Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Luis_Crespo

Why do I suck in my Derpitz?

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
99 posts
5,723 battles

Hi people.

I used to be a potato, and a Kriegsmarine fetishist one. As such, I bought the Tirpitz very soon, and it, obviously, sucked.

When I realised I was indeed a potato, about 500 games into WOWs, I decided to ground my Tirpitz and go back to low tiers to learn the game. It kind of worked and now I suppose  I can qualify as an average guy.

Well, no matter what I do, I can´t make my Tirpitz work. Wasn´t it supposed to be OP?. Wasn´t it the paradigma of Pay To Win?

Can some of you, kindest gentlemen, offer me some clue?

I love the ship, but don´t enjoy it too much these days.

 

The below depicted stats are from the last 20 days or so.

 

TIA.

BBs.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,890 posts
5,016 battles

Play it like your Bismarck, but without hydro. Use your torpedoes if every now and then someone actually comes close. Don't play it different from Bismarck just because you have torpedoes. Keep in mind that you have no hydro though.

 

You seem to do decent in Bismarck. You basically are a Bismarck. But with torps, no hydro. And basically, how often do you use hydro in Bismarck? Not very often. you also don't start smoke rushing, just because you got hydro (I hope), so don't do special crap just because you got torps.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OM]
Beta Tester, WoWs Wiki Team
3,436 posts
11,419 battles

Tirpitz was never really OP or pay-to-win.

It's about the same strength as Bismarck.

 

Do you use different builds on Bismarck and Tirpitz (upgrades and captain)?

 

Anyway, those are just 15 battles. They are statistically not very relevant and you probably just had bad luck with the teams.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
99 posts
5,723 battles

Thanks guys.

I use the same captain. 19 points secondary and endurance specced.

Regarding upgrades, Bismarck is more secondary oriented and Tirpitz uses AA upgrades instead. I think I should change this.

And finally, I command both ships in the same way. Maybe a bit too agressive for the high tier meta, but its sooooo boring otherwise....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
99 posts
5,723 battles
6 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You REALLY should play more games in them.

You are just starting in them.

well, thats true for Bismarck, but not for Tirpitz. She has 150 games. Not really too many, but, hey, I´ve got a life!  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
31 posts
3,589 battles

It's clearly due to a ninja-nerf in the last patch! :P

 

But seriously (since OP is asking seriously): try some more games, could have just been bad luck with meh teams and matchups. Since you seem to do quite well in your Missmarck, try to do the same thing in your Derpitz, should work out well in the long run :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,890 posts
5,016 battles
2 minutes ago, Luis_Crespo said:

Thanks guys.

I use the same captain. 19 points secondary and endurance specced.

Regarding upgrades, Bismarck is more secondary oriented and Tirpitz uses AA upgrades instead. I think I should change this.

And finally, I command both ships in the same way. Maybe a bit too agressive for the high tier meta, but its sooooo boring otherwise....

If you use the same captain, don't use different modules on the ships. Secondary specced captain goes on secondary specced ship, because boosting Aa range without AA captain on Tirpitz with its not too great AA is a waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
99 posts
5,723 battles
4 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

If you use the same captain, don't use different modules on the ships. Secondary specced captain goes on secondary specced ship, because boosting Aa range without AA captain on Tirpitz with its not too great AA is a waste.

Just done it!

Hope it works.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Players
1,422 posts
9,970 battles
33 minutes ago, Luis_Crespo said:

Hi people.

I used to be a potato, and a Kriegsmarine fetishist one. As such, I bought the Tirpitz very soon, and it, obviously, sucked.

When I realised I was indeed a potato, about 500 games into WOWs, I decided to ground my Tirpitz and go back to low tiers to learn the game. It kind of worked and now I suppose  I can qualify as an average guy.

Well, no matter what I do, I can´t make my Tirpitz work. Wasn´t it supposed to be OP?. Wasn´t it the paradigma of Pay To Win?

