Some interesting info around the world

[Ictogan]

T5-7 ranked, eh?

 

So Saipan, Hiryuu, Indianapolis, Myoukou, Nagato, Blyskawica and Hatsuharu only ... plus the usual suspects like people entering with a stock New York, because raisins.

 

I would say Kiev also qualifies for it.

 

And let's not forget the ship that will dominate ranked battles:

Atlanta

 

[txtspeak]

 

I would say Kiev also qualifies for it.

 

And let's not forget the ship that will dominate ranked battles:

Atlanta

 

expecting to see a lot of ARP myokous and perhaps hagurous if she is out by that time

[Sander93]

Bit concerned about the 100mm ijn nerf thogh since IJN is missing the 40mm med range AAs anyhow,

 

Someone mentioned the 100mm nerf might be there to balance the carrier AA now that they received the AA fire consumable, and that the CA could receive compensation later. I'd say it's a valid theory.

[Gojuadorai]

T5-7 ranked, eh?

 

So Saipan, Hiryuu, Indianapolis, Myoukou, Nagato, Blyskawica and Hatsuharu only ... plus the usual suspects like people entering with a stock New York, because raisins.

 

I would say Kiev also qualifies for it.

 

to be fair with t7 max i think playing a Fuso can be justified

[txtspeak]

 

 

to be fair with t7 max i think playing a Fuso can be justified

 

if its tier 7 maximum I suppose the cleveland would still be able to work effectivly. I mean they wouldnt be outranged by 5km and camped out, I would certainatly use mine

[Kurbain]

T7 ranked battles becouse you know we released Saipan and soon Indianapolis. And ofc soon in shop best starter to ranked battles Blyskawica. Thanks god Dreadnought is here, Stellaris is here and soon HoI 4 will be here. Shallow game like WoWs can take 5th row now

 

Well, still better than T8 ranked battles. Indianapolis/Saipan/Blyskawica aren't as strong for their tier as Atago/Tirpitz/Kutuzov.

 

I like the idea that players will be able to use their TX ship in ranked. Maybe to compete for special prices once rank 1 is reached.

 

 

About the secondaries: Let's not forget that range isn't everything. As long as their accuracy isn't improved as well they will barely hit anything unless you upgrade them properly, which requires a lot of captain skill points and modules.

 

txtspeak, on 15 May 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

 

if its tier 7 maximum I suppose the cleveland would still be able to work effectivly. I mean they wouldnt be outranged by 5km and camped out, I would certainatly use mine

 

Yeah, there are quite a few T6 ships that I think could hold their own in a T7 battle. Fuso/New Mexico/Cleveland/Budyonny.

[Gojuadorai]

Yeah, there are quite a few T6 ships that I think could hold their own in a T7 battle. Fuso/New Mexico/Cleveland/Budyonny.

 

in case of the budyonny there would be no reason to not play the shchors which would be my bet for best cruiser!

closely followed by the indianapolis

[Ictogan]

 

Well, still better than T8 ranked battles. Indianapolis/Saipan/Blyskawica aren't as strong for their tier as Atago/Tirpitz/Kutuzov.

 

I don't really get why the Tirpitz is mentioned next to the Kutuzov and Atago so often. Yes, the Tirpitz is a [edited]strong ship, but so are the Amagi and North Carolina. The same thing can't be said about the cruisers at tier 8.

[SBS]

I have found these notes, apparently leaked from a test server. Anyone seen these before?

 

Buffs:

• New Mexico ​Hull C - some single-mount Oerlikon -[become]-> twin-mount Oerlikon. AA goes to 58/75/60 (outer/mid/inner AA ring, add up for total AA, and check in-game stats for current AA)

• Cleveland - 127mm DP has 5km range as secondary armament. (was 4km)

• Colorado ​Hull C- some single-mount Oerlikon --> twin-mount Oerlikons, some twin-mount Bofors --> quad-mount Bofors. AA goes to 58/161/133.

• N. Carolina​ Hull A - ALL Bofors --> quad-mount Bofors. AA goes to 151/159/166. 127 DP has 5km range as secondary. (was 4.5km)

• N. Carolina Hull B - more quad Bofors!. AA goes to 151/239/158. DP buffs.

