|
PirateBob posted:Being able to div with buddies who dont have high tier ships? That is a fairly good point. I guess I'm just looking for an excuse to keep it. I usually sell all of them and only keep the highest tier of a class.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 10:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:23 |
|
|
Dalael posted:I just finished my last match with my Kongo and can finally get the Fuso. I'm somewhat torn tho. I kinda like the ship and am tempted to keep it. However, I don't tend to go back to play lower tier ships once I'm done with them. Considering its 300 Seal clubbing. Whenever I have a string of bad games at high tier (for me), I hop in my St. Louis and wreck newbies for fun and profit!
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
Well ranked battles are only going to be T6-7 or something, so it would be worth keeping good ships in those theirs I suppose? Not that it helps for the Kongo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
Finally got ,y 10 skill Japanese BB Captain. Mikasa goes from meh to PEW PEW PEW DEATH INCARNATE ARRGGHH!!!!! Seriously, it's good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 13:41
|
|
|
Darkrenown posted:Well ranked battles are only going to be T6-7 or something, so it would be worth keeping good ships in those theirs I suppose? Not that it helps for the Kongo. So, what are the nastiest tier 6 and 7 ships? Cleveland's an absolute beast at 6.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
Fuso is good, Nagato is good, Aoba/Myoko are good, Cleveland/Atlanta (might be biased here), New Mex.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
How is the Myoko? Saving up for it but the Aoba's hard to let go of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Dalael posted:I just finished my last match with my Kongo and can finally get the Fuso. I'm somewhat torn tho. I kinda like the ship and am tempted to keep it. However, I don't tend to go back to play lower tier ships once I'm done with them. Considering its 300 If you want a fast battleship below tier 8 (and why wouldn't you?) your options are pretty limited. So far, Kongo gameplay is pretty much unique. There's no special incentive to keep it beyond contests, platoons and low tier games, but Kongo gameplay might be worth 300 gold or selling a less unique ship for the slot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Zero Gravitas posted:How is the Myoko? Saving up for it but the Aoba's hard to let go of. Myoko is a beast once you get used to her turret layout. Hit like a truck with those 10 8-in guns, the torps are useable and even the AA is kinda decent. She can't take a hti anymore than any other IJN CA except the Zao, but angling work decently well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Dalael posted:I just finished my last match with my Kongo and can finally get the Fuso. I'm somewhat torn tho. I kinda like the ship and am tempted to keep it. However, I don't tend to go back to play lower tier ships once I'm done with them. Considering its 300 Credit grinding unless you have multiple premiums. Tier 5 and 6 are great for credits. I found a good rotation for getting credits was leveling the Myoko(tier 7) normally, then running the murmansk and marblehead as soon as I die. Even just kind of driving straight at the enemy and dying in 5 minutes its pretty easy to clear 150k on each and usually by then the ship you're leveling should be out of its previous battle. Gort posted:So, what are the nastiest tier 6 and 7 ships? Cleveland's an absolute beast at 6. New Mexico, and Aoba Zero Gravitas posted:How is the Myoko? Saving up for it but the Aoba's hard to let go of. Myoko is just as good as the Aoba. My stats on both are nearly identical, 65% win, 41/42% accuracy, about 40-46k average damage. Only issue with the Myoko is you occasionally get placed into t9 and even sometimes 10 battles where you dont really see that in the Aoba. Its like other Japanese cruisers where you gotta keep yourself angled or you will get mauled.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
 Nebraska in dazzle camo. MY EYES!!!! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Burt posted:Nebraska in dazzle camo. MY EYES!!!! Now imagine trying to use a stereoscopic range finder on it. What I'm saying is that "hurts your eyes to look at" is a design goal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
 dazzle camo best camo
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Now imagine trying to use a stereoscopic range finder on it. It would have to be one of the most satisfying feelings in the world to sink one
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Artless Meat posted:
I honestly would pay money to have dazzle camo on my premium ships permanently. With the Marblehead and the Murmansk I should be pretty set for credit/exp grinding or should I keep some tier 5 ships? Also do higher tiers pay out more exp and credits on average?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Now imagine trying to use a stereoscopic range finder on it. I used to do stereoscopic work, and I look at the turrets and see the stereoscopic lenses, but until you said that I never "got" dazzle camo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Raged posted:I honestly would pay money to have dazzle camo on my premium ships permanently. XP and credits are based on damage dealt, so indirectly yes, although repair costs are kind of designed to rise faster than damage output, so the top tiers are generally unprofitable unless you have crazy high average damage (or buy premium). Keep whatever ships you have fun playing. Until clan wars are a thing, there's not really any direct incentive to play high tiers unless you want to play the ship you're grinding for. Reztes fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Sep 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
The Marblehead may be some sort of mutant, but I'm starting to like it - this was the single biggest cash money payout I've ever gotten (next closest screenshot I had was 298k). 105,799 damage, 63k of which was AP damage from me blasting the gently caress out of 2 Kumas that didn't get the memo that their side armor is made of rotten cheese and wishful thinking. Each ship took exactly 17 AP shells to destroy. The only reason I died to the Langley was because I hadn't gotten used to the slightly worse rudder, and a head on torpedo that I thought would be a paint scraper scraped a bit more.     :
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
That reminds me though. I've been wondering about this but maybe I haven't thought it through all the way. If you play ships of a tier just above the average played tier for the server population as a whole, aren't you more likely to be top tier in your matches? For example, say the average tier played on the U.S. server at any particular time is tier 5, if I queue a tier 6 or 7, won't I more often be top tier than bottom tier since at any given time, the matchmaking queue will contain more tier 5 players than 6-9 players? I might be overlooking the effect of the matchmaker and those higher tier players getting priority if their queue times are higher than the others, or any fuckery related to the new "you get to be top tier after x games as low tier" system.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
