General CV related discussions.

[Lordcrafty]

17 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

no please not WoWs stats&numbers ship overall stats. Get those away from me I've had enough pepega arguments around this stuff, we don't need some often incorrect stats to prove GZ is trash.
 

 

20 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Not IMO, it will even Over Perform when a bad player plays badly. 
As in, it will still not die even though other ships in that situation die.

No matter how stupid, he'll do better in it than any other in which he is equally stupid.

what I meant is that if an OP ship is compared to it's peers when the best plays are made whilst playing the OP ship and the peers it's being compared to the OP ship will overperform, and as we know, since CVs have no sufficient counterplay they will overperform consistently even against skilled players when played well.

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 minute ago, Lordcrafty said:

no please not WoWs stats&numbers ship overall stats. Get those away from me I've had enough pepega arguments around this stuff, we don't need some often incorrect stats to prove GZ is trash.

LOL. But it is exactly what I mean. If G|Z was OP, it would be > 50% WR. Wayyyy more. 

We all agree Enty is OP though. As it shows. 

 

But they are ALL broken. ALL of them. 

 

1 minute ago, Lordcrafty said:

what I meant is that if an OP ship is compared to it's peers when the best plays are made whilst playing the OP ship and the peers it's being compared to the OP ship will overperform,...

I understood that. But even in the WORST plays the ship will still outperform otherships, if played by that same WORST player.

 

1 minute ago, Lordcrafty said:

....and as we know, since CVs have no sufficient counterplay they will overperform consistently even against skilled players when played well.

That we know. But it is not as much being OP (poor GZ...) but being broken. 

If GZ was OP, we'd see that it would win >>. 50% at least. But it does not. 

That said, we do also know there's LOTS here that can "make it work". 

Or actually, use the brokenness of GZ to the max and beat everything else to a pulp.

 

Note that as hips can be broken AND also OP... 

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

I understood that. But even in the WORST plays the ship will still outperform otherships, if played by that same WORST player.

skill doesn't translate across different classes like that though so this won't always be true

[BLUB__BLUB]

7 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

skill doesn't translate across different classes like that though so this won't always be true

Well, skill probably doesn't translate. I know I am too old and slow for DDs... skill?

 

However knowledge and experience does. So does tactical knowledge... eeh.. well..:

I mean that time that you KNOW he is gonna ram that island... just because they always do.

Or you KNOW he is gonna turn broadside... so he can slap that DD... LOL... 

or you KNOW that if you kill that..., the rest of them is gonna turn tail, hide and you can pick them off one by one. 

[CptBarney]

Can we buff lady lex den?

[159Hunter]

52 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Disagreed: Even an utterly useless player would do significantly better in them than he'd do in any other ship. 

Will he still be utterly useless? Probably. But he'll have the highest ever WR in that (like, 25%... and the rest he has 10%...).

Also, he actually has some damage in it (like 250XP average, rest he has zero). 

So according to your definition Enterprise is not OP:

 

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

4 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

So according to your definition Enterprise is not OP:

I see you found 3 peeps that have no CVs except Enterprise? LOL. Amazing.

Can't say based on that data. They'd need to have a few more CVs (comparable, so T8 and same number battles) to compare. 

OP is determined on how they perform in similar ships. If they do much much better in one, it is probably OP. 

Unless they have played that one 1000x and the others only 5, then it would be "practice makes perfect". 

 

 

What you CAN say is that there is something "broken" there. 

Obviously they can do 50% in some ships (but well, maybe those are OP...). 

However 'that great accomplishment doesn't translate to Enterprise.

Maybe the main guns on Enty don't work as they do on the rest...  

 

14 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

Can we buff lady lex den?

There's a good example. Yes maybe we should, as we cannot nerf Enty... oh wait, has been removed and will "cease to be a problem soon^TM" 

[Lordcrafty]

Just now, BLUB__BLUB said:

I see you found 3 peeps that have no CVs except Enterprise? LOL. Amazing.

Can't say based on that data. They'd need to have a few more CVs (comparable, so T8 and same number battles) to compare. 

OP is determined on how they perform in similar ships. If they do much much better in one, it is probably OP. 

but you can compare classes and call them OP, you're definition is just wonky, it should be true 100% of the time.

[BLUB__BLUB]

15 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

but you can compare classes and call them OP, you're definition is just wonky, it should be true 100% of the time.

Oh in THAT way you are correct. But you will probably also agree that there are lots of factors there. 

