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

The XXXX is so OP/UP BUFF/NERF my ship or I will quit the internet etc. etc.

54 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
213 posts
4,335 battles

So in order to end all XXXX needs buff/nerf. You're using it wrong!! debates.

Here are the stats from Asia server as of 8/26 in pretty graphs with analysis that nobody asked for.

Source data comes from here.

Note that there are very few battles for some high tier ships (especially destroyers)

 

Individual Ship Performance VS Tier Benchmark for all Ships
(see methodology below) 

 3BJYiEH.png

92J3lIu.png

 

Benchmarking Methodology (only read if you're interested)

Blue bars represent All players. Orange top 10%

  • BBs are generally not friendly to newer players. "You're doing it wrong" definitely applies to many ships in this class - especially Kongo
  • Aside from the tier Xs (data not reliable), Fuso, New Mexico and (surprising to me) Wyoming are stars of the line
  • from tier 5~8 Average players do better in the US BBs, Top 10%ers in the JP BBs
  • Miyogi is the worst BB in game followed by Colorado, skill helps ~ but not much
  • Before tier X(again, not enough data), the 8" CAs are UP. The lower tier 6" CAs do better (More Dakka) but require some skill
  • Cleveland really isn't that OP
  • The prems, Atlanta and Atago are terrible (skill makes the Atago considerably less terrible- but still terrible)
  • Everybody's complaints about the Furutaka (soon to be buffed) are justified

 

 KJu41Qu.png

 

  • CVs are almost all monster ~ especially with a skilled player driving
  • Except for the Langley, Bogue (we knew that) and Lexington (What?? Why is this performing so bad?)
  • Aside from the Isokaze and Minekaze which require a bit of skill to perform, all other DDs blow or are at best average and are not really saved by skill

 

 Osn5onS.png

 

Gold bars represent % damage difference between to 10% players and All Players

  • Murmansk seems to be the Unicum's seal clubbing weapon of choices
  • Atago can suck a lot less if played by a ninja (but will still suck)
  • Fuso VS Nagato, New Mexico VS Colorado ? Sorry your additional unicorn spunk will have more impact on the lower tier ship. (i.e. if you can do X amount better in a Nagato, you will do even better in a Fuso)

 

 bLouo3D.png

7scoies.png

In these graphs, each ship is compared only with ships within its own class. (Ignore tier IIIs - they don't follow model so I have omitted data)

This method shows performance difference in class better but different classes cannot be compared as their benchmark is different.

 

Its about the kills dahling:

 iw5Lq3o.pngIt WOT its definitely about the kills. In this game, I think this stat is heavily skewed towards mop up kills (carriers) and kill stealing by rapid fire guns.

Still, the ususual suspects at the bottom of the pile.

 Any still think Atago is OK?:hiding: (Yes... in the right hands its better than a Bogue...)

 

 
 
Edited by Gorbon_Rubsay

Share this post


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

Excellent stuff.

 

Seems to me the only arguments to be had are around the method.

 

The "Stop whining about CVs and l2p" crowd should now do a good approximation of the population playing the Type 59 upon its release, LOL.

 

I seem to recall commenting both in Alpha and Closed Beta that I was yet to see much reason to play beyond tier 6, and am not seeing an awful lot to change that view.

 

Thanks for the effort. Should be interesting to see how it's taken.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Wyoming's not particularly a surprise, tbh. 12 turrets means that once players get the hang of aiming, they can easily oneshot most cruisers at that tier, or even destroyers coming in for close attacks.

 

Likewise for the Fusou/Nagato, Colorado/New Mex data - more guns, more chances of landing hits/devastating strikes. One thing that Nagato has going for it is its HP and beastly secondaries, but given how unreliable the latter is without dedicated upgrades, I'm not surprised to see Fusou outperforming it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

IMHO, I think the reason why the CV is really scary is because most, if not all players, are cramming up strike loadouts (I have yet to see a CV player make solid use of fighters intercepting strike aircraft TBH). I won't say anything about the flippin ship itself since a hull is a hull and everything can blast that hull out of the water like fish in a barrel. its ability to project force anywhere in the map is an added plus without the landmass obstruction. I have no right to scream if the CV's are OP or not as I do not sit in the flight control and helm in em but one DOES know they are dangerous.