Reztes posted:That reminds me though. I've been wondering about this but maybe I haven't thought it through all the way. It'll try to match you as bottom tier for upper-level matches before it will set you top-tier though, as long as it has 5 per side it will consider it a valid match.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Zero Gravitas posted:How is the Myoko? Saving up for it but the Aoba's hard to let go of. Also should say with how HE works right now be prepared to get set on fire and having your steering knocked out, then popping your damage control party only to have the absolute next salvo from that ship do the exact same thing. Japanese cruisers seem to suffer greatly from the rudder being knocked out every other loving shot by HE.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
whew glad my first name choice didn't get taken
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
The warshipstats site really is a nice site for checking your stats and your performance in your ships. http://warshipstats.com/ Even though official ranking isn't in the game yet, if you have enough battles you can check what position you are in the world in damage, win rate, average experience, KDR, and number of battles. Sitting very pretty at 6th in the world with my Atlanta in damage and 1st in the world with the Baltimore.  A nice thing to check if you care about things like that at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 11:25
|
|
|
Checking out Sims stat...  0.32 KDR, 0.56 Kill per game
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 12:04
|
|
|
Chucullinn posted:The warshipstats site really is a nice site for checking your stats and your performance in your ships. Cool, let's check the KDR for certain ships. Bogue: -.02
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
I wonder if there's a reason why the Cleveland and Omaha have a lot more battles than any other ship
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:I wonder if there's a reason why the Cleveland and Omaha have a lot more battles than any other ship  you enormous whinging oval office.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
I'm interested in seeing a breakdown of the stats by win rate of players, the same way that demonstrated to wargaming just how vastly more overpowered, overperforming and gamebreaking than anything else they'd ever created the Waffle E-100 was despite the ordinary "server average" stats WG had been using as their measuring stick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
But Cleveland?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Reverted the cheap rear end 2x to 1.5x already? That ship site showed me and my 38% win rate in my Cleveland. No wonder I wasn't as enamored with it as everyone else. Lowest win rate of any ship I played more than 15 battles in, though top 6 ships for average damage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 16:27
|
|
|
Devorum posted:Cool, let's check the KDR for certain ships. Their KDR calculation is really strange. code:Okay, so what about something else: code:e: wait a second... Bogue kill rate = 0.51, survival rate = 0.531... kill rate - survival rate = ~-0.02 Iwaki Alpha kill rate = 1.25, survival rate = .299... kill rate - survival rate = ~0.95 
Evil_Greven fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Any ETA on when clan tags are visible? I'm losing precious seconds of trolling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:I'm interested in seeing a breakdown of the stats by win rate of players, the same way that demonstrated to wargaming just how vastly more overpowered, overperforming and gamebreaking than anything else they'd ever created the Waffle E-100 was despite the ordinary "server average" stats WG had been using as their measuring stick. it won't demonstrate what you expect it to NA server stats are morebalanced between classes than SEA
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:it won't demonstrate what you expect it to Well where are they then? You must have seen them to be that confident
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Well where are they then? You must have seen them to be that confident http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html There is enough information here. Even in its absence, though, it's often enough (not guaranteed, but significantly better than random chance) to look at whatever NTRabbit is saying in the boats thread and assume the opposite is true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html Oh so you have nothing remotely like what I described, ok. I mean I could say the same thing about the people who bitched incessantly, and very wrongly, about artillery on a daily basis in the tanks thread because they lacked the skill and general intelligence to play against them, no matter how many over nerfs they received over the journey. Assume them to be wrong and you'll have the right of it more often than not. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
quote:Fais_1111 : hwo to shoot missile in water It's just like Navyfield 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Pacra posted:It's just like Navyfield I saw this exact exchange a few weeks back with other people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:I wonder if there's a reason why the Cleveland and Omaha have a lot more battles than any other ship Hi, allow me to clue you into something. Cruisers are the most accessible class in the game, who would have thunk it? I mean, its not like you start playing WoWS with a T1 Cruiser, or that they're portrayed as "Jack of All Trades" type ships, or that Wargaming themselves have said that Cruisers are meant to be the most played class in the game, by a pretty significant amount too. Gee, I wonder why the Omaha and Cleveland are so heavily played. And why all the rest of the drat cruisers are. As for why the US CAs are played the most, its likely due to them being easier than IJN CAs (torps are hard), plus the Furutaka putting people off for some time. Also, NA will be biased slightly towards US ships. Take a look at the SEA stats and you'll notice a lot more IJN ships in the most played category. Nobody cares about your "CRUISERS ARE OP" crying, because its been proven pretty consistently that no, they are not. The T6 BBs and CVs have higher average damage in game, and the Ryujo and Fuso have higher winrates, than the Cleveland. Saying the Omaha is OP is basically admitting that you're really bad at this game, because the Omaha is full of squishy citadel goodness just waiting to be exploited.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:23 |
|
|
^^ Not just that, NTRabbit literally thinks carriers at game launch were balanced and artillery in tanks was fun to play against.NTRabbit posted:The Hosho and the Zuiho are worth exiting to Port if there's a Langley, Bogue or Independence on the other side. American fighters are unbeatable, almost undodgable, and can strip you of every torpedo bomber in your hangar without reloading. Zuiho had average damage 53000 and 50% win rate (across all players) when NTRabbit made this post. Keep up the good work NTRabbit!  edit: also if NTRabbit can't figure out how to determine the ship performance/player performance relationship from the site I linked he is even dumber than I thought James Garfield fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Sep 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 19:09
|
|