber nicht zwangsläufig Rückschlüsse über die Qualität gezogen werden. Beispiel Ibuki: Kein besonders gutes Schiff, aber danach kommt die Zao ;-) Seht ihr das auch so, oder bin ich hier absolut auf dem Holzweg und alle sollten optimaler weise gleiche Stats haben??
  16. Hi there, So, I had this idea already some time ago during closed beta... How about adding 1 vital piece of information to the main armament on each ship which would be... projectile flight time over certain distance. As we all know hitting something at 10km with Zao and Atlanta is not exactly the same thing. I guess that could help newcomers mostly to compare ships that they do not own yet or those that are already sold... but I bet also veterans would enjoy ability to compare certain ships without taking them to battle or making side notes... IMHO this is what determines accuracy more than dispersion and beside reload speed and turret traverse speed greatly describe offensive potential of the gun. Imagine Time to target: 5.1/8.2/12.7 (at 10km/15km/20km) Obviously this could be adjusted to be class/tier specific...
  17. psimage

    Personal Rating

    Hallöchen, gibt ja inzwischen die Persönliche Wertung, eine neue "Kennzahl" für die Fähigkeit des Spielers, die sich aus Schaden, Kills und Siegrate zusammensetzt (zumindest steht es so in der Info). Meiner Meinung nach verschlimmert diese Wertung nur die Egomanie, bzw. Stats-Geilheit, mancher Spieler, und rechtfertigt sie. Das Problem ist das, was NICHT in die Wertung eingeht: Eroberungspunkte, Verteidigungspunkte, Kill-Assists. Warum gibt es keine Punkte für teamdienliches Spiel? Wenn ich mit einem IJN-DD mit 6km Entdeckungsradius einen Cap hole bin ich doch nicht so blöd, irgenwem meine Position zu verraten indem ich schieße - mit den Deko-Kanonen schonmal garnicht. Also kein Schaden, aber ich hole einen Cap und trage damit zum Sieg bei. Rating geht runter. Spiele ich dagegen "egoistisch", also nur auf meine Wertung bedacht, verliere ich vielleicht weil die Gegner cappen, kann aber unter Umständen 2 oder 3, vielleicht sogar 4 Schiffe versenken. Mit Torps auf Schlachtschiffe kommt da ganz schön Schaden zusammen, also eine gute Wertung. Und weil IJN-DDs nun mal schlecht bestückt sind was Artillerie angeht schieße ich auch selten auf DDs, wenn ich NICHT am cappen bin - macht zu wenig Schaden, und die Freunde des angegriffenen DDs (Kreuzer) freuen sich über das Ziel. Aber wenn ich den DD aufdecke - und mich einem Risiko aussetze indem ich ihn offen halte - und meine Freunde (Kreuzer) ihn abschießen bringt das meinem Team was, mir im Rating aber nichts. In WoT sind Kill-Assists unter anderem durch Spotting ja auch möglich, und das Basecaps und Verteidigungen mitberechnet werde können steht meiner Meinung nach außer Frage. Soviel zu meiner Meinung, würde jetzt gerne von euch hören, wie ihr das seht. P.S.: Mich interessiert das insofern, dass ich die Stats schon gerne nutze, aber nicht um zu sagen "mit deiner Hitrate/Winrate/Avg. Damage/Wurst laberst du eh nur Müll, geh lieber mit deinen Barbies spielen du Noob!" (da wäre ich eh in ziemlich schlechter Position) sondern um zu sehen was ich gut kann, was ich nicht so gut kann, was ich üben muss und wie ich mein Spiel vielleicht anpassen muss um meine Fähigkeiten besser zum Tragen zu bringen. Eine umfassendere Persönliche Wertung, die Teamplay mit einbezieht, würde meinen Wert für ein Team - meiner Meinung nach - besser widerspiegeln als eine auf reine Gegnerbeseitigung getrimmte (die man ja indirekt mit Avg. Dmg., Avg. Frags und Death/Kill Ratio eh schon hat(te)), und mir dementsprechend auch besser widerspiegeln woran ich arbeiten muss und wie ich meine Stärken optimal für das Team einsetze.
  18. This is the stat WG made to be most pointed out, like it matter the most. But does it mean anything? Average experience, not WR, was best pointer in someone's profile to show if he was good player or not. It was like that while WG took into account only base experience without modifiers like premium time, bonus for first win, signal flag etc. But at some point they changed it to picture average of total experience with premium time, bonus modifiers and signal flags. My average experience before change My average experience after change So what does that mean? It means that players who pay premium time, like me for example, will have blown out stats compared to players who don't pay for it. From my side, this is ruining sportsmanship spirit and I can see how it could influence egos of bad players who think that their exp with premium is actually better that someone's who is not paying. I would like for us to petition WG to bring back old data in statistics, because this will lead to players creating XVM for WOWS.
  19. OttoZander

