Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Karstodes

Ship at the wrong tier

60 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles

Placing historical ships in tier for balance reason can create some weird situation, with ships that were historically of similar capacity being 1, 2 or 3 tier apart.

 

so which ships are in tier that do bot quite make sense from an historical point?

 

one of the main contester is the Graff spee. Was it a great cruisers? No, at least not for what it was suppose to do. But in the game, having her being at the same tier as Leander while she fought off 2 leander and 1 county class is somewhat questionable. She would fit more at tier 7.

 

an other case would be the tier 8 cruisers that are somewhat weird. On one side you got the Baltimore that was probably the best CA of the war and Hipper that was not. And many cruisers with similar or superior capacity are a tier lower, like Zara and Algerie. In that regard, either Hipper would be drop, or Baltimore, Algerie and Zara advance.

 

is there any other case of wrong placement in your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles

I think Graf Spee makes perfect sense at T6.

CVs at T4 are nonsense, they should be starting at T5.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles
6 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

 

I think Graf Spee makes perfect sense at T6.

 

Graf Spee at the same tier as Pensacola? Or WW1 era battleships? 

 

17 minutes ago, weiwaynezhang said:

 

I think most historically real ship are tiered by their time in history. Earlier ship lower tier 

 

Not really. Hood is the same tier as KGV despite being roughly 20 years olders, Atago is the same tier as Baltimore despite being 10 years olders... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,691
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,882 posts
14,882 battles
10 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I think Graf Spee makes perfect sense at T6.

CVs at T4 are nonsense, they should be starting at T5.

Or give them all of the tier 3, 4, and some tier 5 an AA refit to a level that makes the CV players think before they leap instead of laughing maniacally while they make attack after attack on all the ships with stupidly weak AA.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles
5 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

Graf Spee at the same tier as Pensacola?

Yes of course? What's the problem there? both are Treaty Cruisers

Pensacola was laid down in 1929, Spee in 1932. That's as fair as you can be in this game in terms of time and design.

The BBs at T6 are mostly Superdreads with interwar refits, also perfectly appropriated to the time frame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles
3 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Pensacola was laid down in 1929, Spee in 1932. That's as fair as you can be in this game in terms of time and design.

Only issue: Pensacola was probably the worst treaty cruisers with the French Duquesne, while Graff Spee was a cruiser cheating on the limits, like Zara and Hipper. They were also capital ship replacement  and not proper Heavy Cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles
4 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Or give them all of the tier 3, 4, and some tier 5 an AA refit to a level that makes the CV players think before they leap instead of laughing maniacally while they make attack after attack on all the ships with stupidly weak AA.

This time I'm not talking about game balance but from an historical perspective. T4 time frame is Pre/Early WW1 period, CVs didn't really became a thing until the end of WW1/1920's which is roughly T5 frame. IMO CVs should start at T5 with T4 having only Sea Plane Tenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,374
[CVA16]
Members
6,171 posts
19,033 battles
12 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

This time I'm not talking about game balance but from an historical perspective. T4 time frame is Pre/Early WW1 period, CVs didn't really became a thing until the end of WW1/1920's which is roughly T5 frame. IMO CVs should start at T5 with T4 having only Sea Plane Tenders.

At least make the planes appropriate. Fragile and slow stringbags with limited bombloads. No rockets and (pretty sure) no effective torps thru about 1925.

Guess they had torp bombers (sea planes, not CV) earlier than I thought, 

On 12 August 1915 a Short Type 184, piloted by Flight Commander Charles Edmonds, was the first aircraft in the world to attack an enemy ship with an air-launched torpedo.[18] Operating from HMS Ben-my-Chree in the Aegean Sea, Edmonds took off with a 14-inch-diameter (360 mm), 810-pound (370 kg) torpedo to fly over land[10] and sank a Turkish supply ship in the Sea of Marmara.[5]

Five days later, a Turkish steamship was sunk by a torpedo aimed again by Edmonds. His formation mate, Flight Lieutenant G. B. Dacre, sank a Turkish tugboat after being forced to land on the water with engine trouble. Dacre taxied toward the tugboat, released his torpedo and was then able to take off and return to Ben-My-Chree.[19][20] A limitation to using the Short more widely as a torpedo bomber was that it could only take off carrying a torpedo in conditions of perfect flying weather and calm seas, and, with that load, could only fly for a little more than 45 minutes before running out of fuel.[20]

Edited by Sabot_100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,160
[GWG]
Members
7,396 posts
14,185 battles

Tenryu....   At tier 3 ??????  That thing sunk a New Orleans class heavy cruiser at Savo Island.

If there's ever an IJN cruiser split between heavy/light cruisers, that bote will come up to at least T6.

