Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Kartoffelmos]

 Black friday what if its the  USS Black 

 

Seeing as some NA players are still salty about the Mikaza never being sold over there (yes, it's not like they had the option of getting it for basically nothing), I'm going to guess that she's the mystery ship.

[Gojuadorai]

I would predict massive outcry on EU forum about how unfair it is that NA get's it and we don't

 

as WG likes to have that, so its confirmed 

 

[Takeda92]

 

Seeing as some NA players are still salty about the Mikaza never being sold over there (yes, it's not like they had the option of getting it for basically nothing), I'm going to guess that she's the mystery ship.

 

Exactly my thought as well. It's most likely will be Mikasa, maybe even Katori or Smith.

 

Actually, I don't think Katori ever existsed on NA server. We got her through GNB but NA didn't have that .

[ThePurpleSmurf]

 

I would predict massive outcry on EU forum about how unfair it is that NA get's it and we don't

 

Can we have a EU-only camouflage that reads 'We beat NA and RU' (reference to the cross-server events) on the bow? 

[Elenortirion]

This is an update on the top performing ships 0.5.14 by tier compiled by the Russian video blogger z1ooo. The ranking is based on a damage, frags, winrates, etc. applied to a large sample from the RU server.

 

Source:

 

In general, Japanese ships perform better than American ships on most tiers.

 

The rankings have changed since the previous evaluation.

 

Carriers: The Saipan, which was the top carrier at tier 7, now it performs worse than the Hiryu. The Hakuryuu is significantly better than the Midway.

 

Best ships by tier:

 

Tier 2: Umikaze

 

Tier 3: Nassau

 

Tier 4: Isokaze, Imperator Nikolai I, Iwaki Alpha, Arkansas Beta

 

Tier 5: Minikaze (and clones), Gremyashchy, König, Texas, Königsberg
worst ships Bogue and Emerald

 

Tier 6: Arizona, Leander, Perth
worst ships Nürnberg, Mutsuki and Ognevoi

 

Tier 7: Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Fiji, Belfast, Flint, Błyskawica, Leningrad
worst ships York, Pensacola and Hatsuharu

 

Tier 8: Bismark, Amagi, Mikhail Kutuzov, Edinburgh, Atago
worst ships New Orleans, Admiral Hipper, Prinz Eugen, Tashkent

 

Tier 9: Neptune, Friedrich der Große, Fletcher
worst ships Kagero, Baltimore, Ibuki

Tier 10: Carriers, Minataur, Großer Kurfürst
worst ships Shimakaze and Yamato

 

interesting bit of info although I fail to see that "generally japanese ships perform better than usn ones on most tiers"

[interesting thing is that apparently from t6 upward IJN Destroyers lands in all "worst ships" if WG see it and still wants to proceed with nerfing them then it would mean we are dealing with developpers hypocrisy at it's best >.> ]

[Myrmix]

Wait...the Yamato performs worse than Kurfürst?

Could this have something to do with it's 26 km range? At close range (15km or less) this thing is a beast (at least on test server)

[Spellfire40]

Fiji over Belfast i know Radar isnt everthing ,-)))

[Takeda92]

Well in RU's "in your face" meta, That German tier 10 will do better than Yamato.

 

I ship with 12 420mm guns with highest HP and can't be citadeled at close range, what could go wrong?

[Spellfire40]

Well in RU's "in your face" meta, That German tier 10 will do better than Yamato.

 

I ship with 12 420mm guns with highest HP and can't be citadeled at close range, what could go wrong?

 

​Thoght the same thogh in case of Yama ist probably more that the Turets cant stay on Target at low range. Killed a Yama in a Tirpitz if you flank her you just outtrade her high Alpha with high rof cits

[Elenortirion]

Fiji over Belfast i know Radar isnt everthing ,-)))

 

meanwhile I'm sitting here wondering what that belfast was firing at that fiji to deal to little to no damage to it xD [potatoes maybe?]

[Gojuadorai]

Babykim, on 22 November 2016 - 09:41 PM, said:

Tier 10: 
worst ships  Yamato

 

WTF?

 

how do they play this game????

 

 

 

 

[Trainspite]

 

WTF?

 

how do they play this game????

 

 

 

 

 

Badly. 

[GeneraKrizmuz]

Yamato is far behind because it's a stupid normalized rating that nobody understands except the youtuber who made it

 

In absolute numbers their Yamato does better than ours (53% to 52% and 90k to 86k)

 

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

​Thoght the same thogh in case of Yama ist probably more that the Turets cant stay on Target at low range. Killed a Yama in a Tirpitz if you flank her you just outtrade her high Alpha with high rof cits

 

The bow of the Yam is actually so big and fat that she can't aim at close range stuff...

