Skill ceiling of ships in ranked

[ezymodo]

This post is meant to answer questions regarding the number of "unwinnable games " in the neighbouring ranked thread:

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/54013-big-ranked-battles-compilation-thread-so-we-dont-have-multiple-other-threads-discussing-the-same-thing/page__st__640#topmost

 

which asked,

Even if you do everything completely right, what percentage of games would you say were completely unwinnable? 

 

which is equivalent to asking the skill ceiling of each ships which are used in ranked. Thus, I will try to compile the data of top player performance in different ships for ranked battles this season.

 

The data is obtained from http://shipcomrade.com/

This data is compiled for players both on EU and NA server (not including others such as SEA and RU servers) that have reached rank 1, ordered by their winrate on the ships under evaluation.

The battles from 15 top players will be picked, although less will be included if not enough players has reached rank one using the criteria above.

(this is more because of practical reasons, since I input it manually)

The rank 1 criteria is chosen to ensure that the ships have passed through all of the ranked bracket, with all of the different meta it implies.

A minimum of 50 battles has to be played before the player is included in this list.

 

In all cases, a cumulative number of more than 1000 battles is recorded for most ships (I will note when there is less data). And here it goes:

 

DD

 

Blyskawica leads the DD pack with WR% among top players of 66.3%, followed by the american gunboats Mahan (65.4%) and Sims (63.3%), respectively. The lowest performer in this class is the IJn DDs, with Hatsuharu and Mutsuki having WR% of 53.1 and 53.5 respectively. Thus, more guns are better than a mere spotting advantage. It is noted that Blyska and Sims have the highest winrate of all ships among top players in this rank season.

 

CA

 

Among the cruisers, the Myoko and its ARP clones (represented here by ARP Myoko, I'm not checking all of them) leads the way with 61.2% and 63.2% WR, respectively. The higher winrate on the ARP version might be due to the fact that most top players have access to the high point ARP captain obtainable by missions. The second place is, predictably, followed by Schors with the spammy russian guns with 58.7% WR. Atlanta seems to a a divisive ship; it could perform decently, but the record shows only a handful of players in both servers has the ability to unlock its potential. There are not enough data to conclude anything regarding Indianapolis and Pensacola with certainty, although the lack of data indicates that these ships are not played by good players for good reasons.

 

BB

 

Nagato is the better battleship in ranked, with 64.1% winrate compared to 60.7% obtained by Colorado. This might due to its higher speed and mobility, which helps relocating between different spots in the map once a flank is won. The BB experts might want to elaborate on this.

 

CV

 

Despite some opinion regarding premium ship(s), Hiryuu is still the better CV compared to Saipan, with WR of 63.8% and 59.7% respectively. As of this moment, there is no record of a person reaching rank 1 by playing Ranger more than 50 times. This mirrors the consensus of most dedicated CV players (despite some individual's insistence to the contrary) that ranger is unsuitable for ranked battles.

 

Some of the questions you might ask regarding the data selection:

 

why you include both NA and EU ?

To increase the sample pool, and evaluate what is possible for the best of the best that used a certain ship for the 4th ranked season.

Unlike previous seasons, the same star amount and mechanics are used in this season for both NA and EU server.

It was also noted that not all players are recorded in this website, but it is reasonable to assume that the better players are has been checked (by themselves or other people) in this website.

In this case, the winrate% ceiling will be revised upwards. This represents the lower limit of possible maximum winrate of each ship during optimal play in ranked battles.

The player's name is included so that the readers can check for themselves the validity of each data entry, and so that some of these people might give some insight to others how to achieve such performance.

 

why 50 battles?

Most players are not dedicated, and used 3-5 type of ships during the ranked battles.

it was found that 100 battles results in few samples, since many good players ranked out before they reach 250 battles or so.

On the other hand, 20 battles is somewhat insignificant in terms of battle percentage played to reach rank 1.

Thus, 50 battles is chosen as a filter for evaluation.

 

Summary

 

 

The chart above summarizes the performance of different ships in ranked battles for the top players,

which in turn gives some indication of the skill ceiling of each ships.

