Are You Ready For Clan Battles? [Stat Tracking Self-Improvement]

[Koruption]

I've seen the question "What is the Greatest Stat?" asked quite a lot recently. I have my own opinions about that, and I've even voiced those opinions. (Hint: it's overall win rate with reasonable asterisks attached to the theory.)

 

But my opinions on the greatest stat isn't really what this is about. This is about giving players a way to discover and manipulate data themselves. I spend a lot of time delving into the API that Wargaming so kindly provides to us, and I like to think that gives me a certain perspective on things. This spreadsheet is designed to give that ability to you as well. With the upcoming third season of Clan Battles on our doorstep, I was hoping that this could help players understand a little better where they need to prepare themselves.

 

The first thing one does is turn the sheet on, which is done in cell B1 by entering any clan tag. It doesn't matter if you're in that clan, as entering a clan tag simply turns the sheet on. You'll then be able to either type a name into cell C5 (make sure you spell it right) or select one of the members of that clan from the drop down menu there. You don't have to search for a player in that clan, but it does make it easier.

 

 

From there the sheet will begin loading data. What you're able to manipulate is in the middle of the screen labeled "Stat Goals."

 

 

The sheet comes preset with the above stat goals. I've so far spent two seasons in clan wars at the Typhoon/Hurricane level. When I saw a player make an influential play, or just in general really helped their team, I took notice. I have based these stat goals on those players. Basically, if you want to play at the Typhoon or higher level, these are what you'll need to shoot for. My own clan uses an adapted version of this, and they disagree with me on the numbers. Disagreement is fine! We have a few players that successfully got their flags that theoretically wouldn't make it based on these numbers. The preset values are simply based upon my own observations. And I definitely observed that there is a wholesome correlation between a player's random battles statistics and their ability to perform in Clan Battles. Once you have your own copy of the sheet however, you can change these to whatever you like.

 

These stat goals are quite important. For each one that you meet on a ship, you gain one "Qualifying Rank." Once you have met at least 4, you earn the basic descriptor "Qualified" for that ship. Exceeding the goals results in earning better descriptors on a ship. Working to earn better descriptors on a ship is kindof the entire point of the sheet. As you improve on a ship, you earn better descriptors! The sheet will not give you 4 qualifying ranks until you have at least 25 battles on a ship.

 

These for example, are my descriptors for tier 10. I know... I sucketh quite greatly with the Gearing... 

 

But what about outlier ships? Ships that don't really fit the traditional dd, ca, bb, cv mold? By scrolling down below everything else, you'll see the section labeled "Individualized Stat Goals." If you set a ships' stat goals here, they'll override the more generalized versions above. The sheet comes preset with the Khaba already having individualized stat goals.

 

 

WEIGHTED STAT GOALS

Here's the kicker though. By looking below all of the individual ship results, you'll see a couple of nondescript areas (cells D80 and D82) labeled "Weighted Stat Goals" and "Weighted Player Averages." What if a player only has 2 battles on a ship, but they have 100% win rate etc? Should that be weighted as much as a ship that they have 100's of battles in? In this section the sheet takes all of the different ships, their goals, and weights them with their number of battles as the control. 

 

Those are my weighted stat goals. As you can see, I need to play more at t10, as my weighted stat goal for battles is in the red. I on average have too many t10's for how much I actually play at t10. However when I do play at t10, my other stats are all in the green. This section is best used to a quick glance to see if the player is overall actually performing at the level they should be or not. I can't take credit for this section though, the guys in OPG took the time to critique the sheet and they suggested it. They even took the time to explain the math to me!

 

 

The sheet will also take the time to look up a series of achievements for a given player so that at a glance the user may see if they have any experience in Clan Battles. All it's really saying here is that they played in those leagues, but if I recall correctly you only have to play a few battles in a league to earn the achievement from Wargaming. You don't have to earn a Stalingrad flag to earn the Typhoon league Achievement. But it does serve as a quick reference on a new player to your group.

 

 

 

Remember, this is simply a tool. However it is a tool designed for the user to set their own goals and rewards. I hope this is useful to players!

 

Click Here For Copy Of Sheet

 

I have spent a lot of time looking for critiques on this latest piece of work. However it cannot ever truly be perfect. If you notice something is wrong, or something that could be improved, please let me know.

 

 

Updates:

 

8-14-2018

Auto-Import Stat Goals --- If this feature is turned on, the sheet will import the server averages for ships in order to dynamically adapt the stat goals to their appropriate levels. The user may increase or decrease the an added percentage above the server average by adjusting a variable directly beneath this option. It is located in the middle of the sheet below the original stat goals. The imported/dynamically adjusted stat goals may be viewed by scrolling down. If the user sets the multiplier variable to zero, one may use this to see the non-adjusted server averages/expected variables from wows-numbers.