 

I take faster reloads at the expense of turret rotation so I pretty much need to fight at mid to long range.

[Namolis]

This is an update on the top performing ships 0.5.14 by tier compiled by the Russian video blogger z1ooo. The ranking is based on a damage, frags, winrates, etc. applied to a large sample from the RU server.

 

Source:

 

In general, Japanese ships perform better than American ships on most tiers.

 

The rankings have changed since the previous evaluation.

 

Carriers: The Saipan, which was the top carrier at tier 7, now it performs worse than the Hiryu. The Hakuryuu is significantly better than the Midway.

 

Best ships by tier:

 

Tier 2: Umikaze

 

Tier 3: Nassau

 

Tier 4: Isokaze, Imperator Nikolai I, Iwaki Alpha, Arkansas Beta

 

Tier 5: Minikaze (and clones), Gremyashchy, König, Texas, Königsberg
worst ships Bogue and Emerald

 

Tier 6: Arizona, Leander, Perth
worst ships Nürnberg, Mutsuki and Ognevoi

 

Tier 7: Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Fiji, Belfast, Flint, Błyskawica, Leningrad
worst ships York, Pensacola and Hatsuharu

 

Tier 8: Bismark, Amagi, Mikhail Kutuzov, Edinburgh, Atago
worst ships New Orleans, Admiral Hipper, Prinz Eugen, Tashkent

 

Tier 9: Neptune, Friedrich der Große, Fletcher
worst ships Kagero, Baltimore, Ibuki

Tier 10: Carriers, Minataur, Großer Kurfürst
worst ships Shimakaze and Yamato

T2: no surprise there I really wonder why it has been allowed to have that reload and that range for so long.

 

T3: Again, no surprise. Did you know the Nassau can tank a Yamato firing into its broadside from point blank range? I sure didn't until I loaded up a training room to test it. I'm a little surprised Bogatyr and St. Louis didn't make the grades though.

 

T4: Alpha and Beta are probably just because they on average have more experienced players behind them. Other two, yeah.

 

T5: No Zuiho?

 

T6: This really showcases the big jump from T5 to T6: The Nürnberg is essentially a Königsberg with much better reload, and yet it still falls from best in class to worst in class.

 

In fact, now that T1 doesn't really count anymore, I seriously think they should consider renaming T1 to T0 or TP (practice) or something like that - and then introduce one more level of old-style cruiser into the game. Game balance really struggles because there is so much happening from T2 to T6, making the jump in tier from one to the next very keenly felt. This in turn has caused devs to play around with MM to ease the pain on new players, with decidedly mixed results - be it T3, T4 or T5; the first tier out of kindergarten has always been a rough place. Starting at T6, the progression per tier relaxes - weapons continue to (somewhat) improve, but not by as much, armor gets better, but not by as much, HP gets better, but not by as much; speed mostly stays the same and concealment and turning ability actually goes down. At tiers 7 to 9, it sometimes seems as if it's not really the ships themselves that are getting better, but the pure game-invented stuff like choice of ship modules, consumables and bow armor to be overmatched.

 

T7: Really surprised that Gneisenau and Scharnhorst is so far ahead. They have torps, but dpm and pen respectively are huge issues.

 

Also, Leningrad.... ugh. Look at this: Shimakaze was clocked at 41 kts back in the day with a 79k hp engine (30.8 hp/ton). In game it achieves that, but only with speed boost. Leningrad speed trials acheived 40 kts with its 66k hp engine (30.7 hp/ton). So, naturally, it has 43 kts in game without using speed boost. A buff it evidently didn't need at all from a gameplay perspective. Please, WG, just stick to the same standards here, OK?

 

T8: No carriers? Perhaps the WR from mirror MM is pulling them down, but dmg surely they'd be ahead? Lexington is certainly my best ship below T10 damage wise, and I'm not even that good in carriers.

 

T9: VERY surprised by the lack of carriers here, the others are as expected. Interesting to see that RN CLs are consistently doing well at every tier above the abysmal Emerald. Perhaps there is hope for me after all (only 3k xp left now...)

 

T10: Yeah, Yama at the bottom doesn't really surprise me that much. I have heard the meta on RU server is a bit brawlier than here, and Yama is not very happy once people start getting close and to her flanks. I had expected Monty to sit next to her, though. On the flip side, the CVs finally show up. But as mighty as TX CVs are, I really wonder why lower tier carriers aren't considered as powerful. Could it be that the skill cap is what is felt here; ie. that players need to play through an entire line of CVs before they even become reasonably competent in them?