 

The # of stars per game is not taking into account the case of player getting into top of his team when losing, in which case he doesn't lost a star. 

Overall, the # of stars obtained should be higher, especially for DDs, and less so for CVs.

 

It can be concluded that optimal play will enable the best ships of each class to reach winrate of over 60% in ranked, although obviously some ships (DDs) are better than others.

The greyed out ships (Indianapolis, Pensacola, and Ranger) do not collect enough battles, although it is reasonable to assume that they are underperforming for this mode.

 

I hope that this will be useful to answer the question asked in the beginning of the post, and it would be nice if some of the players above give some tips to us mere mortals.

[Syrchalis]

I have a feeling the Saipan has a better xp value than other CVs. While I don't score first (generally second or third) in my CVs even when doing insane amounts of damage and 3+ DD kills, this is just in normal CVs. In Saipan I often get first even with a rather mediocre game.

 

This makes the ship incredibly good for ranked, because no matter what you play, you will have around 60% winrate if you're good. Not losing stars in the 40% of games you will lose (or at least not losing stars most of the time) helps a ton to get forward. Ezy, since you played Hiryu so much, did you score first often? I don't want to spend 1000 doubloons to move my 18 point captain to Hiryu to test it myself. I just can say that it's easy in Saipan to be first.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Awesome work 

 

Honoured I was mentioned 

[ezymodo]

Since I often play the fighter Hiryuu, almost never. Maybe 1 in 5-6 games.

In fact, even when I play the strike Hiryuu with Kraken and High caliber I still lost to a dd that capped 2x during the game.

[AgarwaenME]

Indirectly Syrchalis raises a relevant question. Many players might not chose a ship merely because they can win in it most often, but because they more rarely lose stars on losses. And it's rather easy to suspect that both blysk/mahan (and even the IJN DDs) will be top of that list at a greater frequency.

[Userext]

Could you use something else than imgur  tinypic could work

[Syrchalis]

In fact, even when I play the strike Hiryuu with Kraken and High caliber I still lost to a dd that capped 2x during the game.

Hm, I do actually not get high caliber in my Saipan. But I also barely go for BBs. I try to strike unaware cruisers and nuke DDs at the start. Capping DDs can get ahead of me if they cap a lot, but generally I win out. However, I play 2/2/0 Saipan.

 

I still think the amount of actually good players is too low to play fighter CV. So 90% of them aren't worth supporting anyway. Then again, in Hiryu fighter layout is actually okay. In Saipan it makes you a pure luck ship.

[robihr]

AS saipan is best for not losing stars. it gets massive xp for dd bombing and you get extra xp for planes shot. while it will not win you games in lot of cases (although they can be quite useful), but it will prevent losing stars.

 

i used hiryu (didnt want to retrain my 15+ captain, so i took a new one) and had 90% WR till rank 10(strike setup, or is it called balanced now?). amount of times i got first place was negligible, but impact i had on game was big. saipan on other hand usually had shitty impact on game, but got first place in most games. had to switch to dd after pounding i got from cv sealclubbers on ranked

[Gojuadorai]

which in turn gives some indication of the skill ceiling of each ships.

 

it would be intresting to see not only the absolute ceiling but to see a relative nimber  how hard a ship is to play by normalizing the numbers you have obtained by the average ranked winrate of each ship.

 

[ApesTogetherStronK]

My 75% WR Hatsu is flabbergasted at being bottom. 

Though granted I'm only Rank 9, but still. I can't really be bothered to put the effort in to go higher, though if I were to do that I'm confident I could go a long way in the Hatsu. In 24 games I've only lost a star once, and that was due to 5 xp point difference between me and a Sims. She performs far, far better than my other tier 7's. 

[eliastion]

I wanted to make a slight correction to your diagnosis of DD performance: "more guns are better than stealth".

This is not entirely true. The reality is: for Ranked the DD needs to be versatile.

Hatsuharu has good concealment and good torps but it lacks the firepower to fight enemy DDs (which is very important).

Kiev has great guns - better than either Sims, Mahan or Błyskawica - but it has bad concealment and very short torps. And yet, it performs worse than any of them.

