Marek Tucan Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 The problem I see with the E100 is so many player using it, go forging out alone and then being focused on by every enemy tank and arty that can. A E100 in a group is quite dangerous when well handled. Actually that's the fate of all long reload vehicles, even KV-2... When platooninng with friends we had quite interesting result with two T30's, his with 155mm (he prefers big boom) and my with 120mm (I like to waste shells ) We managed to catch at least two guys who charged at us adter we both shot and they figured they have soem time for free shots.
Paul G. Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Personally I dont view win rate as a measure of individual skill. Too many other factors involved, like performance of the other players. Win rate is affected by team kills, AFKs, ect, so the spread is typically 45% to 55%. Average Exp is a better measure IMO. Interesting to see if it correlates directly with win rate.
Harold Jones Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I have yet to see a good player with a win rate of below 50%. Naturally my sample is skewed by mostly looking at the stats of people who spend a lot of time posting stupid shit in battle chat but on those times I check out the stats of someone who I thought performed well they are uniformly 50+. Since you can right click on someone in the after battle details screen and choose view details maybe I'll check the top and bottom 5 XP earners every match and see what it shows.
Paul G. Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I have yet to see a good player with a win rate of below 50%. Naturally my sample is skewed by mostly looking at the stats of people who spend a lot of time posting stupid shit in battle chat but on those times I check out the stats of someone who I thought performed well they are uniformly 50+. Since you can right click on someone in the after battle details screen and choose view details maybe I'll check the top and bottom 5 XP earners every match and see what it shows. Some of my tanks have a win rate of high 50%, some low 40%. If I stuck to the high performance tanks my win rate would probably go up. As it is I spread evenly, and my win rate is in the middle. I concur that win rate is a good general indicator of who is good or bad, but not an accurate measure of effectivness. Seldom you will find a player with a win rate in the 60% or 30% (with a lot of battles) unless they clan battle, or platoon a lot with other good players. Average EXP is a better indicator of individual skill I would think.
Marek Tucan Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) win rate is pretty "robust" statistic, though it can be skewed a lot. still, WR above average 48-49% signifies team with you on board wins more often than usual. While in 15v15 one player has small contribution on average, consistently doing good job shows over time. EDIT: high XP but "low" WR may mean the guy is very good at individual level, but plays "selfish" and harms team for own gain... Edited January 24, 2013 by Tuccy
Skywalkre Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I have to disagree on the E100 being useless. I just recently picked one up and am loving it. Just ~20 matches in it so far but only 3 losses. I don't even have the 150 yet.If you're not using gold the 128 is a better route to take and it wasn't uncommon to see folks in pub matches using that even when they had the 150 researched (for CW while using gold). I still don't care for it. If you factor gold rounds into the equation (CW or pubs for folks like me who can afford them) the E-100 is just a huge xp/credit pinata like FCO pointed out. It's an enormous target with armor that doesn't stand a chance against the latest inflated gold rounds from the newest tanks out there. If you're talking pub matches without gold it still has a huge list of problems. The LFP is a large target and easy to pen for anything tier 9+ and heavies/TDs tier 8+. Compare this with the 110E5 which has frontal weakspots as well. The 110E5 has them in smaller spots and spread over the frontal aspect. If you aim for the LFP of the E-100 and your shot deviates, you still have a good chance to hit the LFP. If you aim at the 110E5 and your shot deviates you have a good chance of bouncing. The 150 with normal rounds is basically worthless. Again, compare this with the 110E5 and there's no contest (235 pen vs 269). Sure you can do good with any tank in this game, the point is there's just better options. The E-100 isn't it for tier 10 heavies. On a related note they could probably drop the Maus and E-100 to tier 9, adjust hps, and not destroy the game. A lot of newer tanks have completely thrown out penetration ranges from when the game was released and have more powerful guns. If they bring old tanks up to this level the Maus wouldn't be unstoppable. The catch is they'd have to come up with 2 new tier 10s. Maybe they could drop the Maus to tier 9, get rid of the POS 4502B (which they've never 'fixed' despite it always being bad) and revise the E-100 to be a true tier 10 armored monster (measured by the fact that it would actually be desired in CW) that both the Maus and E-75 research into.
Skywalkre Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I concur that win rate is a good general indicator of who is good or bad, but not an accurate measure of effectivness. Seldom you will find a player with a win rate in the 60% or 30% (with a lot of battles) unless they clan battle, or platoon a lot with other good players.I ran into this last week. Lucked out and got a platoon of morons on my team a few games in a row. Looked one up and his w/r was 56% which is usually a sign of a great player. However, as I was watching him in these games he was a mouthbreather by every definition. I then looked him up in-game and saw how he got his w/r so high: he had like 80 of those 'Brothers in Arms' medals/awards. This guy was an average player who platooned a lot and his platoon did at least one smart thing (moving and attacking together) so he inflated his w/r far above where he could if he only played solo. Average EXP is a better indicator of individual skill I would think.Unfortunately when you look at this stat in-game for a player it factors in premium time. Thus, someone like me who's been on a standard account for about half of my playing time has a lower XP listing than my other stats would lead you to believe. With the talk recently of that new WN6 number I went and read up on how they calculate it. It's pretty solid. Much better than Efficiency (which is pure junk, why anyone still uses that is beyond me). If you look at WN6 plus someone's w/r you have about the best judge of a player you can make with the limited stats we have public access to.
