Jump to content
xeransa

Stats for the impact of patch 0.5.3 on some of the affected ships

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[S0F]
Beta Tester
163 posts
6,416 battles

Always interested to see how changes affect the game and here are some stats for some of the ships affected by the last patch 0.5.3 I've included other ships not affected and of the same tier for a comparison.

The first stats are from the week before the patch the second the week after..

 

Stats are from 13/02/16 - 20/02/16                                          Stats are from 20/02/16 - 27/02/16

Ship

Players Games Avg Exp Avg Damage   Players Games Avg Exp Avg Damage

Damage difference

   
Mogami 1999 29718 1076 36852   1653 23935 977 31678 -5174

 

 

 

 
Admiral Hipper 461 6898 1178 35646   564 8991 1189 35618 -28    
New Orleans 555 7065 1039 29265   640 8614 1075 30203 +938    
                         
Aoba 4568 71468 819 24065   4368 69168 820 23638 -427    
Nurnberg 2211 33075 838 25339   2216 31570 821 24338 -1001    
Cleveland 5452 87529 851 27900   4986 81235 836 25969 -1931    
                         
Murmansk 1036 13094 1045 35809   947 12022 983 31853 -3956    
Furutaka 3588 46049 642 17647   3510 45289 638 16897 -750    

Konigsberg

2444 30641 712 26644   2505 32131 702 24976 -1668    
Omaha 2571 36430 712 24364   2490 34197 685 22205 -2159


 

As you can see all of the affected ships have taken a hit in terms of average damage and those ships not affected have changed little. At tier 8 the Mogami takes a big hit almost down to the level of the New Orleans with the Admiral Hipper now the best non-premium at that level. At tier 6 the Nurnberg and Cleveland were the big losers but interestingly this now seems to be the most balanced tier for cruisers. At tier 5 the Murmansk is the big loser but is still the most powerful tier 5 cruiser with the poor old furutaka still trailing behind.


 

Obviously these are just initial figures so don't take them too seriously it's more from an interest point of view.


 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
464 posts
6,068 battles

im interested in lexington, anywhere i can check that info, her performance after patch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertest Coordinator
3,691 posts
5,782 battles

I suppose based on this limited evidence that the changes have had their intended effect. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BTS]
Players
1,064 posts
4,867 battles

Interesting comparison. Some of my CLs have been badly affected by the patch. My old AFT Tenryu is now just a big DD with slow turret traverse, slow ROF and bad range. On Phoenix I'm now completely outclassed by Koenigsbergs, while I could fight on almost equal terms before. I feel outranged by everything now on the Cleveland. In general this patch has considerably downgraded my gameplay experience with light cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
6,753 posts
7,907 battles

Interesting comparison. Some of my CLs have been badly affected by the patch. My old AFT Tenryu is now just a big DD with slow turret traverse, slow ROF and bad range. On Phoenix I'm now completely outclassed by Koenigsbergs, while I could fight on almost equal terms before. I feel outranged by everything now on the Cleveland. In general this patch has considerably downgraded my gameplay experience with light cruisers.

 

Kuma is affected too.

 

I'm not playing light cruisers anymore atm, imho they are the weakest ships ingame atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
340 posts
134 battles

im interested in lexington, anywhere i can check that info, her performance after patch?

 

Low data, but Lexington is very sharply up on average damage. You'd expect that when so many players are using the 0-1-3 loadout instead of the old 2-1-1, although average winrate also improved. There may be an effect of experienced former players going back to test the ship.

 

Stats for the Kutuzov?

 

+3.5k damage or so. Now roughly level with the Atago, which is probably what WG wanted.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S0F]
Beta Tester
163 posts
6,416 battles

I guess I really should have included the stats for the MK as well...