• ​Iowa Hull A - ALL Bofors --> quad-mount Bofors. AA goes to 151/223/76 ​Max speed goes to 33knot with engine upgrade. DP has 6km range as secondary.

• Iowa Hull B - more quad Bofors AA goes to 151/286/176. DP and speed buffs.

• Iowa Hull C - more and more quad Bofors. AA goes to 151/302/195 (a total of 19 quad Bofors installed, historical config. Hurray!). DP and speed buffs.

• Montana -​ Get 1 more quad Bofors to surpass Iowa. (20 mounts, was 19, guess where is the new Bofors installed ;) AA goes to 157/318/194. Maximum speed goes to 30knot. 127mm DP has 6km range as secondary. (was 5km)

• Ishizuchi - Now she has AA! AA goes to 6/0/0 (go and get your first plane shotdown in Ishizuchi)

• Myogi Hull C - has more 25mm AA gun installed, and say bye-bye to small caliber AA guns. AA goes to 15/40/0.

• Kuma Hull B - more AA guns! AA goes to 0/30/5.

• Furutaka - the old Hull C is her new Hull B, and the new Hull C comes with 3 twin-mount main turrets! (30s/180deg, 36s for single-mount turrets) Reload time is independent from the Hull upgrade, 200mm shell always takes 22s to reload and 203mm takes 15s. AA goes to 20/20/7.

• Fuso Hull B - more small caliber AA guns! AA goes to 40/14/35.

• Fuso Hull C - bye-bye small caliber AA guns! AA goes to 40/81/0.

• Aoba Hull A - now uses the same DP as Furutaka Hull C. AA goes to 20/10/53. She now has more hit point. (30500, was 26300)

• Aoba Hull B - has more hit point. (31900, was 30500)

• Nagato Hull B - more 25mm AA guns! AA goes to 40/70/0. And she now has turrets with rangefinders!

• Nagato Hull C - more 25mm AA guns! AA goes to 40/188/0.

• Amagi Hull C - more 25mm AA guns! AA goes to 81/215/0​.

• Hipper -​ Hull C (new). With powerful AA guns. AA goes to 100/135/53 (See below for her Hull B stats).

• Roon Hull B -​ More AA guns! AA goes to 100/165/60. (See below for her Hull A stats).

• From Hipper Hull B all the way to Hindenburg - HE ammo changed to "203mm Spr.gr. L/4.7 Kz." (2500 13%, was 2300 11%, spam the HE!)

• U.S.S.R. ships - Global buff to three AA guns. 37mm 70-K AA gun has range increased to 3.2km (was 2km). 37mm 66-K and 37mm 46-K AA gun have range increased to 3.5km (was 3.2km). Check in-game to see who are affected.

• Moskva - 130mm DP has 6.5km as secondary. (was 5km, U.S.S.R over U.S. indeed, play soviet ships for the win!)

Tweaks:

• Karlsruhe - armor scheme changed.

• Konigsberg Hull B - removed some AA guns for a new catapult and catapult fighter consumables. AA downs to 24/10/12. Armor scheme changed.

• Nurnberg - Hull C (new). Removed two torpedo tubes and catapults for additional AA guns. AA goes to 32/60/89. The total research cost is unchanged.

• Hipper Hull B - ALL 20mm Flak 38 --> 37mm Flak 30. AA downs to 100/55/52 (enhanced mid ring but nerfed inner ring).

• Hindenburg - ALL 40mm Flak 28 --> 7 new twin-mount 55mm Gerat 58. AA downs to 133/206/72 (but mid ring now has consistent range of 5km, consider it a tweak).

Nerfs:

• Roon Hull A - 37mm Flak LM/42 --> 20mm Flak 38. AA downs to 100/117/30. (enhanced inner ring but nerfed mid ring, consider it a nerf).

• Japanese ships - Global nerf to 100mm DP. It lost 36% of its original AA strength. (13.3dps each mount, was 20.8). (Zao, Ibuki, Taiho and Hakuryu are affected, do your math to see how bad the nerf is)

 

Seems like carriers are taking a big hit with the AA buggs. Some ships I agree needed it, but not sure about the Iowa and north carolinas. Seem to me they are trying to make the AA work against tier 9 and 8 carriers, but it will come at the expense of making any carrier that is low tier in a match more or less useelss. I mean more than they allready were.