[GeneraKrizmuz]

...

ffs you draw conclusions but you have no clue about the metric you are commenting on

 

 

if you want an actual comparison, go to warships today. What the youtuber is using does not have an equivalent on EU server and babykim should be smart enough to know that he is going to cause lots of confusion

[Namolis]

ffs you draw conclusions but you have no clue about the metric you are commenting on

 

 

if you want an actual comparison, go to warships today. What the youtuber is using does not have an equivalent on EU server and babykim should be smart enough to know that he is going to cause lots of confusion

I comment on what Babykim posted. No need to get worked up over that...

 

But please answer me: was the rating he did wrong? How so? I certainly think it fits my perception of things in most cases.

 

Let's talk about the Yama. If you look at Wows-numbers, you see that Yamato does better among all players, but actually falls behind both GK and Monty in WR once you isolate the top players. Warships Today lets you isolate the last two weeks of data showing, again, that Yama is behind Monty and GK in WR on the RU server; however, WT counts only about half as many battles as WN. WN shows the GK performing abysmally among some players, I don't know what's up with that tbh. Perhaps it didn't filter out supertest games from before the HP buff.

 

Annoyingly, no site let's you filter both at the same time, but if he pulled the numbers himself and did the stats himself, its very much possible he was able to correct for individual player skill. That would be the correct way of doing it imo, after all, we're after the inherent qualities of the ship, not the qualities of players drawn to that ship.

 

As for the Yama itself, I don't really think of it as that powerful anymore - I'm having loads of fun attacking them in my Roon these days. I think people's perception comes from the times when it had an improved heal, a better rudder and no ship in the game could angle against it. After the GK arrived, it can't necessarily sit stationary behind an island and make the area directly in front a no-go for battleships. It's not a weak ship by any means, but it has been brought well into line by numerous nerfs. Plus, it's not the only T10 battleship now! In fact; I'm not surprised if it is even a little on the weak side when corrected for player skill.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

 

As for the Yama itself, I don't really think of it as that powerful anymore - I'm having loads of fun attacking them in my Roon these days. I think people's perception comes from the times when it had an improved heal, a better rudder and no ship in the game could angle against it. After the GK arrived, it can't necessarily sit stationary behind an island and make the area directly in front a no-go for battleships. It's not a weak ship by any means, but it has been brought well into line by numerous nerfs. Plus, it's not the only T10 battleship now! In fact; I'm not surprised if it is even a little on the weak side when corrected for player skill.

 

Yam is great fun once in awhile simply for the lol pen guns. Even if they massively over pen cruisers... Wouldn't buy the Prem Camo for it since she's a special occasion ship. Would get old if I played her daily.

[Babykim]

T2: no surprise there I really wonder why it has been allowed to have that reload and that range for so long.

 

T3: Again, no surprise. Did you know the Nassau can tank a Yamato firing into its broadside from point blank range? I sure didn't until I loaded up a training room to test it. I'm a little surprised Bogatyr and St. Louis didn't make the grades though.

 

T4: Alpha and Beta are probably just because they on average have more experienced players behind them. Other two, yeah.

 

T5: No Zuiho?

 

T6: This really showcases the big jump from T5 to T6: The Nürnberg is essentially a Königsberg with much better reload, and yet it still falls from best in class to worst in class.

 

In fact, now that T1 doesn't really count anymore, I seriously think they should consider renaming T1 to T0 or TP (practice) or something like that - and then introduce one more level of old-style cruiser into the game. Game balance really struggles because there is so much happening from T2 to T6, making the jump in tier from one to the next very keenly felt. This in turn has caused devs to play around with MM to ease the pain on new players, with decidedly mixed results - be it T3, T4 or T5; the first tier out of kindergarten has always been a rough place. Starting at T6, the progression per tier relaxes - weapons continue to (somewhat) improve, but not by as much, armor gets better, but not by as much, HP gets better, but not by as much; speed mostly stays the same and concealment and turning ability actually goes down. At tiers 7 to 9, it sometimes seems as if it's not really the ships themselves that are getting better, but the pure game-invented stuff like choice of ship modules, consumables and bow armor to be overmatched.

 

T7: Really surprised that Gneisenau and Scharnhorst is so far ahead. They have torps, but dpm and pen respectively are huge issues.

