Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
NotSynpax

Crunching Numbers on the Conqueror (and other T10 ship classes)

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

59
[TNG-D]
Members
108 posts
818 battles

In evaluating ship performance statistics, it's important to evaluate the ship and not the player. In order to get closer to this ideal, I have limited the statistics to the top 5% of players per WOW-Numbers.com. This means that we are best measuring the pure efficiency of the ship rather than the players who are in them. Why does this matter? Because some ships are harder to play than others but, in the right hands, are capable of much greater results. 

 

This is not perfect, but I'm not aware of a better way to evaluate this since I don't have API access or a whole lot of time. One obvious flaw is that this shows win and damage rate going back in time for the history of the ship rather than just over the last few weeks. This is a bias in favor of newer ships, as more experienced, better players will have gotten to them quicker than causal players. 

 

Note that this is all from the NA server. 

 

I consider win rate to be the most important factor and the true, ultimate measure of a ships potential because, well, winning is all that matters to me. You may see this differently, but I think the point of each game is to win. You can see that the Conq is ahead in damage, but not too far ahead in win rate. 

Then look at the cruiser classes - surprising how close they all are. 

Then look at destroyers - and you may see something there to really complain about. Because there is a much bigger win rate spread there than in battleships. 

 

Okay, one other posts coming from me with an interesting chart on this subject. 

 

T10_BBs.jpg

t10_cacl.jpg

t10_dd.jpg

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[TNG-D]
Members
108 posts
818 battles

This next post shows the T10 BBs on the RU server, where Flamu plays frequently. There is a significant difference in the performance advantage of the Conq there.

 

 

t10_bbs_RU.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,918 posts
1,365 battles

Lol, yeah, Conq and it's armor ignoring [edited] HE shells, yeah, its pretty OP lol.  It pumps out the damage.....burns errything to the ground. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,089
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor
6,246 posts
3,106 battles

Since Yamato's doing the worst, it's obviously time to buff her, right? 

 

Spoiler

ui6DFNo.gif

 

Edited by RivertheRoyal
This is sarcasm, if it wasn't clear.
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[YAN]
Members
1,640 posts
7,466 battles
3 minutes ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Since the Yamato's doing the worst, it's obviously time to buff her. 

 

  Hide contents

ui6DFNo.gif

 

Nah, downtier her to T9 along with Musashi, but buff the ship as well. :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,918 posts
1,365 battles
5 minutes ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Since Yamato's doing the worst, it's obviously time to buff her, right? 

 

  Hide contents

ui6DFNo.gif

 

Yeah, 72 down to 60s turret traverse......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[YAN]
Members
1,640 posts
7,466 battles
14 minutes ago, NotSynpax said:

 In order to get closer to this ideal, I have limited the statistics to the top 5% of players per WOW-Numbers.com.

One of the main issues people have with Conqueror is the HE, while this wont affect the top tier players, it makes her a far, far easier ship to play for lowbies, so I feel using this statistic may not be fully representative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,508
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,092 posts
12,646 battles

Not a fan of the wows-numbers data for three main reasons:

  1. No time window filtering. Old ships have tons of now-irrelevant performance data pushing them up or down.
  2. No division filtering. Some ships are division favorites (e.g. Des Moines), which inflates certain stats including Winrate. This is especially prevalent in the high performance categories; I would not be surprised if literally all of the 5% data is in divisions.
  3. How many games are in the pool for the top 5% of players? Conqueror doesn't have a huge number of games in general, so the number of games in the sample is likely quite small.

That said, the overall trend is pretty consistent with what other sites suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles

It is worth observing that in each screenshot you present the most recent ship to be released in the class has the highest or second highest WR for the top 5%: Z-52, Henri V and Conq.

For destroyers the ranking almost perfectly aligns with the sequence they're released in - Shima/Gearing, Khaba, Z-52, Grozovoi. 

 

So there may be some other effects.

