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

No the Bismarck is not weak just the players.

190 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles

So some people say this Bismarck is weak. You guys are off you're rocker.

It is actually a great and strong ship. I think it could be the players, not the ship.

Here have some proof.

biz 4.jpg

biz.jpg

biz1.jpg

biz2.jpg

biz3.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 3
  • Boring 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,839 posts
9,310 battles

Question: If you weren't sitting in the Bismarck and rather ... say the Richelieu or the NoCal. Would your results be better? Or worse?

 

Fun fact: Just because good players can pull off some stunts the average (or bad) player can not, doesn't mean everything about a ship is fine. Sure she's a good ship, but nowhere near as good as she used to be and on top being quite a bit power crept. Or how else would you explain that MrConway in yesterday's stream acknowledged that KM BBs will get their secondary pen buffed? Surely because they are strong and so on....

  • Cool 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,393 posts
12,202 battles

Oh boy, someone will get 1 warning point for posting players' names

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,301 posts
10,449 battles
1 minute ago, Episparh said:

Oh boy, someone will get 1 warning point for posting players' names

 

Why? There's no name and shame there.

 

Unrelated to that, I see a Siegfried on the fourth pic, red team.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
1,705 posts

OP has 800 battles in the Bismarck. No wonder he gets some good games here and there. :Smile_facepalm:

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
4 minutes ago, Episparh said:

Oh boy, someone will get 1 warning point for posting players' names

Wheres the name and shame just showing how strong the ship is.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
Just now, MortenTardo said:

OP has 800 battles in the Bismarck. No wonder he gets some good games here and there. :Smile_facepalm:

And what does wows stats say about my pr and winrate then?. Like I said it is a good ship. All these games were high tier to prove a point. Only in one game was I in a div... to yet again prove a point.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
1,705 posts
1 minute ago, _HMS_RICHY said:

And what does wows stats say about my pr and winrate then?. Like I said it is a good ship. All these games were high tier to prove a point. Only in one game was I in a div... to yet again prove a point.

The point you manage to show here is that you can have good games in the Bismarck. Woptido. However i am willing to bet that most other T8s like Massa, Bama, NC, the Russian fantacy ship or just basically any other T8 BB would do better. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
9 minutes ago, MortenTardo said:

OP has 800 battles in the Bismarck. No wonder he gets some good games here and there. :Smile_facepalm:

I see you also have great Bismarck stats. so it isn't the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,839 posts
9,310 battles
Just now, _HMS_RICHY said:

I see you also have great Bismarck stats. so it isn't the ship.

That depends. As said: Yes the ship is still an ok to good ship in the right hands.

 

But 

 

a) the majority will never achieve the same skill set as a select few from the forums (that majority however is WG's target group)

 

and 

 

b) My question still stands: Would your overall results be better if you have choosen ANY other T8 BB (sans Tirpitz)? I'd wager: Yes.

 

 

Or in short: Pulling off good games in weak ships proves only that the player in question can pull off good games in weak ships. But it doesn't negate the point that the ship in question is STATISTICALLY a weak ship.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
5 minutes ago, MortenTardo said:

The point you manage to show here is that you can have good games in the Bismarck. Woptido. However i am willing to bet that most other T8s like Massa, Bama, NC, the Russian fantacy ship or just basically any other T8 BB would do better. 

But you have better stats in you're Bismark than you're Nc and better than you're Richelieu. and it beats you're Russian bb. So how do you explain that?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OILUP]
Players
185 posts

One sample says nothing of the trend. Bisko can work but why bother? VMF fantasy bb's do bisko's role better. French bb's too. American prem brawlers just make german brawlers obsolete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BABBY]
Players
467 posts
8,758 battles

Bismarck is awesome when facing t6 but is lackluster on t10, contrary to let's say NC. But then you remember how t8 mm looks like and the answer to the Bismarck dilemma is clear.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,267 posts
7,373 battles
2 minutes ago, _HMS_RICHY said:

I see you also have great Bismarck stats. so it isn't the ship.

 

Still doesnt change the possibility, that the other T8 BBs are better?

Spoiler

image.thumb.png.8e3a17572a4a9f77aa058661c3529ae8.png

 

I played the Bismarck back when i was not as good a player, but also the Meta was better for german BBs. So i guess it evens out.

NC is better than Bismarck any day. And Massa has better secondaries.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
3 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

That depends. As said: Yes the ship is still an ok to good ship in the right hands.

 

But 

 

a) the majority will never achieve the same skill set as a select few from the forums (that majority however is WG's target group)

 

and 

 

b) My question still stands: Would your overall results be better if you have choosen ANY other T8 BB (sans Tirpitz)? I'd wager: Yes.

 

 

Or in short: Pulling off good games in weak ships proves only that the player in question can pull off good games in weak ships. But it doesn't negate the point that the ship in question is STATISTICALLY a weak ship.

