Latest approximate popularity of each class in WoWs (comparison from 2020/05/19 to 2020/10/27)...

[Leo_Apollo11]

Hi all,

 

Latest approximate popularity of each class in WoWs (comparison from 2020/05/19 to 2020/10/27)...

 

Source (all credits to "CardinalSanctis"): Reddit

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

[Captain_Newman]

It's almost like there is a problem with the design of a certain class...

 

..nah, only a very cynical person would say that, right comrade?

[UnterSeeBot]

clearly at 2.5% popularity, 18 months after the rework launched, CVs are a great success.

[HaachamaShipping]

4 to 5 percentage point drop in cruisers and an increase in 3 to 6 percentage points in battleships. Clearly, WG needs to buff their anti-BB CV line, it isn't doing as good a job as the lines crapping on other classes.

[Exoist]

They really have to buff CVs so that more people will play them. Thanks for pointing that out for WG 

[Captain_Newman]

9 minutes ago, Exoist said:

They really have to buff CVs so that more people will play them. Thanks for pointing that out for WG 

 

Yes, for starters they should make the angles on AP rockets more forgiving for MvR, and buff FdR plane's tankiness - the other day an FdR was focusing me in my Smaland and I had 8 whole plane kills!!!1!!1!!! Eight! This may have brought the FdR owner some very mild temporary agitation, and we can't have that, I think an emergency patch is in order.

Shocking.

 

I've asked WG to just remove AA from all ships before, but they didn't listen. They should also add sticky bombs - they saturate a wide area, say, 7-8 km radius, and it makes it hard for ships to turn or accelerate in it for a time. People using WSAD to try and mititgate some of the guaranteed CV damage is basically cheating!

 

But as S_O tells us, there's no player retention problem so it's all good. It's great logic, a bit like your doctor telling you that you don't have a serious health condition with your lungs or the rest of the respiratory system so you can keep on smoking. Well, once it happens it's a bit late for preventative measures, no? Nah, me being cynical again.

[Rhineheart_Thor]

As I look at my fleet I wonder why I do not play Aircraft Carriers much if at all, I do not remember the last time I played a CV.

 

This is a minority game, with a minority playing a class of unit in the game.

 

There should be a button where by a player can choose if they wish a CV in there game, the same for submarines, and then if there was, I suspect they would not get server time.

 

 

 

[Captain_Newman]

1 minute ago, Buccaneer1 said:

As I look at my fleet I wonder why I do not play Aircraft Carriers much if at all, I do not remember the last time I played a CV.

 

This is a minority game, with a minority playing a class of unit in the game.

 

There should be a button where by a player can choose if they wish a CV in there game, the same for submarines, and then if there was I suspect they would not get server time.

 

 

 

 

The reason there is no such button is because, despite WG's claims that CV's are fine, they know damn well CV's would get astronomical queue times if people had an option to opt out. But hey, it's easy to prove me wrong WG. Give it a test, just for a month. If there's no issues I'll never say a bad worth about CV's design again.

[Rhineheart_Thor]

I sold most of my British Aircraft Carriers.

 

If some one would like me to play one I would like a Salary for doing so. 

 

 

Its a shame I can not sell the permanent camouflage,s  for them

 

++++ 

[Prophecy82]

12 minutes ago, Captain_Newman said:

 

The reason there is no such button is because, despite WG's claims that CV's are fine, they know damn well CV's would get astronomical queue times if people had an option to opt out. But hey, it's easy to prove me wrong WG. Give it a test, just for a month. If there's no issues I'll never say a bad worth about CV's design again.

We at WG decided to implement your proposed button. 

Here you go comrade, have some phun!

 

 

 

[Hirohito]

CVs being low is only half the issue.
The second one being that one class (BBs) make up close to 50% of the player base, growing at the expense of all other classes which saw reduced numbers of players in the given interval.

Anyone remember last ranked btw, with 50+ BBs in queue, and often 10 or less of the other classes?
The numbers were obviously even more ridiculous there.

But hey, BBs are bad and struggle against every other class, obviously.

 

[anonym_cwVecOS6ecVy]

40 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

clearly at 2.5% popularity, 18 months after the rework launched, CVs are a great success.

But these little 2,5% have such a high impact to move the players almost exclusively from DDs and CAs to BBs.