A different class will be OP at "Ocean" map than at a map that has lots and lots of little islands. 

In the end (all averages) that should work out, also, there are some things "working as intended".

 

You also stated "when compared to its peers". I assumed you meant DD vs DD, BB vs BB, and CV vs CV.

That might be just me assuming things though. 

 

 

[159Hunter]

12 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

I see you found 3 peeps that have no CVs except Enterprise? LOL. Amazing.

Can't say based on that data. They'd need to have a few more CVs (comparable, so T8 and same number battles) to compare. 

OP is determined on how they perform in similar ships. If they do much much better in one, it is probably OP. 

Now you are moving goalposts. Let me refresh your memory on your definition of OP:

2 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

OP would then be, that anyone can do fat damage or get high winrates in that ship. Better players would do better... maybe.

Which you clarified with the following:

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Even an utterly useless player would do significantly better in them than he'd do in any other ship. 

Will he still be utterly useless? Probably. But he'll have the highest ever WR in that (like, 25%... and the rest he has 10%...).

Keywords in the above:

Anyone

Any other ship

 

So I give you 3 players who do worse in Enterprise than in a other ships. So Enterprise is not OP as per your definition. 

 

Unless ofc you want to call the likes of Amagi and Neptune OP ( just a few ships outperforming Enty in my short player sweep).

[Lordcrafty]

5 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Oh in THAT way you are correct. But you will probably also agree that there are lots of factors there. 

A different class will be OP at "Ocean" map than at a map that has lots and lots of little islands. 

In the end (all averages) that should work out, also, there are some things "working as intended".

 

You also stated "when compared to its peers". I assumed you meant DD vs DD, BB vs BB, and CV vs CV.

That might be just me assuming things though. 

 

 

peers can mean anything from all playable ships to ships of a certain class or nation, it depends on the context of the use of "OP" and the definition should fit all situations not just within the class. It's just whatever you happen to be comparing it to.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

So I give you 3 players who do worse in Enterprise than in a other ships. So Enterprise is not OP as per your definition.

ROFL. Yeah in that thing you are right. ANY other ship, OK I see what you mean. 

But you probably are just making fun now, as it is pretty clear that a T1 and a T10 are also not comparable.

Or at least they shouldn't be, as they aren't peers. 

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

Just now, Lordcrafty said:

peers can mean anything from all playable ships to ships of a certain class or nation, it depends on the context of the use of "OP" and the definition should fit all situations not just within the class. It's just whatever you happen to be comparing it to.

Well in that case you can even call  for a buff of CVs. LOL. 

 

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well in that case you can even call  for a buff of CVs. LOL. 

 

by your definition yes, not by the one I gave and have been arguing for.

[BLUB__BLUB]

Just now, Lordcrafty said:

by your definition yes, not by the one I gave and have been arguing for.

Well maybe we can agree that a "peer" of a T8 CV is a T8 CV? 

 

And the closest thing next to that would then be other T8 ships, which should be "different but equal"

or other CVs in T6 and/or T10 which would be "similar but weaker/stronger"? 

 

At least that is what I'd assume to make sense. 

 

 

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well maybe we can agree that a "peer" of a T8 CV is a T8 CV? 

 

And the closest thing next to that would then be other T8 ships, which should be "different but equal"

or other CVs in T6 and/or T10 which would be "similar but weaker/stronger"? 

 

At least that is what I'd assume to make sense. 

 

 

that's already assuming that CVs are more powerful than surface ships you know right?

[Lordcrafty]

do you want me to revise "peers" to "whichever ships currently being compared"?

[BLUB__BLUB]

Just now, Lordcrafty said:

that's already assuming that CVs are more powerful than surface ships you know right?

Well no, just different. Not assuming anything yet. However they could be - as can surface ships (DD vs CA vs BB). 

One could be stronger that the other - and it can also be "meant to be so" in different circumstances.

 

Have a look at the example form @159Hunter and Enterprise might even be underperforming. 

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Not IMO, it will even Over Perform when a bad player plays badly. 
As in, it will still not die even though other ships in that situation die.

No matter how stupid, he'll do better in it than any other in which he is equally stupid.

 

Doesn't mean he does well or the best plays - he might still get average WR 30% and  crap damage. 

But it would be WR 20% and zero damage in others.

 

Not gonna Join the Remaining Argument.

But this one I have to Comment on. Because this is a very Common Misconception.

 

Because this is where "A Class is OP" is very different to "A Ship is OP" And a Ship is "Generally OP" vs "A Ship has some OP Abilities that can be abused"

 

1.

