Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.

41 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles
Average Score for ShipClasses (all players) [ at 2015/07/19 ]
class tier name players total battles average of rates
battles win experience damage
coused
warship
destroyed
aircraft
destoryed
base
capture
base
defense
point
BB 1 Higher Tier 831 52735 63.46 41.16 1215 38556 0.61 2.77 0.77 4.26 28912
CA 1 Higher Tier 4759 130433 27.41 41.42 1064 26439 0.56 2.76 1.09 6.46 19678
CV 1 Higher Tier 904 50860 56.26 45.17 1765 62727 1.19 17.01 0.34 6.30 31123
DD 1 Higher Tier 2959 45122 15.25 40.64 841 14029 0.39 0.32 1.60 4.86 14354

 

- Lowest

- Highest

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,177 posts
4,099 battles

 

Take a look at this page, which is an unofficial statistics summary for players on the Asia server compiled by a Japanese player, based on publicly available player information on the official WoWS website.

 

This website covers ASIA only, and does not include NA, EU and RU. Since there is no public API for WoWS yet, I'm assuming that he wrote a website trawler to collect raw data from "worldofwarships.asia/en/community/accounts" pages, and then compiled/cleaned/mined the data using an analytics program like IBM SPSS, Strata, SAS or RStudio.

 

A few interesting points to note:

  • Low tier CAs perform statistically better in terms of winrate, with an average of 47.28%. This is followed by low tier DDs (46.75%), low tier BBs (46.23%) and high tier CVs (45.17%).
  • High tier BBs on average receive the highest XP earned, followed by high tier CAs, and high tier CVs. DDs, high and low tier, perform the most terrible across the board.
  • Most people play low tier CAs (125,612 players with a total of 4,569,312 battles).
  • High tier CVs deal the most average damage (62,727). Across the board, high and low tier DDs performed the worst.
  • On the Asia server, Wargaming has sold 3,035 Atagos. That's AUD $182,000 worth. Atlanta is comparatively less popular, with only 1,512 players.


I guess you could conclude from this that the DD nerfs towards the end of CBT seriously affected the game balance. I'd assume that we should see similar statistical trends on the NA and EU servers as well.

 

Edited by benlisquare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ST Coordinator
2,325 posts
2,196 battles

  • On the Asia server, Wargaming has sold 3,035 Atagos. That's AUD $182,000 worth. Atlanta is comparatively less popular, with only 1,512 players..

 

Everyone loves them Panpapapak Fuel Tanks !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,177 posts
4,099 battles

Welp, there's already a thread about it - guess you sum it up as well.

 

Really? Where was it? I made sure to look at the entire front page of "General Discussions" before I posted this.

 

EDIT: Whoops, just noticed it. I guess it flew right over my head while I was looking through the threads. If it's necessary, a mod should probably merge the threads, sorry for the trouble.

Edited by benlisquare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

Is this based on raw exp, or is it screwed around by including premium bonus for those with premium? Last I checked the profile stats on the website don't differentiate between premium and non, so comparison of average exp by ship is not truly valid. Have to wonder about win bonuses, too.

 

Same problem with WoT.

 

Unless someone can confirm that's not the case for WoWS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,177 posts
4,099 battles

Is this based on raw exp, or is it screwed around by including premium bonus for those with premium? Last I checked the profile stats on the website don't differentiate between premium and non, so comparison of average exp by ship is not truly valid. Have to wonder about win bonuses, too.

 

Same problem with WoT.

 

Unless someone can confirm that's not the case for WoWS.

 

The player profiles on the WoWS website don't take daily x1.5 modifiers, signal flags or premium into account.

 

If you buy a ship for the first time, have premium, and win your first battle, even if you earn 2250 XP, your profilie will still say that you have 1 battle in ship X, and that your average XP is 1000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

 

The player profiles on the WoWS website don't take daily x1.5 modifiers, signal flags or premium into account.

 

If you buy a ship for the first time, have premium, and win your first battle, even if you earn 2250 XP, your profilie will still say that you have 1 battle in ship X, and that your average XP is 1000.

 

OK then, thanks. Has always been a problem in WoT.
Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
13 posts
928 battles

I maybe mistaken but why is it that the exps i earned from battles doesnt tally with what i should get on records? eg: I am looking forward to get Aoba and i have 46k more exps before i can get it. So i fought and accumulated say... 10k of exps.. by right i shud have 36k more to go... but when i checked... its like i still have 40k to go.... weird. Please advice. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

I believe there are some errors in the Page as it's probably handmade - but Still believable enough to be worrying.