 

 

Ship

Players Games Avg Exp Avg Damage   Players Games Avg Exp Avg Damage

Damage difference

   
Mogami 1999 29718 1076 36852   1653 23935 977 31678 -5174

 

 

 

 
Admiral Hipper 461 6898 1178 35646   564 8991 1189 35618 -28    
New Orleans 555 7065 1039 29265   640 8614 1075 30203 +938    
Atago 2643 40588 1140 33004   2793 43253 1167 35084 +2080      
Mikhail Kutuzov 543 6269 1263 35740   608 7685 1291 38273 +2533      

 

 

Interestingly the Atago went up by a fair bit this week this may have something to do with team battles as the Atago seems to be the most favoured CA in team battles.

Edited by xeransa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
789 posts
1,620 battles

I find it amazing both how the Omaha dropped that much and that it's so far behind the Murmansk. Personally I've never used AFT on my Omaha, not always Expert Marksman either. I have been running the C hull since it got the range upgrades though and it's still a very well  performing ship for me with ~40k avg damage. The only thing I've lost that really makes a big difference now is 10% ROF, which will surely be noticable, however the ship was pretty darn powerful before when played right. Took it out today to see how bad it got and really couldn't notice the difference, it's still a powerhouse IMO.

 

Just go with the C hull and demolition expert, with that, hitting just four shots in a salvo has almost 50% of setting a fire, every 7 seconds at 14.8 km range from a very nimble ship and you actually do have a bit of AA which isn't that common at T5. Don't think I've ever felt like I'm missing the extra torpedoes either, 5.5 km isn't a range I generally want to be at in this ship anyways.

 

All this said, I don't understand why they thought it necessary to nerf light cruisers at all. Sure, a lot of people whine about "flamethrowers" setting fire to their BB's etc, which is 95% about them being terrible at the game or at least at their class. Even though my avg damage in the Omaha is pretty decent, my T4 Wyoming outdamages it easily. I don't know, sometimes it feels like WG are addressing an entirely different game then what we are playing when they come up with balancing ideas seeing how they frequently decides to nerf something totally out of  the blue that _no one_ in their right mind even had the thought about nerfing, while forgetting about some things that are obviously totally OP or broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
340 posts
134 battles

Interestingly the Atago went up by a fair bit this week this may have something to do with team battles as the Atago seems to be the most favoured CA in team battles.

 

I don't think team battles are in the API yet, and they certainly wouldn't be included in the "pvp" section that most stat sites use. The rise in Atago stats might just be down to ex-Mogami players rearranging their crew skills for better performance in 8" gun cruisers. Mogami players did tend to have extremely good crews.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,772 posts
12,699 battles

 

Interesting stats.

 

I'm collecting stats on my own games in the following ships:

T4: Kuma, Omaha

T5: Königsberg, Murmansk, Omaha

T6: Cleveland, Nürnberg

 

So far, my average damage per game is down by 15%. My survival rate is down slightly also. It is now about 50%. It was 56% before 0.5.3. Plus, the figures that I am comparing against are the whole 0.5.3 figures, including playing with stock ships, whereas the post-0.5.3 ships are all elited, and have more experienced captains.

 

Wargaming have succeeded in making the cruisers in these tiers more balanced with respect to each other. Well done! I don't have any problem with that AND NEVER HAVE.

 

Where I do take issue with the 0.5.3 changes is that all cruisers - and light cruisers especially - are noticeably weaker in relation to other classes. With BBs you have less dodging room and take more hits, and with DDs you can't get your guns to bear on them so easily, your rate of fire is reduced, and they seem so much more difficult to kill because they all seem to have "Last Stand" to protect their engines/steering.

 

I can understand the case for saying that BBs should be made relatively stronger to cruisers - since they are the counter to CAs. But since cruisers are supposed to be the counter to DDs it seems daft make it harder for cruiser to do their job. It's bad enough that you can't see the blighters unless they make an error or choose to de-cloak!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,045 posts
7,561 battles

I find it amazing both how the Omaha dropped that much and that it's so far behind the Murmansk. Personally I've never used AFT on my Omaha, not always Expert Marksman either. I have been running the C hull since it got the range upgrades though and it's still a very well  performing ship for me with ~40k avg damage. The only thing I've lost that really makes a big difference now is 10% ROF, which will surely be noticable, however the ship was pretty darn powerful before when played right. Took it out today to see how bad it got and really couldn't notice the difference, it's still a powerhouse IMO.