BB should not be immune against CV, but more work to reduce incoming damage. It is people sticking together, covering each other and cruisers AA ability/fighters that should make you immune (or close to) from planes.

 

I agree that japanese 100mm needed a nerf. 

Also, that new furutaka hull, omg YES! Might be a little OP though, will have to test it out.

 

I much more feel like it would be better to just look at tier 9 and 10 CV's planes and maybe look at those instead, make them slower or reduce number of squadrons in the air.

They allready smoothed out plane progression once to not make the jumps so big and prevent CV from creeping far ahead of anything else?

Why not smooth out both planes (stats and number of active squadrons) as well as AA across the tiers, to make sure that you can do something as both a high tier and low tier CV (still should be harder for low tier CV).

[Tyrendian89]

 

in case of the budyonny there would be no reason to not play the shchors which would be my bet for best cruiser!

closely followed by the indianapolis

 

except for some actual armour and maneuverability, both of which the Shchors entirely lacks... But yeah Shchors is stronk no doubt about it

[Xerkics]

One thing i noticed about tier 7 ships they seem to have better MM than tier 6 and 8 ships. I wonder if this will make Indianapolis on par with Atago for farming etc.

[Spellfire40]

 

Seems like carriers are taking a big hit with the AA buggs. Some ships I agree needed it, but not sure about the Iowa and north carolinas. Seem to me they are trying to make the AA work against tier 9 and 8 carriers, but it will come at the expense of making any carrier that is low tier in a match more or less useelss. I mean more than they allready were.

BB should not be immune against CV, but more work to reduce incoming damage. It is people sticking together, covering each other and cruisers AA ability/fighters that should make you immune (or close to) from planes.

 

I agree that japanese 100mm needed a nerf. 

Also, that new furutaka hull, omg YES! Might be a little OP though, will have to test it out.

 

I much more feel like it would be better to just look at tier 9 and 10 CV's planes and maybe look at those instead, make them slower or reduce number of squadrons in the air.

They allready smoothed out plane progression once to not make the jumps so big and prevent CV from creeping far ahead of anything else?

Why not smooth out both planes (stats and number of active squadrons) as well as AA across the tiers, to make sure that you can do something as both a high tier and low tier CV (still should be harder for low tier CV).

Makes sense to nerf CV AA thogh to force them to buy prem AA consumable. NC thertainly dont Need a AA buff she is near imposible to atack allready IF you Chose to mount the AA module.unless you want a T8 BB to defend themself totaly agist T10 CV atacks.I allready score more Air kills in her then most CV that sails around in my Team and i didt even upgraded the Hull. All in all high Tir AA buffs just makes sure that Players get didillusioned and leave to Play other classes. Well good News for my DD grinding thogh.

[Pajosaurus]

One thing i noticed about tier 7 ships they seem to have better MM than tier 6 and 8 ships. I wonder if this will make Indianapolis on par with Atago for farming etc.

 

I'm glad you noticed this too because I wasn't sure if it was just me getting unlucky. I have quite a lot of battles in both tier 6 and 7 (among others), and while I was extremely rarely getting placed in tier 9 matches in, say, Myoko or Nagato, I am constantly seeing tier 8 enemies in Nurnberg and other tier 6 ships. It got to the point where Nurnberg was becoming unplayable due to a neverending barrage of vastly more powerful opponents.

[txtspeak]

 

I'm glad you noticed this too because I wasn't sure if it was just me getting unlucky. I have quite a lot of battles in both tier 6 and 7 (among others), and while I was extremely rarely getting placed in tier 9 matches in, say, Myoko or Nagato, I am constantly seeing tier 8 enemies in Nurnberg and other tier 6 ships. It got to the point where Nurnberg was becoming unplayable due to a neverending barrage of vastly more powerful opponents.

 

agreed...

cleveland am getting constantly uptiered. pepsicola. not so.

I am generally fighting higher tier ships in the cleveland than the pepsicola! It's GabeNs judgement on me

[Gojuadorai]

well i observed it too

seem to be highest tier in t7 ships like ~70% of the games

and i have a theory why!