    Player stats don't matter

    Did that get your attention? Fantastic! Now that you're here, let me tell you a story. Have it ever happened to you that a complete rotten tomato has kicked your butt so hard you couldn't sleep right? Yesterday some generic, non-outstanding member of the community with the stat-board all in yellow, win rate of 51% and PR of 1000, you know the type, has out-played me in his CV against my Hakuryu, and in such a spectacular way. I am not a great player in any way, I am barely beginning to learn the intricacies of carrier play, but I am definitely not a slouch and there is no way a player of such caliber (stat-wise) should've been able to bring me to shame in such a glorious way. He was pulling off fighter manoeuvres that I've only seen Feld, MV and Papedepupi perform I began wondering, could it possibly be that once in a 1000 battles, just once, the player statistics were giving me a completely wrong impression of player's actual skill? Or is it some old-timer that had bought that account. This is simply an acknowledgement of my own faults. Considering what a colossal thundercunt I can be to my team mates when I snap, judging their incompetency in random battles, it is possible that karma had finally caught up with me and I've got curb-stomped by one of their kind People, learn from my mistakes.
  20. Reaper_JackGBR

    Stats not updating properly?

    Just a quick one for something that I noticed last night and checked on again today. Didn't want to send a ticket as this was a minor issue, but anyway. I scored a 51 plane kill game in my Hiryu, and while perusing my stats afterward (as I knew this had beaten my previous plane record) I noticed that my stats still recorded 46 plane kills as my record, the same as before (Akizuki) however, it now told me that the ship used for this record was the Hiryu. See? They don't match up. Actually, taking that screenshot just now, apparently I've also played only 1 tier 7 and one tier 8 game. Interesting. I'm sure this isn't important to most people, but just another little bug that ought to get attention I think.
  21. Koruption

    Stat-Qualification-Conversation

    Howdy y'all! I almost exclusively play on NA, and I've done as much as I can over there at the moment. I'm not really a fan of some of the 3rd party stats websites, so I've been working on my own little side project. It's primarily designed for use within a clan setting, however it is completely usable by others as well. While I'm not really ready to make it public yet, I am looking for someone that's played (at the Typhoon/Hurricane level) to critique what I've got so far. If someone that fits this description wouldn't mind sending me a PM here on the forums I'd like to have a conversation in either Discord/Teamspeak/etc to have my work critiqued.
  22. DutchDelightsNL

    Ranked Season Seven,the numbers

    Today, I came across this article on the NA server. https://worldofwarships.com/en/content/in-da-club/ I noticed that only 24 players made it 2 rank one, with I believe 3 weeks to go. When trying to find the number of players, playing ranked I came across, the numbers on http://wows-numbers.com for ranked Season 7 - Na server more love for premium ships like, Warspite and Arizona - Cleveland and Fuso most played ship on both servers - Fubuki great DD, with 10k torpedoes, 3x3 hard to detect, and Farragut good smoke duration and great guns, although I would choose Fubu - No CV in the top 10 ship list, and I have seen that when you are a good CV player, in a Ryujo you can totally dominate a game - Leander great ship versatile, speed, smoke, torps, and stealth but 2 many BB and no HE. - Shinonome well I would say if you have one use it! should be an easy breeze to tier X after that well somewhat harder but I believe you make it to 1. - 24 out of how many players, prepare that this ain't going to be easy, guess I make it to 10.
  23. fatmonk