 

as for the battleships though, I don't see anyone threadin' red whine on the Kongo (speaking of which, NY is just... absurd. it is the very definition of manly tear inducing dread I have ever seen) for that matter but dakka triumphs everything which is probably the reason Nagato has the potential to be a ship that nobody can get up close and personal as well as Fuso having the highest broadside potential at her tier (six flippin dual mount turrets packing 14 inch guns. afaik the only thing that can match that is the old Wyoming dread!). I don't know about Colorado as there was that someone in FEHSBEWK railing at the Colorado as "Craporado".

 

I still want the flippin Myogi to have a teeny tiny shot deviation adjustment. all that range and someone's a bit alienated from the AXY turret layout as I am assuming players who are starting to get into ships with turrets are very familiar with the turret layouts they know such as the common ABX or ABXY layouts.

Share this post


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

 

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

The less people talk about Warspite, the better. Warspite is a unicorn now, glad i bought it before it went missing. :hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

What does the y-axis represent in the ship-by-ship comparison chart?

 

Edit: Answered thanks.

Edited by Haku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[151ST]
In-Training Moderator
95 posts
4,644 battles

IMHO, I think the reason why the CV is really scary is because most, if not all players, are cramming up strike loadouts (I have yet to see a CV player make solid use of fighters intercepting strike aircraft TBH). I won't say anything about the flippin ship itself since a hull is a hull and everything can blast that hull out of the water like fish in a barrel. its ability to project force anywhere in the map is an added plus without the landmass obstruction. I have no right to scream if the CV's are OP or not as I do not sit in the flight control and helm in em but one DOES know they are dangerous.

 

as for the battleships though, I don't see anyone threadin' red whine on the Kongo (speaking of which, NY is just... absurd. it is the very definition of manly tear inducing dread I have ever seen) for that matter but dakka triumphs everything which is probably the reason Nagato has the potential to be a ship that nobody can get up close and personal as well as Fuso having the highest broadside potential at her tier (six flippin dual mount turrets packing 14 inch guns. afaik the only thing that can match that is the old Wyoming dread!). I don't know about Colorado as there was that someone in FEHSBEWK railing at the Colorado as "Craporado".

 

I still want the flippin Myogi to have a teeny tiny shot deviation adjustment. all that range and someone's a bit alienated from the AXY turret layout as I am assuming players who are starting to get into ships with turrets are very familiar with the turret layouts they know such as the common ABX or ABXY layouts.

 

I used to play a fighter loadout on my US CVs.........but, the xp is just much better if you run a 1.1.1 instead of a 2.1.0 (or is that a 2.0.1?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
213 posts
4,335 battles

Thanks for the positives!

Added an explanation of the benchmarking.

Also no data for Sims, Yubari or Warspite. Used to be in some older data sets. Perhaps not enough games in these ships for the person who made the original data to pull them.

 

Also out of curiosity ~anyone with experience driving Lexington ~ what's wrong with it? is this an anomaly or does it suck?

Edited by Gorbon_Rubsay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,083 posts
5,169 battles

i hope they buff colorado soon.

Also out of curiosity ~anyone with experience driving Lexington ~ what's wrong with it? is this an anomaly or does it suck?

 

probably because it has lower DB and TB plane in reserve because most of its reserve are on fighters. and at higher tier cv are expected to receive heavy plane loss because of higher AA DPM.

 

back on cbt i have better performance on ranger compare to lexi. because even if i lost 2-3 torpedo plane during bombing run i have more planes on reserve to absorb the losses, i can even sacrifice a whole squadron just to take out or heavily damage a vital target but i can't do that on lexi. you have to be picky on choosing your target target or you will loss your all your striking capability.

Edited by yansuki

Share this post


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

Couple of minor points (being picky, lol):

 

Could I suggest a constant use of orange and blue? At one point we have "Blue bars represent All players. Orange top 10%" and then we get "Blue bars represent % damage difference between top 10% players and All Players" (I assumed that should be 'top 10%' and changed it from the 'to 10%' as written). So we have blue bars being used for different purposes. Within the same report, you really ought to avoid doing that.

 

In your comment on the analysis method, might I suggest you explain the graph IN the spoiler FIRST? When I read it the first time, I thought "the Y axis can't be that because it's clearly average damage". Then I realised of course you're referring to the graphs presented earlier in the post. If you explain the graph WITHIN the spoiler first, THEN you can explain its relevance to the initial class/tier graphs (which is kind of what you do, it's just not as clear as it could be).

 

Again, just being picky, but it's an occupational hazard for me given my own professional background. Those few simple changes could remove any potential misunderstanding or needless confusion in what's excellent material.

 

Thanks and cheers.