 

Also, Leningrad.... ugh. Look at this: Shimakaze was clocked at 41 kts back in the day with a 79k hp engine (30.8 hp/ton). In game it achieves that, but only with speed boost. Leningrad speed trials acheived 40 kts with its 66k hp engine (30.7 hp/ton). So, naturally, it has 43 kts in game without using speed boost. A buff it evidently didn't need at all from a gameplay perspective. Please, WG, just stick to the same standards here, OK?

 

T8: No carriers? Perhaps the WR from mirror MM is pulling them down, but dmg surely they'd be ahead? Lexington is certainly my best ship below T10 damage wise, and I'm not even that good in carriers.

 

T9: VERY surprised by the lack of carriers here, the others are as expected. Interesting to see that RN CLs are consistently doing well at every tier above the abysmal Emerald. Perhaps there is hope for me after all (only 3k xp left now...)

 

T10: Yeah, Yama at the bottom doesn't really surprise me that much. I have heard the meta on RU server is a bit brawlier than here, and Yama is not very happy once people start getting close and to her flanks. I had expected Monty to sit next to her, though. On the flip side, the CVs finally show up. But as mighty as TX CVs are, I really wonder why lower tier carriers aren't considered as powerful. Could it be that the skill cap is what is felt here; ie. that players need to play through an entire line of CVs before they even become reasonably competent in them?

 

Carriers were not included in the main list. They are separately mentioned at the beginning.

 

(!) A correction, the Japanese being generally better than the Americans refers to the carriers, not all ships. I apologize.

 

We already discussed the issue of metric, which is difficult to discuss since the exact formula has not been published.

 

But the above ranking is not based on a metric alone. It mentions ships that have significantly higher average damage or frags per battle compared to other ships of the same type and tier. A kind of statistical outliers within a tier/type group.

[CaptainThunderWalker]

T6: This really showcases the big jump from T5 to T6: The Nürnberg is essentially a Königsberg with much better reload, and yet it still falls from best in class to worst in class.

 

Actually, Nurnberg is worse than the Königsberg.

You gan one extra torp launcher on each side (only useful in Coop) and that extra reload, but the latter is more than offset by the fact that you can no longer turn your rear turrets in a full circle.

[Takru]

 

T4: Premium ships up front.

 

T5: Bogue being a bad ship is totally NOT surprising, considering the craploadouts she has.

 

T6: 2 out of top 3 premiums.

 

T7: 5 out of top 7 premiums. Seeing a pattern here? Nah.

 

T8: Hipper and Eugene being listed bad performing ships seperately is kinda ... it's. the. same. bloody. ship.

 

T10: CVs best performers? What? This does obviously not include their economics, then?!

 

 

[Babykim]

 

T4: Premium ships up front.

 

T5: Bogue being a bad ship is totally NOT surprising, considering the craploadouts she has.

 

T6: 2 out of top 3 premiums.

 

T7: 5 out of top 7 premiums. Seeing a pattern here? Nah.

 

T8: Hipper and Eugene being listed bad performing ships seperately is kinda ... it's. the. same. bloody. ship.

 

T10: CVs best performers? What? This does obviously not include their economics, then?!

 

 

 

Yes, premium ships rule on most tiers and with few examples. I can imagine that tier X carriers are damagewise very good, especially because so few play them. But again, the main ranking is for all ships except the carriers. I corrected this.

 

Please understand that this taken from a video. The blogger jumps around topics so that it not always easy to follow the thought.

[1MajorKoenig]

Sad thing is WG listens a lot to RU cluster and will take this crap serious. I mean they have all the data themselves. They can compare higher damage dealt to damage received (simply speaking just a more aggressive use of the ship).

 

But I am afraid they just nurf the whole list beyond all recognition. Smart small changes are really not WG's cup of tea

[Babykim]

Sad thing is WG listens a lot to RU cluster and will take this crap serious. I mean they have all the data themselves. They can compare higher damage dealt to damage received (simply speaking just a more aggressive use of the ship).

 

But I am afraid they just nurf the whole list beyond all recognition. Smart small changes are really not WG's cup of tea

 

It is very likely that they listen to RU cluster whiners more (natural, cause their forum is full with WG staff), but SubOctavian said on reddit that they pool the statistics from all clusters when evaluating a ship's performance.

 

Whether they draw correct conclusions and make appropriate changes is another question. For example, it is evident that ships like the Bogue, Emerald or Baltimore are not competitive. Yes, an odd nerd can make them work, will come out and argue in the forum that its your skill, not the ship. But seriously. These ships are plain bad.

[Takru]

Balancing on the base of complaints only is not a thing for any developer, really. What annoys me no end is the constant non-balancing of CVs, which Wargaming has been very slow to do anything about. 2016 a good year for CVs? ...