Paul G. Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Worth repeating the story. One of the best wins I ever had. There I was playing SPG M41, ran out of ammo, last AFV left on my team. Map was el Halluf, on top of the south-western cliff. Enemy team down to a single Cromwell with 3% HP left, starts up the switchback to hunt me. I time it just right, and plummet off the cliff right on to the cromwell getting the kill and winning the game AND I survived the impact. LOLs all around from both sides, including the cromwell driver. Kinetic kills are the best. Funny all my Kamakazi badges are with SPGs.
Fritz Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) EDIT: high XP but "low" WR may mean the guy is very good at individual level, but plays "selfish" and harms team for own gain... Correct. I know because that's me. Or at least it was me before it occurred to me to think about why my very high avg xp (currently something like 800th place on the NA server) doesn't correlate to very high win ratio. I've been working on my teamwork since then and I'm doing better. With the talk recently of that new WN6 number I went and read up on how they calculate it. It's pretty solid. Much better than Efficiency (which is pure junk, why anyone still uses that is beyond me). If you look at WN6 plus someone's w/r you have about the best judge of a player you can make with the limited stats we have public access to. Too bad XVM still uses the old eff. rating. Edited January 24, 2013 by Fritz
Skywalkre Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) EDIT: high XP but "low" WR may mean the guy is very good at individual level, but plays "selfish" and harms team for own gain... Correct. I know because that's me. Or at least it was me before it occurred to me to think about why my very high avg xp (currently something like 800th place on the NA server) doesn't correlate to very high win ratio. I've been working on my teamwork since then and I'm doing better.That listing also factors in premium time. All the XP ranking shows is who's been buying premium time vs who hasn't. With the talk recently of that new WN6 number I went and read up on how they calculate it. It's pretty solid. Much better than Efficiency (which is pure junk, why anyone still uses that is beyond me). If you look at WN6 plus someone's w/r you have about the best judge of a player you can make with the limited stats we have public access to. Too bad XVM still uses the old eff. rating.I read the latest version will use WN6. If so, I could see myself actually using XVM for the first time. Edited January 24, 2013 by Skywalkre
jwduquette1 Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I'm not real obssessed with game stats. But, it's probably because I'm pretty average. However, I view the interest in stats like anything else in-game in that some folks really enjoy that aspect of the game. I suppose it's like looking at individual players Baseball stats and etc. So in that sense it's one more kewl\fun layer of the game that folks can get into. How about using those individual tank mastery medal thingies as an overall metric for individual performance. Those "M" badge thingies are supposedly an indication that you've done better than 99.99% (or whatever) of the players driving the same tank. And a #1 badge thingy is like you drove the tank better than 95% of the other folks that have driven the same tank type. I don't think the medal things are typical shown when you try to look up another players stats.
jwduquette1 Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) On a completely different note, I read on the WoT forums yesterday -- I think it was a play tester that posted this -- that "Dragon Ridge" and one other map (maybe it was "Cliffs"(?) or maybe it was "Serene Coast"(?)) would be removed from map rotation in the next major update. Dunno if the rumor is true or, but hopefully they will replace the two maps with two new maps. Some more rolling hills or desert -- non-urban'ish -- maps would be nice. Edited January 24, 2013 by jwduquette1
Skywalkre Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I'm not real obssessed with game stats. But, it's probably because I'm pretty average. However, I view the interest in stats like anything else in-game in that some folks really enjoy that aspect of the game. I suppose it's like looking at individual players Baseball stats and etc. So in that sense it's one more kewl\fun layer of the game that folks can get into.That's me. When I get into games I love getting into the mechanics and metrics (I really wish WoT had a website like EJ... /sigh). Oddly enough, I hate baseball though. How about using those individual tank mastery medal thingies as an overall metric for individual performance. Those "M" badge thingies are supposedly an indication that you've done better than 99.99% (or whatever) of the players driving the same tank. And a #1 badge thingy is like you drove the tank better than 95% of the other folks that have driven the same tank type. I don't think the medal things are typical shown when you try to look up another players stats.The problem with those badges is they're awarded for outliers and only calculated over a small window of time (1-2 weeks is what I've read).