Can some of you, kindest gentlemen, offer me some clue?

I love the ship, but don´t enjoy it too much these days.

 

The below depicted stats are from the last 20 days or so.

 

TIA.

BBs.jpg

 

 

Time to do something useful in 100 years....

 

Ok so what is the point with stats?
In my opinion, everyone should go through lerning curve for every ship. Thats why first 100 battles or so are usually worse in terms of your performance , just to get used to ship.

Same happened with my Minotaur for example (you should have seen first 50 battles PFT).

 


So, take your time to get used to ship.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,890 posts
5,016 battles
1 minute ago, Luis_Crespo said:

Just done it!

Hope it works.

Thanks.

If it works on Bismarck, it works on Tirpitz. Tirpitz basically is the same ship, with slightly better turret angles, negligibly more hp, worse AA, torps instead of hydro.

 

And frankly, I prefer hydro to torps, but either works and as said, the fact that the torpedoes replace hydro should tell you how situational they should be and that you shouldn't try to torp rush just because you think you can.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
5,393 posts
8,735 battles
48 minutes ago, Commander_Cornflakes said:

Anyway, those are just 15 battles. They are statistically not relevant

QFT

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
14,695 posts
10,879 battles
8 hours ago, Luis_Crespo said:

well, thats true for Bismarck, but not for Tirpitz. She has 150 games. Not really too many, but, hey, I´ve got a life!  ;)

They why do you look at stats that do not say anything?

 

These are your stats you should talk about:

  Warship Tier Nation Battles Win rate PR Average Damage Avg. frags Avg. planes destroyed  
1    Scharnhorst 7 Germany 197 50.25% 921 43 916 0.73 1.16 Details
2    Tirpitz 8 Germany 147 46.26% 926 38 289 0.48 1.88 Details
3    Gneisenau 7 Germany 54 50% 663 35 246 0.54 1.24 Details
4

   Bismarck

8 Germany 24 54.17% 1596 63 829 0.96 1.46

Details

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,413 posts
13,825 battles
3 hours ago, Luis_Crespo said:

Wasn´t it supposed to be OP?

 

Nah, Tirpitz was actually underpowered when she first released (not anymore tho). She's probably the ship that received the most direct buffs in the history of this game, really.

As for your performance, your sample size is kinda low. There could be a number of reasons as to why you haven't recently performed as well as in your Bismarck in comparison, none of them have to do with yourself. If you enjoy the Bismarck and perform fairly well with her, there's really no reason why you shouldn't be able to do so in the Tirpitz as well.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,890 posts
5,016 battles
1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Nah, Tirpitz was actually underpowered when she first released (not anymore tho). She's probably the ship that received the most direct buffs in the history of this game, really.

How many direct buffs did the ship get? More than Furutaka?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,413 posts
13,825 battles
27 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

How many direct buffs did the ship get? More than Furutaka?

 

Well, considering almost everything on Tirpitz was buffed at one point, I think she got a lot more than the Furutaka.

Just off the top of my head:

- armor was buffed several times

- AA was buffed at least twice

- firing angles were buffed

- fairly recent secondary buff

I think the only things that haven't gotten direct buffs are things related to main battery performance (aside from the one firing angle buff) and maneuverability.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,890 posts
5,016 battles
12 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Well, considering almost everything on Tirpitz was buffed at one point, I think she got a lot more than the Furutaka.

Just off the top of my head:

- armor was buffed several times

- AA was buffed at least twice

- firing angles were buffed

- fairly recent secondary buff

I think the only things that haven't gotten direct buffs are things related to main battery performance (aside from the one firing angle buff) and maneuverability.

And detectability, I guess, if we subsume hp buffs into a broader category of "survivability".