Probably not I find the hydro and armor on the Bismarck to be a life saver. Most times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
854 posts

Quote :-

 

 

INT INC:

WOWS Bismarck   :  Tier 8   INT Rating 7/10 

Can be expensive to run without good XP semi forcing a more cavalier game style. Secondary build STRONGLY RECOMMENDED  

Only has eight (8) barrels, while every other ship at this tier has nine (9) or more of a higher calibre.

15-inch guns have trouble with angled enemy battleships (use HE against the superstructure or choose a different target).

Her anti-aircraft can be destroyed with sustained HE spam.

Extremely vulnerable to fires. Superstructures can be set on fire by calibres of any size quite easily.

Armour scheme remains vulnerable to full penetrations by Armour-piercing shells when showing the flat broadside of the ship to the enemy; Bismarck may not take citadel damage, but a lot of regular penetration damage hurts just as badly.

Main guns' accuracy can be disappointing at times, especially without Aiming System Modification upgrade.

HE shells have low damage.

No torpedoes.

 

End Quote:

 

image.thumb.png.28c5314a0b45c7932d5dbbe229cf6a0e.png

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Still doesnt change the possibility, that the other T8 BBs are better?

  Hide contents

image.thumb.png.8e3a17572a4a9f77aa058661c3529ae8.png

 

I played the Bismarck back when i was not as good a player, but also the Meta was better for german BBs. So i guess it evens out.

NC is better than Bismarck any day. And Massa has better secondaries.

 

You should read properly this was aimed at Morten Tardo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,839 posts
9,310 battles
Just now, _HMS_RICHY said:

Probably not I find the hydro and armor on the Bismarck to be a life saver. Most times.

Good. And now take a look at the average stats of the ship (and the other T8 BBs in question). Bismarck is on the lower end of the spectrum. So ON AVERAGE players of all skill levels do WORSE in the Bismarck than in other T8 BBs.

 

Take me: In the T8 BBs that I played more than 10 times NoCal, Amagi and Richi do about 80k avg. DMG with a WR of (63, 64 and 55). Bismarck on the other hand has 60k avg. DMG on a 50% WR. Sure I could probably up the avg. DMG by a bit if I'd really put into it. But why? If there are ships out there that have it much easier to do consitently good in than the Bismarck?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
1,705 posts
1 minute ago, _HMS_RICHY said:

But you have better stats in you're Bismark than you're Nc and better than you're Richelieu. and it beats you're Russian bb. So how do you explain that?.

I can. I played the Bismarck when i was interested in the game and MM was much better for T8s. A good while back. Ritchy: Just wasnt interested and again MM. NC was basically my first BB and is one of my cursed ships. 

 

If i would play the Bismarck now it would be a different story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
854 posts
1 minute ago, _HMS_RICHY said:

You should read properly this was aimed at Morten Tardo.

The problem with them statistics are it does not show or factor in how many players of the type of ship there are with stats viable, hence if there are 1000 players of 1 type of ship and 10 of another it is likely the ship with 1000 players has better stats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOTN]
Quality Poster
2,213 posts
15,628 battles

Biscuit is a decent if unexceptional battleship as I remember her. It's her two younger, bigger, and dumber sisters that I take issues with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
6,267 posts
7,373 battles
8 minutes ago, _HMS_RICHY said:

You should read properly this was aimed at Morten Tardo.

 

Great stats in a ship doesnt mean that it cant be worst ship in its tier. Ive better stats in all my other T8 BBs... Why play Bismarck?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,717 posts
7,083 battles
10 minutes ago, Capt_Dragunov said:

Only has eight (8) barrels, while every other ship at this tier has nine (9) or more of a higher calibre.

Tirpitz, Richelieu, Gascogne, Vanguard?

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Players
216 posts
18,182 battles
Just now, DFens_666 said:

 

Great stats in a ship doesnt mean that it cant be worst ship in its tier. Ive better stats in all my other T8 BBs... Why play Bismarck?

And why not play her only bb at tier 8 with hydro means you can push better than most. Or would you rather camp at the back?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
854 posts
12 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

Good. And now take a look at the average stats of the ship (and the other T8 BBs in question). Bismarck is on the lower end of the spectrum. So ON AVERAGE players of all skill levels do WORSE in the Bismarck than in other T8 BBs.

 

Take me: In the T8 BBs that I played more than 10 times NoCal, Amagi and Richi do about 80k avg. DMG with a WR of (63, 64 and 55). Bismarck on the other hand has 60k avg. DMG on a 50% WR. Sure I could probably up the avg. DMG by a bit if I'd really put into it. But why? If there are ships out there that have it much easier to do consitently good in than the Bismarck?

image.thumb.png.03d414c8264aff941fed3438b748c13f.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×