 

Błyskawica is the top because it can perform as any of the four roles:

1. DD brawler - it has good hp, good guns (with shell arcs that easily balance out lower DPM than what USN DDs pack)

2. Torper - it has decent camo and torpedoes that allow for stealth torping even if they are a tad slow

3. Fire support - guns have good range and actually allow for consistent HE hits on bigger ships from ranges where they have hard time hitting the DD in return if they can even see it at all (invisi-fire that distracts people, gets them mad and sometimes sets them on fire which is always nice)

4. Spotter - decent camo

 

There's also hiding allies with smoke but that's available to any and all DDs. There are some differences (some smokes are better than others) but what usually counts is the ability itself, the problem is to apply it when and where needed, not to keep it up forever.

[eliastion]

My 75% WR Hatsu is flabbergasted at being bottom. 

Though granted I'm only Rank 9, but still. I can't really be bothered to put the effort in to go higher, though if I were to do that I'm confident I could go a long way in the Hatsu. In 24 games I've only lost a star once, and that was due to 5 xp point difference between me and a Sims. She performs far, far better than my other tier 7's. 

 

Well, a player with generally inferior ship that is known to him, has a good captain etc is also likely to outperform superior ship controlled by someone who heard that thing is OP and has no clue what its strengths and weaknesses are. It's often (not always but often) best to take YOUR best ship into Ranked, not ship that is best for other people.

 

...of course, then there are these strike Rangers, but... oh, well.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

I wanted to make a slight correction to your diagnosis of DD performance: "more guns are better than stealth".

This is not entirely true. The reality is: for Ranked the DD needs to be versatile.

Hatsuharu has good concealment and good torps but it lacks the firepower to fight enemy DDs (which is very important).

Kiev has great guns - better than either Sims, Mahan or Błyskawica - but it has bad concealment and very short torps. And yet, it performs worse than any of them.

 

Błyskawica is the top because it can perform as any of the four roles:

1. DD brawler - it has good hp, good guns (with shell arcs that easily balance out lower DPM than what USN DDs pack)

2. Torper - it has decent camo and torpedoes that allow for stealth torping even if they are a tad slow

3. Fire support - guns have good range and actually allow for consistent HE hits on bigger ships from ranges where they have hard time hitting the DD in return if they can even see it at all (invisi-fire that distracts people, gets them mad and sometimes sets them on fire which is always nice)

4. Spotter - decent camo

 

There's also hiding allies with smoke but that's available to any and all DDs. There are some differences (some smokes are better than others) but what usually counts is the ability itself, the problem is to apply it when and where needed, not to keep it up forever.

 

True,

 

I have the Kiev, Blys and the Sims and my observations are:

 

Kiev is great fun to play as an Anti-DD gunboat but it consistently scores less points as it simply can't cap. 

 

Sims has great handling but it's guns are awful at long range. They're so bad that I probably wouldn't shoot anything bigger than a DD at about the same range as you're revealed. Sims torps are also diabolical, slow and weak...

 

Blys, best balance of all the attributes required of a Ranked DD. I tried using other ships as I simply got bored of playing her but I've returned. AFT and BFT and you've got enough firepower to face off against all other DD. Her torps aren't to be laughed at either. 

[ezymodo]

I wanted to make a slight correction to your diagnosis of DD performance: "more guns are better than stealth".

This is not entirely true. The reality is: for Ranked the DD needs to be versatile.

Hatsuharu has good concealment and good torps but it lacks the firepower to fight enemy DDs (which is very important).

Kiev has great guns - better than either Sims, Mahan or Błyskawica - but it has bad concealment and very short torps. And yet, it performs worse than any of them.

 

Błyskawica is the top because it can perform as any of the four roles:

1. DD brawler - it has good hp, good guns (with shell arcs that easily balance out lower DPM than what USN DDs pack)

2. Torper - it has decent camo and torpedoes that allow for stealth torping even if they are a tad slow

3. Fire support - guns have good range and actually allow for consistent HE hits on bigger ships from ranges where they have hard time hitting the DD in return if they can even see it at all (invisi-fire that distracts people, gets them mad and sometimes sets them on fire which is always nice)

4. Spotter - decent camo

 

There's also hiding allies with smoke but that's available to any and all DDs. There are some differences (some smokes are better than others) but what usually counts is the ability itself, the problem is to apply it when and where needed, not to keep it up forever.

