They keep on going with this mantras 2+ month now denying and ignoring the arguments.
No, it’s called statistical rigour. There’s another chart in the article that shows the relative drop by BR quite well by the way.
You want the absolute numbers, fine. In the month before the update there were 2,107,859 naval AB players in games. In the last month there have been 1,882,414, an 11% net reduction.
Before anyone asks, in NRB the stats were 1,008,539 in Feb and 1,039,964 in April, a 3% increase. (However there was a 13% overall increase in games played overall for WT over the same period, so in relative terms that’s still a reduction as well.)
Take the L my dude. So long as Statshark exists there’s a lot of stuff we just KNOW now that we didn’t before. Your original statement there’s more playing NAB now is objectively untrue.
12 Likes
And now you show March to April comparison in NAB and NRB. Would you?
It’s the best ship in the game with better guns, eliminating the single downside to it, granted the changes to ammo fires made Scharnhorst a lot easier to kill but that was long needed and effects all other ships too. I think this might be the dirtiest PTW premium yet.
Sorry if I tossed you in front of a bus there mate, but those break downs are top notch, much appreciate the work.
1 Like
Yeah, it will be, I just hope Rileys planned bug reports for a reload rates go through and they dont set her reload rates to be the same as Bismarks (it was half as fast as Bismark)
Spoiler
4 Likes
Thanks for the personal attack. You always keep it classy…
1 Like
I showed “Feb-Mar” and “Apr-May” in that article because it put both measures cleanly on either side of the update, not with one in the middle. But here’s the relative stats with NRB:
.
I don’t think you can prove the last update has significantly hurt NAB, to be clear. Big ships take time to turn. What we can say is that it has not yet attracted new players enough to make up for those it lost, and if anything it has discouraged players who play lower BRs from continuing to progress, based on the relative increase within the mode of top-tier play. Basically more people with 7.0 lineups have stuck around through it so far, rather than being added to by a new bunch of players.
I’m honestly as curious as everyone else to see what happens in June with this BB wad-blowing, hail-Mary, all-on-the-table update. Hopefully we’ll have some stats to tell us in a few months.
4 Likes
Show numbers how much there was battles and players March to Aipril in NAB and NRB, not percentages of players playing one mode over other.
With all due respect there are dedicated threqdw for this
2 Likes
Yeah, this one is just digusting tbh.
The naval game isn’t ready for these ships, they’re way to early. I’m honestly not sure what the hell they’re thinking apart from seeing $$$ signs.
Actually, lets be honest here. The only thing they’re seeing is $$$ signs. They don’t seem to care about naval balance in the slightest.
If they actually invested in the game, the prices might be slightly justifiable, but they just don’t.
For navy we desperately need :
-
A new spawn system where ships aren’t spawning on top of each other. Come on, this is basic game design
-
Actual decompression.
-
Removal of the circle jerk maps. I mean, what the hell. It’s the most uninspired, lazy thing possible.
For ground we need :
-
Maps which are actually suitable for their BR
-
Maps which don’t have glaring issues like being able to park behind the enemy spawn and shoot into it within a couple of minutes of the game starting without being detected.
-
New game modes. I know it’s hard but it’s been 10 goddam years.
-
Decompression so there aren’t BR black holes. 10.7 is virtually a guaranteed uptier to 11.3 or 11.7 these days and it sucks.
-
Actual fixes to horrific balancing issues. Why the hell does the yak-9k still have it’s fictional APHE belt? Why is the fictional kh-38MT still in the game?
Dont’ worry though, some jets can now dump fuel. That was really sorely needed…
So yeah, the prices combined with the lack of investment into the game just chaffs.
9 Likes
I’m the first person to buy this type of junk, but not this time. There are some acute issues that still need resolving before Naval sees any more of mah munnay…
5 Likes
Statshark’s a public site, I’d encourage you to do your own research if you don’t like mine. They’ve done such a service for the community here, I wouldn’t want to deny them other people’s clicks and attention.
I would caution you that MarApr seems to be possibly a 10% longer measurement period in terms of days than FebMar for Statshark (hard to say for sure, they have not given precise start and end dates that I have seen, someone should ask the guys on their Discord or Patreon what they were probably), so those absolute numbers are going to be more misleading than any relative comparisons would be. All mode stats will also have a post-update surge effect on it, as people try the new stuff out, so I consider the cross-update MarApr set as having less value. We’re gonna have a similar problem on any immediate stats around the June update, depending when it drops. Cheers.
(And yes, I agree with the previous poster who said there’s other threads for this, don’t rabbithole this one.)
2 Likes
So you refuse to prove your points with data the you were requested? Maybe those numbers doesn’t suit you?
Yeah, I agree
Actually, if you play air sim… It really was. Im rather excited for that mechanic :D
1 Like
If needed in the future, $100 packs would not be surprising, but the question is, does our naval battle have a future? The $80 packs this time are like funeral expenses for a naval battle mode death
5 Likes
(Just to note I’m the one who was trying to get out of this topic and let it be about the new ships again because it’s the wrong thread for it. Please don’t hate on me for replying to a direct personal attack.)
For the record, I showed you the relative graph two posts up. I told you two good reasons why I didn’t think the absolute numbers from MarApr on Statshark would be very useful one post up, which is why I didn’t pull them or use them in my analysis. I’m not going to go to the site and do that full data pull for the first time now just to possibly get a doggytreat from an internet rando. The whole process of data curing, if you do it right, takes a couple hours and you’re not paying me my company’s Saturday overtime rate (and trust me, it’s high).
And if you disagree with those reasons, you can go to the source yourself. It’s public. No one’s refusing you anything, just telling you you will need to pick your own cherries here. But I’m sure if you dig around there long enough you will find two numbers that will allow you to announce NAB is doing just fine. Can’t wait.
9 Likes
The 38cm gun used on Bismarck and Gneisenau was not the same one you had on Bayern class. It would have ~100mm and more penetration at distance than the current German 28cm and 38cm
2 Likes
Prob better than grinding for Schanhorst?
it shouldnt be added as she was never fitted with the guns especially as a premium
1 Like