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
2,980 posts
8,603 battles

Hi all,

 

Hre  is full data sample for our OP:

 

https://wows-numbers.com/player/533011375,Luis_Crespo/

 

 

IMHO he is more than OK player and he is willing to learn / ask questions / improve which is great! :Smile_honoring:

 

 

As for bad stats in Tirpitz - do you have 100% same ship setup for both "Bismarck" and "Tirpitz" (I know I have - and I use the same 19 point fully secondaries specced captain)?

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-OAW-]
[-OAW-]
Players
69 posts
6,832 battles

Tirpitz build and playstyl always changed for me when the meta changes, it probably will again with alle the hidden firespammers just released.

I first went tank build wich was great against fires but after some months it started lacking, i always got rekt by AP and torps.

Then the secondary buff came out and speccd more into that next to some tanky skills/mods but it still didnt wanna hold up.

Then tried consealment and sec spec with 3 4point skills. I had no fun with this build.

 

My current build im happy with, its a secondary spec, with ruddershift, torp detection and dropping any consealment.

Main battery mod 1, dmg ctrl system mod 1, sec battery mod 2, steeringgears mod 2, target acq system mod 1.

Direction center for catapult planes, EM, AR, BFT, Vigilance, AFT, manual secs.

 

If the map allows it use islands to get close and let the fire rain. You need to use tirpitz speed to dictate range and manouverability to limit the (the effectiveness of) incomming shells and torps.

Forget you have torps untill a special lategame oppertunity pops up.

 

With this build the damage i eat has been alot less, and had more fun.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OSC]
Players
1,991 posts
11,497 battles
10 hours ago, Luis_Crespo said:

Hi people.

I used to be a potato, and a Kriegsmarine fetishist one. As such, I bought the Tirpitz very soon, and it, obviously, sucked.

When I realised I was indeed a potato, about 500 games into WOWs, I decided to ground my Tirpitz and go back to low tiers to learn the game. It kind of worked and now I suppose  I can qualify as an average guy.

Well, no matter what I do, I can´t make my Tirpitz work. Wasn´t it supposed to be OP?. Wasn´t it the paradigma of Pay To Win?

Can some of you, kindest gentlemen, offer me some clue?

I love the ship, but don´t enjoy it too much these days.

 

The below depicted stats are from the last 20 days or so.

 

TIA.

BBs.jpg

It is not OP or P2W ship. It is solid ship with worst guns on t 8 and needs good reading of the game to decide when to push and use secondaries and when to be more conservative. 

 

It can not win gun duel with other BBs But need to close range and use turtle armor and secondaries. 

 

Whining how OP are KM BBs ended in 2017 when peoples understood that you will not citadel him but will do 20 k salvo on superstructure and that you do not fight it in secondari range (that got nerfed)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
99 posts
5,723 battles
10 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

They why do you look at stats that do not say anything?

 

These are your stats you should talk about:

  Warship Tier Nation Battles Win rate PR Average Damage Avg. frags Avg. planes destroyed  
1    Scharnhorst 7 Germany 197 50.25% 921 43 916 0.73 1.16 Details
2    Tirpitz 8 Germany 147 46.26% 926 38 289 0.48 1.88 Details
3    Gneisenau 7 Germany 54 50% 663 35 246 0.54 1.24 Details
4

   Bismarck

8 Germany 24 54.17% 1596 63 829 0.96 1.46

Details

 

Thank you all guys, again.

Regarding those stats, I didn´t use them cause include all my early battles in the Tirpitz (and Scharnhorst, by the way) extremely biased by my cluelessness those days.

Thats why I included only last 20 days stats. But as some of you have correctly stated they include too few games to be even analyzed, so I include a new set spanning the last month. Now we got 51 games, enough to properly perform a chi square test.

 

Gess what?, results are NOT statistically significant. So the difference in performance of my Tirp and Bis could very well be due to simple luck (or lack of it)

 

But this thread is far from non significant for me. You gave me a good heads up about the difference in my builds, which will make me more comfortable in the Tiripitz for sure.

Big Thank You again.

 

 

BBs.jpg

Stats.jpg

Edited by Luis_Crespo
misspelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×