 

Also, is there much difference for Conq between having 105 and 70mm of HE pen? All the extremities are penned by either value, all the decks, all the belts can't be penned either way. The only bit of plate I can think of in the 70-105mm range is a bit on FDG, bit of Kurfuerst? Strakes on Hindy? Pretty marginal?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[NA]
Members
1,204 posts
9,988 battles
1 hour ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Since Yamato's doing the worst, it's obviously time to buff her, right? 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

ui6DFNo.gif

 

Yeahhhhhh. Please WG :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,452
[ARMDG]
Members
3,242 posts
1,567 battles
54 minutes ago, mofton said:

It is worth observing that in each screenshot you present the most recent ship to be released in the class has the highest or second highest WR for the top 5%: Z-52, Henri V and Conq.

For destroyers the ranking almost perfectly aligns with the sequence they're released in - Shima/Gearing, Khaba, Z-52, Grozovoi. 

 

So there may be some other effects.

 

Also, is there much difference for Conq between having 105 and 70mm of HE pen? All the extremities are penned by either value, all the decks, all the belts can't be penned either way. The only bit of plate I can think of in the 70-105mm range is a bit on FDG, bit of Kurfuerst? Strakes on Hindy? Pretty marginal?

 

Conq with IFHE, pen 131mm of armor with HE, and citadel most of the T8-10 cruisers with HE rounds.  If you really want HE pen take the 457s for a whopping 141.7mm of HE penetration.  Remember that it has a 1/4 HE pen, so base pen from the 406mm guns is just a hair over 101mm, while the 457s are just about 114mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles
Just now, Sirus_Patton said:

Conq with IFHE, pen 131mm of armor with HE, and citadel most of the T8-10 cruisers with HE rounds.

Off the top of my head not Baltimore, Des Moines or Moskva, I thought Ibuki and Zao had a 25mm torpedo bulkhead which would trigger the HE and protect them, and Hindenburg might get penned but does have a turtleback. I'm not sure on Henri's belt thickness.

Minotaur and the RN CL would be in the danger zone with IFHE. Donskoi/Chapayev I think are threatened.

It's pretty niche in my view, I haven't seen much evidence of people going for it. A huge proportion of Conq's damage will be on 32-50mm plates which all >16in HE penetrates. I don't think it made any difference against that Montana.

 

The RN HE 1/4 pen seems a major problem at T4 or T5 where the difference in pen puts Orion and Iron Duke above 76mm for HE pen without IFHE, and 76mm is about the most commonplace T4-T6 cruiser armor belt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[WAIFU]
Members
724 posts
7,043 battles
4 minutes ago, mofton said:

Minotaur and the RN CL would be in the danger zone with IFHE.

 

... Do I really need IFHE for them? :cap_hmm:

 

Nope :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles
Just now, PauloBR said:

Do I really need IFHE for them? :cap_hmm:

D'oh, I forgot Minotaur was <114mm armored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,784
[WOLF3]
Members
16,051 posts
14,440 battles

The OP is at least trying to show what's going on with the Tier X's in a different light, so I give credit in that regard.

 

Below is what I just grabbed for Tier X BBs for all servers.  2 weeks, Solo PVP, sorted by WR%.  RU Server is a real crazy set of stats but when you look at the Battles Played it makes me wary on taking those values at face value.

7ast2Ci.jpg

 

Except for those real low Battles Played numbers in RU Server with strange values, 3/4 of the servers show pretty similar values in Tier X BBs.  The most reliable set of numbers IMO are EU server's because of the sheer amount of Battles Played.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,452
[ARMDG]
Members
3,242 posts
1,567 battles

I'm actually not surprised that the Conq has a lower WR, because it's not suited at all to pushing and helping maintain cap circles.  What's very telling about the Conq's performance however is the average XP, which it is pulling a fair bit more than the other T10 BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,969
[SYN]
Members
14,442 posts
10,418 battles
4 hours ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Since Yamato's doing the worst, it's obviously time to buff her, right? 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

ui6DFNo.gif

 

Yamato did have a planned revision with the Akizuki 100mm guns replacing all of the 127mm guns. Possibly even adding more twin 100mm gun turrets on top of that. :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×