 

Player Rating --- The sheet now imports a brief overview of a player's "Player Rating" from the site wows-numbers.com. It also provides a link to the source page for ease of access. Individual ship player ratings are also calculated in the background using wows-numbers server averages/expected values. 

 

Spotting Damage --- Spotting damage has now been included as a imported statistic. It is not included as one of the stats required as a qualifying rank, however the data is now available for users to use as they see fit.

 

Potential Damage --- Potential damage has now been included as a imported statistic. It is not included as one of the stats required as a qualifying rank, however the data is now available for users to use as they see fit.

 

Ship Name/ID Import --- This feature is an unseen feature. The previous iteration of it no longer worked as a standalone. There have been too many additions of ships to the game. This has been updated to have double the available space. This means the load times of ship names and id's has gone up slightly, however it should mean that the sheet has been future proofed considerably.

 

Updated 3-7-2019

 

Minor niceties. Doubled and streamlined the ship name and ID import function. So many new ships have been added that there were ships no longer appearing in the list. New space was needed. Logic code has been cleaned up as well. 

[Koruption]

Btw, thank you to @RobS80 and @Boris_MNE for taking the time to go over the sheet and critique it. Heck, half of the descriptors idea was Boris's.

[JG4_sKylon]

It has no use for me, but thank you very much for putting so much effort into this and providing it to us.

[dCK_Ad_Hominem]

Thank you for the effort. A lot. Will check it out once I'm on the PC again. It will be rather interesting to see how dd play is rated, as you really aren't a main damage scorer (my highest cw damage was 161k, and at one time the enemy had 999 points, truly was a split second that won us that one).

 

Unlike random, cw win rate really tells a lot about your value for a team. 

 

Update: Took a look and the stats are pretty much as expected. Imo it still focuses too much on random battles to be accurate to assess how a player will fare in clan battles. This may be due to the fact that clan war stats are apparently not isolated yet. My results were as expected though. 

[maxram68]

4 hours ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

...snip...

This may be due to the fact that clan war stats are apparently not isolated yet.

Being a bit of an API-aficionado myself, I can confirm that they are not.

 

@Koruption well done!

[dCK_Ad_Hominem]

21 minutes ago, maxram68 said:

Being a bit of an API-aficionado myself, I can confirm that they are not.

 

@Koruption well done!

I wonder why though. Should make for maybe the most interesting stats yet. 

 

Aside: lacking 0.05%wr and 3200 average damage on the Gearing for "highly qualified"..... story of my life.

[Koruption]

6 hours ago, maxram68 said:

Being a bit of an API-aficionado myself, I can confirm that they are not.

 

@Koruption well done!

 

Correct, they aren't in the API. Thank you by the way for the kind words!

 

10 hours ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

Thank you for the effort. A lot. Will check it out once I'm on the PC again. It will be rather interesting to see how dd play is rated, as you really aren't a main damage scorer (my highest cw damage was 161k, and at one time the enemy had 999 points, truly was a split second that won us that one).

 

Unlike random, cw win rate really tells a lot about your value for a team. 

 

Update: Took a look and the stats are pretty much as expected. Imo it still focuses too much on random battles to be accurate to assess how a player will fare in clan battles. This may be due to the fact that clan war stats are apparently not isolated yet. My results were as expected though. 

 

I agree, mostly because during season one I played exclusively z-52 and in season two the Gearing. I did notice however that there was generally a correlation between random battles success (not playstyle) and Clan Wars success (not playstyle). 

 

Also, that's exactly why the stat goals are editable!  :)

[Koruption]

5 hours ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

I wonder why though. Should make for maybe the most interesting stats yet. 

 

Aside: lacking 0.05%wr and 3200 average damage on the Gearing for "highly qualified"..... story of my life.

 

I hope they keep the clan battles stats quiet anyways. I'm constantly in the API and it's taken me a while to really wrap my head around how everything matches up.

 

Clan Battles is where stats matter the least for destroyers of all things. How do you accurately quantify successfully smoking up an ally, screening them for torps, all while cap contesting and spotting... without dying? To quantify that in a manner that the average joe can agree on? 

 

Random battle stats do however work to serve as... proof of competency if it were. But where should that little grey line of competency reside? I have my opinions, and they're in the stat goals, but they're obviously subjective and should be editable by others.

[loppantorkel]

"Improve all stats"??     Yorck and Takao are no goes for me apparently.

 

Most of the improvements are increase survival, damage and hit rate. Seems there's room for some improvement... Good job OP.

[Koruption]

11 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

"Improve all stats"??     Yorck and Takao are no goes for me apparently.