I don't know what nerf bat they used on the T5 Yahagi....    That should have been T7 with more historical capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles
1 minute ago, Karstodes said:

Only issue: Pensacola was probably the worst treaty cruisers with the French Duquesne, while Graff Spee was a cruiser cheating on the limits, like Zara and Hipper. They were also capital ship replacement  and not proper Heavy Cruisers.

That doesn't mean they are not right to be paired at the same tier. Spee was an odd duck but was indeed a Treaty Cruiser (not a capital ship) constricted by the 10k ton limit (even if cheated). If anything the game more or less fairly represents the discrepancies between them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles
1 minute ago, ArIskandir said:

Spee was an odd duck but was indeed a Treaty Cruiser (not a capital ship) constricted by the 10k ton limit (even if cheated). If anything the game more or less fairly represents the discrepancies between them. 

Not quite. The Deutshland were not under the Cruisers rules but under the Versaille one, where Germany could replace their old pre dreadgnouth  with newer ships respecting a limit of 10k tons.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles
2 minutes ago, Sabot_100 said:

At least make the planes appropriate. Fragile and slow stringbags with limited bombloads. No rockets and (pretty sure) no effective torps thru about 1925.

That's more salt on the wound, T4 CVs are throwing interwar planes against Pre-WW1 ships... :fish_glass:

5 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

Tenryu....   At tier 3 ??????  That thing sunk a New Orleans class heavy cruiser at Savo Island.

If there's ever an IJN cruiser split between heavy/light cruisers, that bote will come up to at least T6.

I don't know what nerf bat they used on the T5 Yahagi....    That should have been T7 with more historical capability.

IMO Tenryu is Ok'ish, probably T4 really since it was laid down in 1915 (WW1 era). Yahagi is a complete anachronism at T5, only reason for her to be there is she was quite small and under gunned, compared to their respective age counterparts. Balancing CLs, the small ones particularly becomes sketchy within the tiers system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,337
[SALVO]
Members
6,969 posts
5,510 battles
10 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

Not quite. The Deutshland were not under the Cruisers rules but under the Versaille one, where Germany could replace their old pre dreadgnouth  with newer ships respecting a limit of 10k tons.  

You have a point there... hence why they didn't abide by the caliber restriction, in the spirit of Versailles they were meant to be Coastal Defense Battleships. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[2020]
Members
157 posts
4,208 battles
1 hour ago, Karstodes said:

Graf Spee at the same tier as Pensacola? Or WW1 era battleships? 

 

Not really. Hood is the same tier as KGV despite being roughly 20 years olders, Atago is the same tier as Baltimore despite being 10 years olders... 

Hood doesn't count, because it is a premium, you don't want to release a premium at T5 and can't face Bismarck at all.

Atago and baltimore are different country and Japan stop all shipbuilding after WW2. You can't compare the two country together

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
273
[KREW]
[KREW]
Members
477 posts
20,732 battles

Yes, Tier 4 CV's should be moved to Tier 5. But wait, there's more. Langley should be replaced with Bogue. Lexington should be moved to Tier 6 and replaced with Essex at Tier 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,092
[SIM]
Members
5,787 posts
9,263 battles

When it comes to game design, balance > history.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,160
[GWG]
Members
7,396 posts
14,185 battles
2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

IMO Tenryu is Ok'ish, probably T4 really since it was laid down in 1915 (WW1 era). Yahagi is a complete anachronism at T5, only reason for her to be there is she was quite small and under gunned, compared to their respective age counterparts. Balancing CLs, the small ones particularly becomes sketchy within the tiers system. 

The Tenryu was completely rebuilt a number of times.

There was not much left of the 1917 ship originally laid down.  It was IJN philosophy to keep upgrading and rebuilding old ships as opposed to throwing them away like the US and Britain.
Upgrades occurred in 1921, 1925, 1930, 1937, 1942, 1942
Fought at Wake Island, Guadalcanal, Savo, then Sunk

I got my first Kraken in the game on the Tenryu -- in both accounts.  That thing is a serious clubber when the red ships line up and take one spread of torps each.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,063
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,760 posts
6,003 battles
4 hours ago, Karstodes said:

Not really. Hood is the same tier as KGV despite being roughly 20 years olders, Atago is the same tier as Baltimore despite being 10 years olders... 

Hood may have been 20 years older, but she had a wildly higher budget too.  Think of it this way, compare the QEs at Tier VI to Hood at Tier VII.  Hood has nearly the same protection, the same firepower and can do 9 knots more in speed, and per game rules has much more health due to tonnage.  How can you place Hood at Tier VI looking at that?

That said, a much better argument can be made for putting KGV at Tier VIII, which is actually where I think she should have gone.

Edited by Helstrem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles
2 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Hood may have been 20 years older, but she had a wildly higher budget too.  Think of it this way, compare the QEs at Tier VI to Hood at Tier VII.  Hood has nearly the same protection, the same firepower and can do 9 knots more in speed, and per game rules has much more health due to tonnage.  How can you place Hood at Tier VI looking at that?