Agreed,

what I meant was that the way Mutsuki is played in ranked, it is weaker than a Mahan.

It is merely a spotter and a torpedo dispenser, nothing more.

You cannot secure a win just by spotting, you also need to deal damage.

[CosMoe]

Very good analysis, thanks!

 

 

Hope that Wargaming sees these stats and improves future ranked seasons so that the top bracket becomes less DD heavy.

 

[SkybuckFlying]

Data clearly shows ranger cannot win with decent support from cruisers... that's obvious conclusion that I will make ! ;)

 

I feel this is happening to me in ranked games... cannot progress decently, always some cruiser noob, throwing the game away... not defending battleships, not defending cv, cruiser going solo while there are 2 battleships and some enemy destroyers around... and then cruiser tries to kill some other cruiser and losses... noob crap like that.

 

Nagato is easily destroyed from it's broadside, the number of citadells a colorado can do against it is amazing, once players catch on to this, bye bye nagato ?!

 

Also it's air defense is usually pretty weak, though there are acceptions... carrier bot for example will take out nagatos first... this says something about nagato's strength in CV games.

 

My conclusion stands as a rock:

 

Ranger does not reach rank 1.

Pensacola does not reach rank 1.

 

Why is this ? No cooperation from cruiser players !

 

This combination: Ranger + Pensacola should be in rank 1 cause it's powerfull enough.

 

(Cleveland isn't even in it, also a very powerfull AA ship).

[eliastion]

(...)

Ranger does not reach rank 1.

(...)

Why is this ? (...)

 

Simple: Ranger is a bad ship for Ranked and especially in strike configuration it has nothing to oppose enemy air supremacy that gives the enemy:

1. Easy caps.

2. Reduced (if not eliminated) DD threat since either DDs are spotted and destroyed or stay back and have to torp from afar with planes scouting the torps in advance

3. Immense scouting advantage because enemy can't rely on planes to scout (and DDs that scout in no-CV matches are, as mentioned before, mostly neutralized)

 

Strike Ranger is a huge burden on the team, "bringing" an enemy carrier to the game ant then letting it do whatever it wants. This is a big disadvantage - one that can, at times, be overcome, sure. The same, however, can be said about having an AFK in the team - the fact that some games are won despite that doesn't mean that it's a favorable situation.

[Sea_viper]

@Sky$uckflying

I sincerely hope that you are trolling... 

 

First thing first: 

Nagato do fine when angled properly and staying at medium range. Please do not assume that BB players don't understand the basics...

 

THEN

I will explain ONE MORE TIME why Strike Ranger doesn't work even with AA escort.

The Ranger strike with 0/1/3 will face at least 2 fighter squad unless you meet another Ranger in 1/1/1 or 0/1/3.

 

Let say you meet a Saipan

Even 2/2/0 setup have enough FT that are fast enough to stop your TB from going through by simply ignoring the DBs, which are not great on Ranger. While Saipan only got 6 torps from two squad, they are faster AND operating in a secured airspace. Technically, you can snipe him, but 1 Saipan FT is enough to save him. What makes matter worse is that sometimes you have no idea where his ship and his fighter is until your bombers reach the target (more on that when I talked about the Hiryu) , which often equals to lots and lots of dead bombers.

A 3/0/1 Saipan can create a no-fly-zone on his fleet with ease. (Note: If you think you can snipe a 3/0/1 Saipan...) 

 

Against a Hiryu, the problem of squad getting slaughtered reduces BUT the spotting disadvantage becomes ridiculous. A good 2/2/2 Hiryu take scouting very seriously (#NOT_MIDWAY_AGAIN) , just the 2 DBs can provide vision on most of the objective areas and the strike Ranger have 0 counter to it, which means that your DDs will either leave cap or die. Since most of the spotting are done by DBs, the Fighters can intercept much more efficiently and the TBs can attack from good angles because time and vision control allows it to do so. The most funny thing that can happened is that a Strike Ranger finally manage to get a TB through... then you know what? DEFENSIVE FIRE and the fighters are on the way ...