Fritz Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Frankly when I look at XVM stats I don't really make a big difference between a 1400 and 1500 rated player. I basically lump them into "worthless" (that would be sub-600), "good enough for meatshield" (700-1000), "competent" (up to say 1300), "very good" (1300-1600), above that is basically "worth more than half the team combined".
Stefan Fredriksson Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) My take is that a high win-rate necessary does not mean that the player will be good/great, but most of the time I look up the "noob-criers", they have a less than good win-rate. EDIT: as Jeff, I also find the Ace-tanker badges interesting when checking a players' stats. Edited January 24, 2013 by Stefan Fredriksson
Marek Tucan Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Dragons and Serene Coast will indeed be taken out of rotation. Personally I didn't mind Dragons (though it is hard to play properly), but Serene is too restrictive fr my taste - generally one big bottleneck and who moves first, loses...
Fritz Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=37252 Show your support.
Harold Jones Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 The problem with those badges is they're awarded for outliers and only calculated over a small window of time (1-2 weeks is what I've read). Saw a guy today with a 40% overall win rate who had an M in his t110 (also 40%) win rate. His best win rate was in lol traktor at 54%. I only noticed him because I was going through the post battle screen looking at the top and bottom 5 players sorted by XP earned on each team. What I noticed over the games I did this for is that people with 51+ percent win rates were about twice as likely to be in the top 5 xp earners as they were in the bottom 5 and the teams with more of their 51+ folks in the top 5 tended to be the winners more often. I only tracked 3 games though so that may or may not hold up. Since I don't use XVM all I use win rate for is to confirm my bias that people who spend a lot of time typing in a match tend to not be very good at driving their tanks.
yuval Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 http://208.84.116.22...showtopic=37252 Show your support. Great idea!I'll see what I can do
Marek Tucan Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 http://208.84.116.22...showtopic=37252 Show your support. Capital idea.
Max H Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 See, even window-breathers learn. Not that 40 battles are significant. But still. What the hell have you been doing? defender in every game? revise the E-100 to be a true tier 10 armored monster (measured by the fact that it would actually be desired in CW) that both the Maus and E-75 research into. Problem with that is the E-100 is already violating the laws of physics as it is. It has turret side armour buffed to two or three times the thickness it was designed to be, and yet weighs the same as with 80mm thick turret sides. The gun, even with low pen for a TX, is capable of waay more than it was IRL also - without giving it credit APDS there's not much they can do without making it as realistic as the E-90. hopefully they will replace the two maps with two new maps. Some more rolling hills or desert -- non-urban'ish -- maps would be nice. The ones confirmed to be in development look fairly non-urbanhttp://wot-news.com/main/post/10152011/1 http://wot-news.com/main/post/02172012/2 http://wot-news.com/main/post/10262011/1
medicjim86 Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Correct. I know because that's me. Or at least it was me before it occurred to me to think about why my very high avg xp (currently something like 800th place on the NA server) doesn't correlate to very high win ratio. I've been working on my teamwork since then and I'm doing better. That's really funny, because I am essentially programmed to be a total team player (firefighter), so I've been trying to emulate your play style a bit and be more of an individual contributor.
Paul G. Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 I try to be a team player, but find that every time I stick my neck out..as in go where I think I should to help the team...I look around and am suddenly unsupported (especially as the top list tank). I mean who lets their to tier tank be taken out 3 to 1. Only option is to sit and wait and hope for support (or threaten) while the other team gets the key terrain. Im not talking about rushing ahead of everyone else (which I am accused of) Im talking about advancing while other teammates advance and then hesitate. When I see a friendly involved in a shoot out, I rush to help, wehereas I typically get into a detail fight and find my friendlies sitting back watching rather than assisting. Frustrating and makes me want to play very conservation minded.
Stefan Fredriksson Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 See, even window-breathers learn. Not that 40 battles are significant. But still. What the hell have you been doing? defender in every game?...Actually no defender-badges at all. I saw that %-wise defending cap had risen most of my stats. But I think that is based on two or three games where I did real good resets on encounter-battles. That's why only 40 games show very little, except for a nice trend. I mainly play Hellcat, T28P, T28 and T29 atm.
cptcav Posted January 24, 2013 Posted January 24, 2013 Personally I dont view win rate as a measure of individual skill. Too many other factors involved, like performance of the other players. Win rate is affected by team kills, AFKs, ect, so the spread is typically 45% to 55%. Average Exp is a better measure IMO. Interesting to see if it correlates directly with win rate. The problem with average experience it depends on the tiers that you play most and the type of tank (light, medium or heavy) due to the potential damage output of their respective guns. For example, my first 8,000 battles were fought mainly on low tiers (average 3-to-4) with light and medium tanks because of my average fps (10-15). Now that I have my new computer and get 50-to-60 fps, I am playing more in the big boy leagues (tiers 6 and up; having just started tier IX) with mediums and heavies. That means that my experience was running at just under 300 and is now on the climb up.
Recommended Posts