My point was not that she should be lower, only that year of production is not a rule of ''what tier for that ship''. Nelson and Hood are quite older than KGV and DOY, yet at the same tier.

 

And for QE: we do have the rebuild QE and Warspite, with better fire control and better AA. Hood in the game is the worn out piece of metal that was long overdue for her complete rebuild. Not that she should be tier 6 (that spot if for Renown, if she ever get in the game) but still.

5 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

That said, a much better argument can be made for putting KGV at Tier VIII, which is actually where I think she should have gone.

Yes, but it would go against the design the the Royal Navy in WOWS. They made these ships made of carton with poor armor, poor HP and high citadel even if the KGV was basically maxing it's survivability stats in the real life. If KGV was probably the weaker of the late treaty BB, she was still the better protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,846
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
2,028 posts
14,004 battles
6 hours ago, Karstodes said:

Placing historical ships in tier for balance reason can create some weird situation, with ships that were historically of similar capacity being 1, 2 or 3 tier apart.

 

so which ships are in tier that do bot quite make sense from an historical point?

 

one of the main contester is the Graff spee. Was it a great cruisers? No, at least not for what it was suppose to do. But in the game, having her being at the same tier as Leander while she fought off 2 leander and 1 county class is somewhat questionable. She would fit more at tier 7.

 

an other case would be the tier 8 cruisers that are somewhat weird. On one side you got the Baltimore that was probably the best CA of the war and Hipper that was not. And many cruisers with similar or superior capacity are a tier lower, like Zara and Algerie. In that regard, either Hipper would be drop, or Baltimore, Algerie and Zara advance.

 

is there any other case of wrong placement in your opinion?

By that logic, the tier 8 US CV should be the Yorktown-class rather than the Lexington-class, given that Lexington was commissioned as an aircraft carrier in 1927 while Shokaku was completed in 1941, while Yorktown was much closer in age, being commissioned in 1937.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,142
[PISD]
Members
1,844 posts
6,102 battles
5 hours ago, Zaydin said:

By that logic, the tier 8 US CV should be the Yorktown-class rather than the Lexington-class, given that Lexington was commissioned as an aircraft carrier in 1927 while Shokaku was completed in 1941, while Yorktown was much closer in age, being commissioned in 1937.

Only it was not my point. I never point out thqt it should be by release date, but by capacity. Hipper was globally weaker tan Zara and Algerie for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[USN]
Members
1,513 posts
20,411 battles
13 hours ago, Karstodes said:

so which ships are in tier that do bot quite make sense from an historical point?

Not a lot, actually. 

BBs: Sinop I believe predates the Russian Revolution, while most other T7 BBs are about 1-3yrs newer

The Scharnhorst class are mid-30s designs, a decade newer than T7 BBs 

Amagi, Kii, Kansas, Minnesota, and Vermont range from 1916-1920, two decades older than their tier mates 

Cruisers:

Exeter is a decade newer than most other T5 cruisers, same with Koenigsberg

Atlanta is about 5yrs newer than T7 cruisers

Baltimore is about 3yrs newer than T8 cruisers

Alaska is slightly older than T9 cruisers

Zao is about 5yrs older than T10 cruisers

Mogami, Atago, and Ibuki are about 5yrs older than their tier mates 

DDs:

Visby is a late 30s design in a world of early 20s late 1910s designs

Gaede and Mass are slightly newer than their tier mates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[F4E]
Members
336 posts
6,325 battles
7 hours ago, Zaydin said:

By that logic, the tier 8 US CV should be the Yorktown-class rather than the Lexington-class, given that Lexington was commissioned as an aircraft carrier in 1927 while Shokaku was completed in 1941, while Yorktown was much closer in age, being commissioned in 1937.

CV's at T4 make no sense to me.

Start at T6 with Ranger, then T7 with Lexington, T8 with Yorktown, T9 with an Essex class, T10 with Midway

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46
[-AGW-]
Members
24 posts
5,372 battles
On 2/3/2021 at 6:19 PM, AVR_Project said:

Tenryu....   At tier 3 ??????  That thing sunk a New Orleans class heavy cruiser at Savo Island.

If there's ever an IJN cruiser split between heavy/light cruisers, that bote will come up to at least T6.

I don't know what nerf bat they used on the T5 Yahagi....    That should have been T7 with more historical capability.

Tenryu is my favorite ship in this entire game.  I have a 62% win rate in it over hundreds of games, and I'm no genius player (how much can one ship matter, given the battle sizes?  THIS tells you this is a good ship).

The four guns do good damage, start fires often, and fire pretty quickly.   The torpedo armament is centerline, avoiding the stupidness of Kuma.

Tenryu is a lot of fun to play.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×