What you have to keep in mind is that a 0/1/3 Ranger are always fighting blind, 2 DB and 2 FT can spot and deny what a strike Ranger can spot, which makes most of his strikes... seems like a bunch of headless chicken trying to find some corn AND force it down their throat .  If you ask a cruiser for AA, and the dds to spot targets for you, A 2/2/2 Hiryu will happily slaughter those dds (which have shells raining on them already) by TBs. 

 

A 3/1/2 Hiryu have stronger no-fly-zone but less strike potential (Note: Good luck sniping!)

Against A Hiryu, you will not even know are the fighters until you actually run into something important and got the bomber slaughtered.

 

All your teammates will hate you with passion if you act like CinC with strike ranger.

 

An even more important aspect of this discussion is that, in all the cases discussed, the enemy CV can shut you down without EVER SNIPING YOU! Then, what is the point of AA escorts?

 

Enlighten me if you can, shame on you if you can't

[RUSSIANBlAS]

The Starbuckflying guy isn't trolling... Or if he is, he's doing it on a deeper level. 

 

I've had the enviable pleasure of playing alongside him numerous times. He plays as a Strike Ranger and will defend it to the death. Granted the games we played, we won but they were from a combination of good teams, a DD slipping through and killing the enemy CV and Starbuckflying getting an Alpha Strike against the enemy CV. 

 

Also I play both Nagato and Colorado (not anymore in Ranked I might add), and there's actually very little difference in their armour pattern when you face only two BB. Neither ship seems to have any immunity zones like the NC for instance. Colorado might take a little less damage but a decent salvo will hurt both in nearly equal amounts.

[Sea_viper]

Now, back on the topic itself. 

The Statistic itself is a excellent piece of work! But I do have a few comments on the conclusion you draw.

 

First, the unusually high win rate of Blys and Mahan might have something to do with the MM -- They will get match with Hatsuharu and Mutsuki, which are relatively weak but still being played in higher rank. It is very unlike CV, BB and CL's case, since Ranger is basically extinct, Colorado and Nagato is relatively balanced and USN cruisers are also (nearly) extinct.

If we try to cancel the bias due to MM and how people select ships, we can look at ship class average

 

CV: 61.75

BB: 62.4

CL/CA: 58.88

DD: 60.083

 

Which kind of suggest BB and CVs can make a bigger impact to the games, even though BB and CV are polar opposite in terms of game play style.

But more importantly, Cruisers are struggling. The reason why Myoko have higher win rate is very likely because it is better then other CL/CA in the rank meta, but the class have issues influencing the outcome of the match. Obviously the problem is not because of the RNG involve, if I am going to make a guess, the reason lies on the job of the Cruisers

 

T7 Cruisers cannot do their jobs by themselves, for the most part, they help others do their job better

e.g. 

Engage DDs, without radar, DD hunting is risky and difficult. The risk of getting wrecked by BB didn't make their job easier.

AA escort, It helps reduces pressure of friendly CVs, but staying close to important targets are often dangerous

Engage BB and Cruisers, it is best to not do it alone 

 

So cruisers are very much dependent on their teammates doing their job in the first place, that is quite different from other ship classes where jobs could be done alone. 

CV will try to control the sky/spot/deal damage most of it is a solo effort

BB will engage deals damage/tank damage most of if is also a solo effort

DD will contest caps/spot/area denial most of it is also a solo effort

Having a coordinated team makes them do their job better and create favourable tactical situation, but bad teammates shouldn't stop them from trying to do their job in the first place.

 

CV will keep fighting for spot/ deals damage even the team collapse 

BB will keep returning fire and tank damage even when a flank collapsed and have to run

DD will keep trying to approach the caps at different angle even when it got push off during the first encounter

 

While a cruisers can't even get into position to do their job if the teammates are not doing their job.

 

Camping BB = cruisers have to fall back

Suicidal DD = cruisers can't spot DDs themselves

Trash CV = cruisers can't be everywhere to stop strikes AND spot

 

My 2 cent

 

 

[Mayv]

@Sky$uckflying

I sincerely hope that you are trolling... 