    Double the base XP

    I don't know if this suggestion has been discussed already, but I tried to search for it. - so forgive me If that's the case. Sometimes weekends are horrible, and this one is no exception. Yesterday my two div buddies and I, had quite a few tier X battles that lasted like 7-10 minutes. Its actually much much shorter than most tier 1-2 matches. When looking at the scoreboard after the game, either team had any player who made anything remarkable, in fact it was poor allover. The top player on the winning team had like 1300 XP´ish - in a tier X game! I doubt its satisfactory for any player, winning or losing regardless. Suggestion: If the game lasts XX minutes, under the full 20 minutes, then boost the XP proportionally, with xx percent. Maybe it could be tweaked, so the boost would not be 200% if the game only lasts 10 minutes, but 180%, as some games lasts 18 minutes.- It should be based on average/expected match duration. - I assume the credits, is linked to the base XP? I'm not a math guy, but I'm sure somebody here could make an equation, of how it should be calculated. Another solution could be a better and more fair matchmaking, but that's probably not gonna happen...
  24. Comme vous le savez impossible de voir en jeux les stats du blindages des navires depuis la beta mais elles ont encore sur le wiki de wows mais pour cb de temps ? http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/World_of_Warships Ce topic servira a répertorier les blindage puis a les commenter ou a les comparer. Arbre Japonais Tier 4 Hosho : Armor 1 - 20 mm Hull Armor 6 - 20 mm Citadel Armor 10 - 20 mm Deck Armor 6 - 15 mm Extremities Armor Tier 5 Zuiho : Armor 9 - 20 mm Hull Armor 15 - 20 mm Citadel Armor 15 - 15 mm Deck Armor 13 - 15 mm Extremities Armor Tier 6 Ryujo : Armor 6 - 30 mm Hull Armor 16 - 30 mm Citadel Armor 19 - 19 mm Deck Armor 16 - 20 mm Extremities Armor Tier 7 Hiryu : Armor 6 - 110 mm Hull Armor 25 - 110 mm Citadel Armor 25 - 25 mm Deck Armor 19 - 60 mm Extremities Armor Tier 8 Shokaku : Armor 1 - 215 mm Hull Armor 1 - 165 mm Citadel Armor 1 - 127 mm Deck Armor 21 - 40 mm Extremities Armor Tier 9 Taiho : Armor 6 - 165 mm Hull Armor 25 - 165 mm Citadel Armor 48 - 95 mm Deck Armor 21 - 95 mm Extremities Armor Tier 10 Hakuryu : Armor 15 - 130 mm Hull Armor 15 - 130 mm Citadel Armor 48 - 95 mm Deck Armor 21 - 130 mm Extremities Armor Arbre Americain Tier 4 Langley : Armor 6 - 20 mm Hull Armor 6 - 20 mm Citadel Armor 6 - 10 mm Deck Armor 10 - 15 mm Extremities Armor Tier 5 Bogue : Armor 6 - 16 mm Hull Armor 6 - 16 mm Citadel Armor 6 - 6 mm Deck Armor 13 - 15 mm Extremities Armor Tier 6 Independence : Armor 6 - 127 mm Hull Armor 13 - 127 mm Citadel Armor 51 - 51 mm Deck Armor 16 - 102 mm Extremities Armor Tier 7 Ranger : Armor 6 - 51 mm Hull Armor 6 - 51 mm Citadel Armor 6 - 6 mm Deck Armor 19 - 30 mm Extremities Armor Tier 8 Lexington : Armor 1 - 178 mm Hull Armor 1 - 178 mm Citadel Armor 51 - 51 mm Deck Armor 6 - 40 mm Extremities Armor Tier 9 Essex : Armor 13 - 102 mm Hull Armor 34 - 102 mm Citadel Armor 37 - 64 mm Deck Armor 21 - 64 mm Extremities Armor Tier 10 Midway : Armor 1 - 193 mm Hull Armor 1 - 193 mm Citadel Armor 13 - 13 mm Deck Armor 6 - 160 mm Extremities Armor Bon voila, je ne pense pas faire les destroyers (ils ont tous entre 10-13mm de blindage).
  25. DefeatedUranus

    Stat info not collecting

    So I don't believe my stat information is being collected and placed into my profile. I've tried a quick search and not seen anything recently happening to anyone else. I have been stuck on 66 victories for a few days now, and I certainly have won plenty and lost some since then. Anyone else having a similar issue? Battles 133 Victories 66 (49%) Defeats 62 (46%) Draws 5 (4%) Battles Survived 45 (34%)
×