[ThePurpleSmurf]

It's interesting how 2.6% of the playerbase is actually treated as the majority when it comes to enjoyable gaming experience and the opinion of the 97.4% means little to nothing to WG. And as WG stated in their last Q/A on discord, which can be found on reddit as well, there is nothing wrong with AA and everything is fine with CVs in general.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

2 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

It's interesting how 2.6% of the playerbase is actually treated as the majority when it comes to enjoyable gaming experience and the opinion of the 97.4% means little to nothing to WG. And as WG stated in their last Q/A on discord, which can be found on reddit as well, there is nothing wrong with AA and everything is fine with CVs in general.

I would like to defend Wargaming here.  (Eh? What? surely some mistake, Ed.)

 

I don't think that they are favouring one small group of players over a majority of the players.

 

No, I believe that they are treating us all with equal contempt.

[Camperdown]

30 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

CVs being low is only half the issue.
The second one being that one class (BBs) make up close to 50% of the player base, growing at the expense of all other classes which saw reduced numbers of players in the given interval.

Anyone remember last ranked btw, with 50+ BBs in queue, and often 10 or less of the other classes?
The numbers were obviously even more ridiculous there.

But hey, BBs are bad and struggle against every other class, obviously.

 

As a DD main I call it a target rich environment 

[Saltface]

what we can say is that BBs played more battles compared to DDs and Cruisers that played less battles.

I assume number of battles played is the data used for this table. If we want to quantify popularity we would need to do some rather complex math.

We need to take into consideration who plays what how often. Simply counting number of battles will not do the job. It is an indicator but not a definite one.

 

One example to illustrate:

If we define popularity as "how many people prefer a ship class over an other ship class" then lets suppose we have three individuals: Players A, B and C. 

Player A prefers BBs and played 6 Battles in BBs 2 in Cruisers and 1 in DDs

Player B prefers BBs and played 5 Battles in BBs 1 in Cruisers and 1 in DDs

Player C is an avid DD player. Like me e.g. I almost exclusively play DDs. and Player C played 0 battles in BBs 0 in Cruisers and 16 in DDs. Lockdown...I played a lot.

Lets add the numbers now

BB = 11

Cruisers = 3

DD = 18

Total 32 Battles, BBs = 34.375% vs DDs =  56.25%

In my example DDs are more popular when they aren't actually more popular as only 1 player prefers them in contrast to BBs that 2 people have preference to them.

 

What I take from this chart is that during the last 5 months more battles were played in BBs than in DDs or Cruisers.

 

My post only has to do with math not my actual feeling that indeed BBs are the most popular class.

I am being pedantic now LOL but ...its fun.

 

 

[ColonelPete]

EU (since April 2018):

[st_dasa]

1 hour ago, LoveZeppelin said:

clearly at 2.5% popularity, 18 months after the rework launched, CVs are a great success.

 

Ppl at WeGe be like

[st_dasa]

41 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

It's interesting how 2.6% of the playerbase is actually treated as the majority when it comes to enjoyable gaming experience and the opinion of the 97.4% means little to nothing to WG. And as WG stated in their last Q/A on discord, which can be found on reddit as well, there is nothing wrong with AA and everything is fine with CVs in general.

 

Just as in real life... small minority is getting all the love and resources, while the rest of us are treated as a workforce / cannon fodder / insert degrading notion.

[Captain_Newman]

41 minutes ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

It's interesting how 2.6% of the playerbase is actually treated as the majority when it comes to enjoyable gaming experience and the opinion of the 97.4% means little to nothing to WG. And as WG stated in their last Q/A on discord, which can be found on reddit as well, there is nothing wrong with AA and everything is fine with CVs in general.

 

Of course it's fine, especially in competitive modes! I mean nothing says "good balance" like most teams running 1 MvR or maybe FdR, a Kremlin, and usually an assortment of Petros / Stalingrads, with DD's being largely absent, if you do see one 9/10 times it's a Halland due to it's AA. These are signs of a well balanced game, no problems here comrade.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

Isn't Asia using the RTS carriers still?  ---> 5%

[lossi_2018]

Wish people were honest more, CVs are dying and they are  not the biggest problem this game has. For me, it's the thinning out of older captains, the influx of new players in their stead, who don't know the game, they climb up the ranks too fast and when faced with (a rare) good CV captain just plain give up.

[ColonelPete]

11 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Isn't Asia using the RTS carriers still?  ---> 5%

No.

That was the China Server and even that got updated.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

12 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

No.

That was the China Server and even that got updated.

Damn, poor RTS lovers ^^

[Karasu_Browarszky]

Okay, that's bad. Tells us WG balancing is completely effed up.