 

p.s. I'm going to stick with my comment from ages ago with one modification: if you don't play CVs, there's little point in playing beyond tier 6 as pretty much everything goes down the tubes in tiers 7 and 8. That's a LOT of grinding in average to poorly performing ships.

Then again, if the devs balance CVs more effectively the baseline numbers will change and hence ships' performances against that should increase even if their own play doesn't alter. If they go too far with CVs, however, BBs really will rule everything. Ironic that the net effect of all that mirrors real naval history; BBs trump everything until CVs show up, after which everything is relatively irrelevant.

 

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

Heh, Wonder how can people still Defend CVs. DD are "Definitely not" weak and all you need is LTP.

 

Because if you give every CV Lexington's 50/25/25 loadout then they'll all sux?

CV are OP if you give them bombers.

CV are useless if you give them fighters.

 

It's just simple as that. I'm not surprised to see high tier CV getting such stats because the number of TB and DB they get as well as greatly increased hangar to replace their bomber losses.

Share this post


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

 

Because if you give every CV Lexington's 50/25/25 loadout then they'll all sux?

CV are OP if you give them bombers.

CV are useless if you give them fighters.

 

It's just simple as that. I'm not surprised to see high tier CV getting such stats because the number of TB and DB they get as well as greatly increased hangar to replace their bomber losses.

 

The problem is that there is not incentive for a CV to be a Team player.

Damage is all that matters for a good result. Thus why people refuse to play in the way a "Team" needs to be but instead for Personal Achievement. And they indeed, have the power to easily dominate a game.

 

I wonder whether the devs are able to "Rebalance " them instead of Nerf Nerf Nerf or limited to Changing Squadron Loadout. Right now I am not seeing any progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,326 battles

 

The problem is that there is not incentive for a CV to be a Team player.

Damage is all that matters for a good result. Thus why people refuse to play in the way a "Team" needs to be but instead for Personal Achievement. And they indeed, have the power to easily dominate a game.

 

I wonder whether the devs are able to "Rebalance " them instead of Nerf Nerf Nerf or limited to Changing Squadron Loadout. Right now I am not seeing any progress.

 

That squadron loadout change is the "rebalance". They gain more defense (fighter) in exchange for offense (bomber).

It's because previously there were too many bombers for CV captains to divert his Fighters to defend allied ships instead of himself, that you might call them not playing as a team. Ofcourse now there won't be as many bombers, things might change.

 

How much difference that would make, we'll have to observe. Guesswork could only get us so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
982 posts

Wow, the Atlanta is terri-bad and the Atago is not far behind. This will make a lot of people have a moment of pause prior to pulling out their wallet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,566 posts
12,949 battles

Wow, the Atlanta is terri-bad and the Atago is not far behind. This will make a lot of people have a moment of pause prior to pulling out their wallet.

 

yeah but don't forget a lot of people who are buying the Atlanta and Atago are new inexperience players with no idea how to play so they go out and die real easy.

had one guy in a battle in his Atago asking where he should go on a map as it was his 3rd game lol

but good to see the tier 9 cruisers for IJN and USN are both just as bad as each other from the looks of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2 posts
220 battles

Wow, the Atlanta is terri-bad and the Atago is not far behind. This will make a lot of people have a moment of pause prior to pulling out their wallet.

 

atlanta's guns are just to small and atago's rudder shift and citadel are just not good enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,566 posts
12,949 battles

bit surprised the Nagato  isn't better than the Fuso as I do have a 71% win rate from 51 battles in Nagato and only 50% in the Fuso from 64 battles

but the Zao a runaway for tier 10 cruisers 

Share this post


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

Wow, the Atlanta is terri-bad and the Atago is not far behind. This will make a lot of people have a moment of pause prior to pulling out their wallet.

 

Nein. It's a Premium Ship and currently (And for quite some time now) is the Single Only Tier 8 Premium ship - And it had the name "Atago" on it.

 

And if you had any memory when the Lowe/T34/Type 59 is introduced to World of Tanks......

 

Same goes to Atlanta - It's a Even Harder ship to play due to the 5 inch gun's Handling issues.

 

 I can only imagine Tirpitz will be Crazy "Underpowered".....................

 

Personally, I think the Atago is Perfectly fine as it is as a Premium. It's basically an Up-Tiered Myoko with Slightly better Torpedo Handling.

Atalanta - I don't own one - but It could use a 5 inch gun rework (Along with USN DD Rebalance).

 

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×