 

There were probably a lot of people with no Murmansk that kept an Omaha around. It isn't unreasonable to assume those people have barely touched their Omahas since. These Omahas probably had a lot of the skills affected, and the players with them were probably some of the more experienced players at the tier. So if they don't play, you have effectively taken away the best performers, and predictably the results show a decline.

 

What is surprising is the general drop in damage. Even Furutaka which should probably see a slight increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I401]
Beta Tester
1,013 posts
8,078 battles

I always find it interesting that the Murmansk has more avg dmg than most of the T8 and some of the T9 cruisers and nobody cares :)

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,772 posts
12,699 battles

I always find it interesting that the Murmansk has more avg dmg than most of the T8 and some of the T9 cruisers and nobody cares :)

 

Brilliant comment.....Liked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NBS]
Beta Tester
254 posts
6,387 battles

I always find a way to make mogami enjoyable.

It was an invisible rain of shells before the update ... Now its a ninja assasin against other cruisers and predictable BB sailors. That 9,4km spotting range makes the ship whats it is.

All in all. The ship is a bit less consistent when it comes to the average damage. but sometimes I manage 100k damage, while other times I get unlucky and meet too many DDs that keep me lit up and not being able to do the damage that I want resulting in low 30k damage games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester
385 posts

Mogami is still able to spam no-skill HE, even more so because they can pick +3% firechance over the AFT now. Was just in my Nagato and got set on 4 fires by a Mogami, along with taking half of my HP off from the sheer damage combined with the fires.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Players
984 posts
10,091 battles

Mogami is still able to spam no-skill HE, even more so because they can pick +3% firechance over the AFT now. Was just in my Nagato and got set on 4 fires by a Mogami, along with taking half of my HP off from the sheer damage combined with the fires.

 

Firstly, AFT and Demolition Expert doesn't exclude one and other. I had both on my Mogami. You, as a Supertester, should know that.

 

Based on your statement, if you're getting set on fire at 15,1 km by Mogami and you can't kill it or damage it, so that he'd rather flee, than risk another hit, we should maybe nerf the range to like 12 km or 10 km?

 

It happens to me often in my BBs, getting set on fire constantly, but you should look at it objectively and adjust your playstyle tactics accordingly. If you're upset about Mogami being so über-powerful with its 15,1 km, I'm sure, you'll enjoy facing Kutuzovs with 19,1 km, which could then spam you from 19 km or sit 5 km next to you in smoke and you still wouldn't be able to do a damn thing.

 

Also, check this topic: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/45569-bringbackaft-website-petition-closure/

 

Cheers,

~t3h'Pâr4d0x

Edited by t3h3th32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[S0F]
Beta Tester
163 posts
6,416 battles

It seems you can't get the staff these days, I actually posted the results for the asia server originally so here are the EU stats...

Stats from pre 0.5.3                                                                            Stats from post 0.5.3

 

Ship Players Games Win % Avg Dam   Players Games Win % Avg Dam Diff in Damage
Mikhail Kutuzov 316 5407 51.25 34866   323 6040 52.01 37192 +2326
Atago 1412 27932 50.02 32727   1397 28091 50.76 33825 +1108
Mogami 1331 24390 50.26 37016   1228 22662 49.06 33425 -3591
Admiral Hipper 1005 20306 48.41 32550   1243 25069 49.09 32177 -373
New Orleans 776 13943 1115 29564   861 15753 48.43 29608 +44
                     