 

 

You must be new around here.

[ezymodo]

Data clearly shows ranger cannot win with decent support from cruisers... that's obvious conclusion that I will make ! ;)

 

...(more incoherent rambling here) 

 

1. Just borrowed my friend's account to see how the CV plays in higher bracket now.

2. Pick fighter Hiryuu.

3. See a Ranger in bracket 2-5. I guess he must be your follower or something?

4. No planes spotted on the map, assumes strike ranger trying to snipe.

5. Pull 2 fighters back to the CV, was not dissapointed. 24 planes in 2 strafes.

6. Meanwhile, his dds got bombed and spotted to kingdom come.

 

Rinse and repeat. Got first blood and clear sky. 7-0 score for my team. GG, was close .

 

You know, it is possible that you are Jesus's second coming for CVs. For me, I'm content to be the Devil . 

I hope your strike Ranger gospel spread far, and may other CV players follow your example.

Amen.

 

 

[eliastion]

 

1. Just borrowed my friend's account to see how the CV plays in higher bracket now.

2. Pick fighter Hiryuu.

3. See a Ranger in bracket 2-5. I guess he must be your follower or something?

4. No planes spotted on the map, assumes strike ranger trying to snipe.

5. Pull 2 fighters back to the CV, was not dissapointed. 24 planes in 2 strafes.

6. Meanwhile, his dds got bombed and spotted to kingdom come.

 

Rinse and repeat. Got first blood and clear sky. 7-0 score for my team. GG, was close .

 

You know, it is possible that you are Jesus's second coming for CVs. For me, I'm content to be the Devil . 

I hope your strike Ranger gospel spread far, and may other CV players follow your example.

Amen.

 

 

 

I often kinda ditch the queue when I see CVs in it, I'm too afraid of getting... well, maybe not strike ranger, they are rare, but a CV player that will simply lose against the enemy badly, leaving the rest with a pretty much unwinnable match.

If one of your team's BBs screws up, there are things that can be done.

If one of your CAs screws up, well, the game is still on.

If one of your DDs screws up... well, there are often so many of them that you can pretty much expect at least one on each side that will do something stupid and get himself killed.

 

If, however, your team suffers from failure on CV's part, things are looking really really bad. There's simply no playing around it - CV is irreplaceable to the extent no other class is. Well, DDs would be in similar situation, only you tend to get a couple (some complain: too many) DDs per side so there is some redundancy even if one is AFK or dies immediately, or just does nothing useful all game. CVs, on the other hand, are dispensed strictly on 1-on-1 basis. Tere are no "other carriers" in your team that could potentially be just good enough to somehow make up for the one that sucks.

 

Sure, a decent CV player can hinder a great CV player enough that the latter won't dominate the game entirely so it's not like it's only carrier skill that counts for the result. However, a BAD carrier player in one of the teams... oh, boy.

[Syrchalis]

I think that problem with CVs is more that a bad CV player is absolutely useless, while a bad DD/CA/BB still does his job. If a total noob DD drives into an empty cap he still caps it. If a total noob CA drives around he still causes fires which causes repairs to be wasted and absorbs at least a few salvos usually. A total noob BB can survive quite a while, even kill a cruiser with some luck.

 

A total noob CV however just does nothing at all. Also CVs disturb each other a lot in what they do, so the other CV will be even more effective. A bad DD/CA/BB doesn't cause the enemies DDs/CAs/BBs to become more effective, at least not by a significant margain.

 

In summary - CV skill difference is a ton more relevant to the game than in other classes. One reason I don't play anything else in ranked, since there is just a handful people I would call better or even equal. And many of those are rank 1 by now *wink to ezymodo*. I waited for a reason.

 

Also question ezy: Why am I not in the CV list for Saipan? Is it just people who reached rank 1 yet? I ask because I'm at 75 games with 71% winrate.

[ezymodo]

aye, the list is for those that has reached rank 1. 

It's just to make sure that the ships under question has gone through all of the bracket with all of the different meta.

 

I'm surprised that the strike Saipan worked out for you, though.

I guess the good players with the fighter heavy loadout has ranked out early.