Ships being OP doesnt mean they will Perform Good in the Hands of an Average Player.

 

Because You have to keep in mind. Wargaming Balances by Spreadsheet according to the Average Player Results.

Unicums as well as Horrible Players tend to be Ignored. Because Spreadsheet gives every Player the Same Weight.

So the 5% Unicums and 5% AFK Botters will pretty much be completely Ignored because the 90% Average Players just have so much Influence that everything else can barely change the Numbers.

 

Therefore. Ships which Perform very Good in the Average Players Hands. Will tend to be Nerfed Quickly. As they are immediately on Wargamings Radar and get Sorted.

So these Ships barely ever happen. And if they do. They get Sorted out Quickly.

 

What generally happens. Is that Ships have either a Strong Advantage that Good Players can Abuse to make it OP. Or have OP General Abilities but a Strong Disadvantage which Good Players can Ignore as it only becomes a Problem when making Mistakes.

Because these Advantages/Disadvantages Fly under the Radar as Spreadsheet doesnt Pick them up. Simply because the Average Player cant abuse the OP ability. Or cant cover up the Disadvantage thus being Killed despite the OP Base Stats.

 

As such. The Average and Below Player will often Perform no Differently in OP Ships than he does in Normal Ships.

 

 

2.

In case of an OP Class like CVs. You also need to keep in mind that WG is using Mirrored MM.

A CV on Team A means a CV on Team B.

And here being OP actually Results in Bad Players having an even lower Winrate than with an normal or even Underpowered Ship.

 

Because both Sides by Default get this one OP CV. Which makes out a Large amount of Potential Influence for his Team.

And if your a Bad Player. Then this means your Team has a Severe Handicap. Because you are causing the Enemy to have an Highly Influental and OP Ship that might actually be Capable of Exerting some of that Influence Properly.

While you yourself do not Provide that Influence.

So even tough your Fighting Power is way above that what you get when you would Drive some Standard Ship. You causing the Enemy to get an OP Ship actually Results in a Net Negative for your Team and Your Performance.

Meanwhile. If he just Played some Run off the Mill Standard Ship with little Influence. The Team can far more often Cover for him. Causing his Performance and Winrate to be Higher because his lack of Skill doesnt create a Heavy Disadvantage for his Team.

 

As such. The Average and Below Player will often Perform much Worse in OP CVs than he does in Normal Ships.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

do you want me to revise "peers" to "whichever ships currently being compared"?

I do not really understand what you mean by that. Ships can be compared. However if they are peers or not can be debatable.

If they work in completely different ways, then it would be obvious they're a bit more removed than two that work in similar ways.

[Lordcrafty]

1 minute ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well no, just different. Not assuming anything yet. However they could be - as can surface ships (DD vs CA vs BB). 

One could be stronger that the other - and it can also be "meant to be so" in different circumstances.

 

Have a look at the example form @159Hunter and Enterprise might even be underperforming. 

enterprise will underperform when the player is crap enough that's simple fact.

[Lordcrafty]

1 minute ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

I do not really understand what you mean by that. Ships can be compared. However if they are peers or not can be debatable.

If they work in completely different ways, then it would be obvious they're a bit more removed than two that work in similar ways.

you're really sidetracking what we were talking about now you know?

[Nibenay78]

2 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

you're really sidetracking what we were talking about now you know?

Most of the conversation is sidetracking how annoying CV (and deadeye, but thats another thread) is for gameplay.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

enterprise will underperform when the player is crap enough that's simple fact.

I've seen good players (in DD, CA and BB) get a CV from a crate and potater the hell out of it. 

But That is probably the opposite of what you mean. Actually I am not sure what you mean... 

What is usually said, is that even BAD players can play CV because they are broken/OP.

 

1 minute ago, Lordcrafty said:

you're really sidetracking what we were talking about now you know?

No I don't get the sidetracking part. What we were discussing is if CVs are either broken or OP. 

 

6 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

As such. The Average and Below Player will often Perform much Worse in OP CVs than he does in Normal Ships.

Duh? As above:

What is usually said, is that even BAD players can play CV because they are broken/OP.

[Lordcrafty]

5 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

No I don't get the sidetracking part. What we were discussing is if CVs are either broken or OP. 

wait, we are? then why did you talk about comparing CVtoCV or BBtoBB etc only? Anyway, I thought we were talking about the definition of "OP" since your definition seems wonky to me since it doesn't work in all cases.