 

CV - Across the board is just plainly imbalanced when everyone skill is roughly the same as shown. Basically the more Hakuryu you get the better chance you will win. Doesn't matter anything.

BB - As expected - Good players will do really good in it and Newbies drag it's down.

CA/CL - Nothing unexpected.

DD - It proved the nerfs are unjustified. It's not like OP or even borderline UP - Why change it? Now Great another rebalance is needed. Kinda Pointless and wasting time.

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

Well at least im above average i guess.

Edit: 

Even better according to this im one of the best Cleveland captains on the server, here i was thinking im average. I wonder where i actually stand out of those 397 clevelands. 

Top 10% scores

devfcBF.jpgMine

NWJROFw.jpg

 

Edited by Fear_the_Reaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
773 posts
796 battles

Well at least im above average i guess.

Edit: 

Even better according to this im one of the best Cleveland captains on the server, here i was thinking im average. I wonder where i actually stand out of those 397 clevelands. 

Top 10% scores

devfcBF.jpgMine

NWJROFw.jpg

 

 

Pfft.  In the CBT HoF you and I were the top Cleveland captains.

 

Anyway, I find it interesting that on average BBs are doing less than their own HP in damage and only two BBs are averaging at least one kill per battle.  Obviously it's early days for the higher tiers but I find the trend significant.  I said in CBT that BBs were the hardest class to carry in and that doesn't seem to have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,374 battles

 

Pfft.  In the CBT HoF you and I were the top Cleveland captains.

 

Anyway, I find it interesting that on average BBs are doing less than their own HP in damage and only two BBs are averaging at least one kill per battle.  Obviously it's early days for the higher tiers but I find the trend significant.  I said in CBT that BBs were the hardest class to carry in and that doesn't seem to have changed.

 

Playing a BB is like playing chess, a move you made 10 minutes ago can get you killed is the problem and a lot of people have a very hard time thinking 10 minutes ahead of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
506 posts
1,386 battles

didn't they intend to make CV a support role ? LOL

that damage are almost Double from 2 place (BB)

 

If they want CV to be support role, then perhaps they should have thought of scout plane gameplay instead of dismissing scouting completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
512 posts
308 battles

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20150719/statistics.html

 

This link (and the graph below) has a whole bunch of interesting stats to do with the Asia wows server, and are probably quite similar to other servers as well.

FsDXH7R.png

 

The information in this graph for example infers a bunch of interesting things:

  • Carriers are OP, as a class aircraft carrier average damage output exceeds battleships by roughly 50%, and cruisers by more than 100%, destroyers are left in the dust (or perhaps shallows would be more fitting?) with roughly a third (or less) of the average damage.
  • For high tiers carrier average exp is an incredible outlier, being more than double that of destroyers, and 500 exp higher than battleships, their closest competitor.
  • Kills per game far exceeds that of the other classes, which is especially pronounced at the high tiers (nearly double that of battleships, and moreso when compared to the other classes).
  • Carrier win rates in the lower tiers is marginally the worst of the classes, which I'm assuming is a result of their inflexibility, while being far better than other classes for the higher tiers, which is probably a result of more capability (number of squadrons in the air and so on), higher speeds and longer game times, all of which directly boost the amount of potential the carrier has to cause damage.
  • Draws are a serious issue in the high tiers, average win rate for all classes except carriers takes a 5-6% hit at the high tiers compared to the low tiers, making for an average win rate of around 40-41%, which is approximately 8-9% lower than the average win rate in wot for example, this can only be the result of draws (due to basic maths, otherwise the average win rate server-wide could only be 50%, as somebody has to be winning).
  • Destroyers are seriously under-performing, this is unsurprising given the skill-intensive nature of them, and is to be expected, most people simply can't deal with a class that has incredibly limited survivability and requires people to think to actually deal damage effectively.
  • Battleships are fine, they may be slow and have bad accuracy, but their survivability and alpha damage means that their potential is huge.
  • Cruisers as a class are under-performing, which is a result of their awful survivability (very little armour worth a damn, battleships feast on them), and main guns which are reliant on RNG (fires), not skill (aiming).

 

There are a lot more stats, but those are just the things one can work out by looking at that graph, feel free to look at the link for a more in-depth view of the stuff there, it is quite an interesting read once you get past the rather haphazard presentation. 

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×