 

i think its a tricke down effect.

t10 need to be filled with  t9 and t8 which diverts alot of t8 ships from t8 battles which need to be filled with t6 

there are virtually no t9 battles which need to be filled from up to t7 because t9 is a not verry played tier and most of t9 end up in t10 games "by default".

 

so when you imagine the distribution of battles a t7 is placed in it is skewed to the lower because of the few t9 battles

and the distribution of t6 is skewed to the higher tiers cause so many of the t8's are drawn into t10 balles too

 

i hope its understanable what i m trying to say 

 

 

 

 

[Xerkics]

BTw those of you that understand Russian will find this video really interesting : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFF_QfKjuVg 2014 stream. Its a Stream with Ru WoT streamers Jove and Murazor who are two of the most popular ru streamers with Evily from Wargaming where they discuss bots and how Wargaming deals with that in WOT its from 2014 and  2.5 hours long so there is too much stuff to post but some of it is about policy and i think is also directly applicable to Wows and explains how WG operates so i would recommend listening to it if you understand it.

[IsamuKondera]

 

I'm glad you noticed this too because I wasn't sure if it was just me getting unlucky. I have quite a lot of battles in both tier 6 and 7 (among others), and while I was extremely rarely getting placed in tier 9 matches in, say, Myoko or Nagato, I am constantly seeing tier 8 enemies in Nurnberg and other tier 6 ships. It got to the point where Nurnberg was becoming unplayable due to a neverending barrage of vastly more powerful opponents.

 

welcome to my world

 

T6 carrier? Lets put you into a T8 battle where you cand o nothing because every AA kills your planes before they reach the target...

 

Playing T6 in a cleveland? Nope... Who needs carrier there?

[Comrad_StaIin]

from a Q&A

Some news now, and a bit of it is in advance; Babykim provided some info from the Russian YouTuber getfun, and I’ve got a little translation (courtesy of therassvet on Reddit) from the RU Forums, part of a bigger Q&A which Carnotzet will hopefully translate fully, later.

The main tidbit of this Q&A is quite nice, though, so I’ll put it right below. Enjoy!

---

Q: The Molotov apparently is modeled after it’s 1942-1944 state. During this period, four 37mm anti-aircraft guns were installed on the roofs of the second and third turret. But these guns are missing on game ship model. However, Tirpitz has her (turret) roof AA guns.

A: By the way, Tirpitz AA guns are not working. They will be enabled in 0.5.6. Same patch, Molotov and several other ships will receive their AA guns on main battery turrets.

 

Texas even more stronker AA?

also now we know that Iowa's 19th and Montana's 20th quad Bofors is on top of the B turret

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

 

I'm glad you noticed this too because I wasn't sure if it was just me getting unlucky. I have quite a lot of battles in both tier 6 and 7 (among others), and while I was extremely rarely getting placed in tier 9 matches in, say, Myoko or Nagato, I am constantly seeing tier 8 enemies in Nurnberg and other tier 6 ships. It got to the point where Nurnberg was becoming unplayable due to a neverending barrage of vastly more powerful opponents.

 

I feel your pain. I struggle against top-tier opposition, especially when the gap is two tiers.

However I have not had the same unfavourable matchmaking when playing tier 6 ships that you have. My pain is in tiers 4 & 5.

 

(Data from my Post Patch 0.5.3 Games Database)

Tier of my ship	Top Tier	Mid Tier	Bottom Tier
4	21	8	31
5	47	29	60
6	32	31	32
ALL	100	68	123

[Kurbain]

 

I feel your pain. I struggle against top-tier opposition, especially when the gap is two tiers.

However I have not had the same unfavourable matchmaking when playing tier 6 ships that you have. My pain is in tiers 4 & 5.

 

(Data from my Post Patch 0.5.3 Games Database)

Tier of my ship	Top Tier	Mid Tier	Bottom Tier
4	21	8	31
5	47	29	60
6	32	31	32
ALL	100	68	123

 

 

There may be a solution to your matchmaking issues. I've found that if I play T10, I tend to be top-tier incredibly often, you may even say all the time!