 

Most of the improvements are increase survival, damage and hit rate. Seems there's room for some improvement... Good job OP.

 

Well, do remember that the stat goals are built around tier 10... and gauged as proof of competency for typhoon league or higher. The sheet definitely works for any tier, however the stat goals aren't designed for them. You're welcome to set your own goals though!

[Verblonde]

@Koruption Very nice spreadsheet work, sir - as a keen observer of such things, I salute you!

 

Now, all I need is to get my first T10(s), and the sheer glory of how much I suck will become fully apparent...!

[Koruption]

1 minute ago, Verblonde said:

@Koruption Very nice spreadsheet work, sir - as a keen observer of such things, I salute you!

 

Now, all I need is to get my first T10(s), and the sheer glory of how much I suck will become fully apparent...!

 

Don't rush through it! Take your time. I just started back on working towards my first EU t10...

 

Problem is... idk what I want to work towards heh

[Verblonde]

15 hours ago, Koruption said:

 

Don't rush through it! Take your time. I just started back on working towards my first EU t10...

 

Problem is... idk what I want to work towards heh

My first will probably be the Japanese DD (I currently have the T9), or maybe the lighter Russian DD (I used the rental in the last clan season, and rather liked it); it's just a question of having the time to play enough before the next season starts...

 

This, of course, assumes my clan will need me (I suspect I'm about the worst player we have!).

[TeaAndTorps]

This is a fantastic piece of work. I'm not going to be playing CBs any time soon, let alone at Typhoon League level or above. But this will be an excellent tool for tracking my progress in getting good at the mid-tiers, if I can come up with some reasonable goals for 'consistently carrying a bit more than my weight'. Thanks OP, and everyone else involved, for all the hard work that's clearly gone into this 

[dCK_Ad_Hominem]

21 hours ago, Koruption said:

 

I hope they keep the clan battles stats quiet anyways. I'm constantly in the API and it's taken me a while to really wrap my head around how everything matches up.

 

Clan Battles is where stats matter the least for destroyers of all things. How do you accurately quantify successfully smoking up an ally, screening them for torps, all while cap contesting and spotting... without dying? To quantify that in a manner that the average joe can agree on? 

 

Random battle stats do however work to serve as... proof of competency if it were. But where should that little grey line of competency reside? I have my opinions, and they're in the stat goals, but they're obviously subjective and should be editable by others.

Well, I'd go by win rate, survival rate, warships spotted, spotting damage and caps. I must admit that I do not know of those can be extracted from the api though. 

 

My 58%wr in cbs should at least say I'm doing something right .

 

That is of course assuming these were cb stats. 

[Astolfo_Is_My_Waifu]

I checked my stats and then remembered I've only played 8 games between all 7 of my tier 10s so not much to see.

 

Great sheet though, will definitely be using it going forward.

[Koruption]

25 minutes ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

Well, I'd go by win rate, survival rate, warships spotted, spotting damage and caps. I must admit that I do not know of those can be extracted from the api though. 

 

My 58%wr in cbs should at least say I'm doing something right .

 

That is of course assuming these were cb stats. 

 

Spotting damage can be ascertained from the api, but yeah... not for CB. 

 

And yeah! We can all see our CB win rate in game... but it's not in the API! I do wish they'd at least include how many battles you've played in CB as well as your win rate.

[Koruption]

There have been some errors in how the API transmits data into a google sheet recently. For instance, if you have a ship, but haven't played it, the api simply duplicates data from another ship and applies it to the blank data ship. This can also happen to a ship that a player has a 0% win rate on, resulting in the amount of wins from another ship being duplicated. That tricks the sheet into thinking you have a 100% win rate instead. 

 

I have updated the sheet's logic to prevent these errors from manifesting in the final product. For these fixes, simply make a new copy from the original post.

[Armorin]

You can include ships spotted (they are only initial spots I think, rather than the ribbon logic), spotting damage and potential damage (art_agro + torpedo_agro).

[Nebelwanderer]

It's very interesting and quality spreadsheet. Thanks for this.

[Jengkins]

@KoruptionVery nice work mate. 

[Mr_Tayto]

That's awesome!

[_DFA_]

I see a lot of effort went into this, and in my opinion it's great. I particularly like how it tells you which stats need improvement so you can work on specific areas to get better. Good work.

[Koruption]

6 hours ago, Armorin said:

You can include ships spotted (they are only initial spots I think, rather than the ribbon logic), spotting damage and potential damage (art_agro + torpedo_agro).

 

I could have done so, and I may in the future, however for this the central idea was to use 6 core statistics that every ship type desires to attain.

[Koruption]

5 hours ago, Accelerated said:

It's very interesting and quality spreadsheet. Thanks for this.

Thank you very much!