Aoba 2644 50679 49.02 24724   2653 51211 50.40 24842 +118
Nurnberg 5395 111671 47.87 23180   5302 107521 48.41 22369 -811
Cleveland 6165 129704 50.88 26545   5601 119327 50.37 25173 -1372
                     
Murmansk 901 16280 54.07 33171   770 13798 52.47 29003 -4168
Furutaka 2111 37912 47.85 19063   2126 38601 48.15 18769 -294
Konigsberg 4658 87916 48.48 23893   4677 89299 48.61 22379 -1514
Omaha 3374 65022 49.20 22725   3202 62037 49.36 21119 -1606

 

 

Slight difference from the asia server but still the same message.

Tier 8 Mikhail Kutuzov is now the best ship but limited numbers of players may be boosting this higher than it should be. The Mogami is now more in line with the other tier 8s which is fine but the New Orleans needs a little bit of love.

Tier 6 looks fairly balanced and while the cleve is still top it's lead is very slender.

Tier 5 the massively OP Murmansk is pegged back a lot but is till way ahead of the other ships but at least the poor old furutaka gained a bit on the non premium tier 5s.

Edited by xeransa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_OPC_]
Players
364 posts
11,422 battles

I always find it interesting that the Murmansk has more avg dmg than most of the T8 and some of the T9 cruisers and nobody cares :)

 

It is simple, the gap between bbs and ca/cl increases with lvl (bbs have more range, more survivability, move faster and are more agile).

 

At lower tiers:

 - the battles are more balanced in terms of ship type numbers  - at higher tiers you can see more bbs and sometimes a CV.

 - you can risk fight with bb in higher tiers maybe at max range and bb doesn't care about you (which is very rare...after all it is easy pray).

 - you often get +2 tier difference in T8 ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,772 posts
12,699 battles

Interesting stats xeransa - well done for putting the effort into collecting and publishing them,:honoring:

 

I added a little extra analysis of my own. I added an index whereby the strongest ship in each tier (in terms of damage) gets a rating of 100, and the other ships a value relative to that.

e.g. a rating of 90 means that the ship does 90% of the damage that the best ship does.

 

This gives:

 

Ship  Avg Dam  Diff in Damage Index
Mikhail Kutuzov  37192 2326 100.0
Atago  33825 1108 90.9
Mogami  33425 -3591 89.9
Admiral Hipper  32177 -373 86.5
New Orleans  29608 44 79.6
         
Aoba  24842 118 98.7
Nurnberg  22369 -811 88.9
Cleveland  25173 -1372 100.0
         
Murmansk  29003 -4168 100.0
Furutaka  18769 -294 64.7
Konigsberg  22379 -1514 77.2
Omaha  21119 -1606 72.8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OM]
[OM]
Players
480 posts
11,008 battles

Can you clarify why a Murmansk (Omaha C Hull) is better then Omaha? Does the stats only show the fact that the player using the ship massively impacts the stats?

 

Same goes for MK/Mogami/Atago/New Orleans; all ships are pretty close, I mean 8k DMG are 1-2 salvos with full dmg. That from my point of view is very well balanced.

 

And as a personal hint: to play the mogami with her play style to her strenghts will impact your ibuki gameplaye. Since the ibuku is just that: A slightly better mogami with 203mm guns, more range, more hitpoints, healing included.

So when if not on mogami a player should learn to play these ships and adapt the style?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
340 posts
134 battles

Can you clarify why a Murmansk (Omaha C Hull) is better then Omaha? Does the stats only show the fact that the player using the ship massively impacts the stats?

 

The Murmansk has the following advantages over the Omaha C Hull:

 

- 50% better AP penetration.

- Much better rudder shift time.

- Longer range torps.

 

It's not that much better than the Omaha though. The Murmansk also has no stock grind and has somewhat better players, which accounts for most of the difference. A clearer example is Arkansas (39k) vs Wyoming (25k). Generally raw averages are pretty bad for comparing ships, but changes over time can be quite interesting.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×