 

Let's check the statistics:

 

 

Tier of my ship	Top-Tier	Mid-Tier	Bottom-Tier
10	100%	0%	0%

Conclusion: If you are worried about being bottom-tier to often, just play T10. 

 

 

Joke aside, keep up the data collection, I'm curious about it. Looks like you are indeed bottom-tier unusually often.

I guess that most players are playing T6-T8 by now, especially T8 since the best premium ships  for captain training and money-making are located there. Tirpitz has been one of the most played ships each week for a long time now.

That means you will be bottom-tier as a T4 to T6 ship more often, since the matchmaker will be able to find and create a T6-T8 battle a lot faster than a T4-T6 battle.

There are a few rules the matchmaker tries to follow and the more ships the matchmaker can use, the easier it will be for the matchmaker to fulfill these requirements.

 

T8 may be the best tier to play in regards to matchmaking, since there are always a lot more T6/T7 than T9/T10 players around, which should allow you to be top-tier often.

Would be nice to see some data for every tier in the game to see if this is actually true. The scarcity of T9/T10 players could also increase the amount of times T8 players are bottom-tier since they will have to fill up missing slots more often.

[Commander_Steph]

Check my signature, i have levelled my account directly for Tier8s. Should i sell them all now?

[Pajosaurus]

 

I feel your pain. I struggle against top-tier opposition, especially when the gap is two tiers.

However I have not had the same unfavourable matchmaking when playing tier 6 ships that you have. My pain is in tiers 4 & 5.

 

(Data from my Post Patch 0.5.3 Games Database)

Tier of my ship	Top Tier	Mid Tier	Bottom Tier
4	21	8	31
5	47	29	60
6	32	31	32
ALL	100	68	123

 

I have a tier 4 problem too, though I'm not too bothered by it. I kept only one T4 ship -- Clemson -- because I am crazy in love with her and like to take her out for a spin every day. I do get placed in T6 matches very often (in fact, I had a post on it a few months back when I was grinding her on the way to Nicholas), but since that ship is so damn good, I can live with it. 

 

Anyway, WG should really tweak their MM. While I don't have a problem with +/-2 tier matchmaking, in my opinion the bottom tier placement should't be that frequent, certainly not more frequent than other match-ups. Also, certain ships are more influenced by it than others. For example, Minekaze doesn't give a damn about Tier 7, it's just so good. On the other hand, Nurnberg, with its paper armor and low caliber AP which tends to get deflected at the smallest of angles, is no match against high tier opposition, especially if you find yourself facing a competent opponent. And since I'm grinding this ship right now, I've really soured on her.

[ilhilh]

Important official info on the upcoming rank battles season 4:

 

The developer Vallter_ says:

We know that players would want to prepare their ships and captains for upcoming rank battle seasons, and therefore need to know which tiers will be eligible. The next rank battles season 4 will be held at tiers V, VI and VII. Those who are confident that they will reach rank 1 may prepare their tier X ships.

 

Interesting.  I have the Mahan, Saipan and 5-skill-Hiryu at tier 7.  I can make the Fuso work in tier 7 too (I did in the first season) as it is brilliant for CA deletion.  And then I could always retrain Yamato captain for the Nagato I guess?  Plenty of options.  I like the idea of there being something for post rank 1 as well

 

EDIT: guess I have the Myoko thanks to ARP too if I really fancy dragging the team down with me :p

[anonym_gxxGX7KaxQVa]

also now we know that Iowa's 19th and Montana's 20th quad Bofors is on top of the B turret

 

 

nooooo please   Iowa looks ugly with a bofors on her turret.

it wasn't even that common, i barely saw any real life photo of her with it from the WW2 timeframe

or does the model has it already ? i don't have Iowa yet, but judging from the other Iowa i saw in game she doesn't have it as of now

 

[Comrad_StaIin]

 

nooooo please   Iowa looks ugly with a bofors on her turret.

it wasn't even that common, i barely saw any real life photo of her with it from the WW2 timeframe

or does the model has it already ? i don't have Iowa yet, but judging from the other Iowa i saw in game she doesn't have it as of now

 

 

Wisconsin because WoWs Iowa is Wisconsin

come on its not that bad

 

extra http://maritime.org/doc/plans/bb63.pdf

even more extra

 (the Bofors on Turret A is a mistake)