Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
RamboCras

How does the end scoring work?

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[VLOOT]
Players
298 posts
20,053 battles

Hi,

 

The winning team gets their XP x 2 for winning the game someone once told me.

 

Very often when I see the team score of both teams and multiply the losing team x 2 to see how their score would be if they had won I notice that their score x 2 for 9-10 players is higher than the players of the winning team if you compare the no 1's, 2's etc.

 

How can this be? The lost, they are all dead, my team has 6 living, all caps....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,805 posts
39,397 battles

Adding to this the draw (if you get it cause it’s very rare) both teams get the amount of exp as in the loss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BNBS]
Players
410 posts
6 hours ago, RamboCras said:

Hi,

 

The winning team gets their XP x 2 for winning the game someone once told me.

 

Very often when I see the team score of both teams and multiply the losing team x 2 to see how their score would be if they had won I notice that their score x 2 for 9-10 players is higher than the players of the winning team if you compare the no 1's, 2's etc.

 

How can this be? The lost, they are all dead, my team has 6 living, all caps....

 

 

So much to unpack here.  As Pete said, it's usually x1.5  XP and not x2.  It is however entirely possible for the top XP earner in the losing team to earn more base XP than the top player in the winning team if they did more damage, defended more caps, took more caps, had more spotting damage etc etc when added up compared to a mediocre performance from the leader in the winning team.  If the majority on the winning side just did enough to secure a win that would still outweigh 3-4 stellar performances on the losing side.  Next time you notice such an odd occurence check out the the bottom 5 of the losing side and I bet you that they were terrible compared to the bottom 5 of the winning team.

 

Sometimes no matter how hard you battle you can't carry a poor team against a team where the majority just do enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
8,388 battles

how does it work? well it does not work because the multiplier (1.5 for a win) is outweighed by doing only slightly more damage in a loosing game.  If WG do want it to work they need to fiddle the multiplier until winning actually means something.  At this point it is just bragging rights.  The challenge that they sit with is that they want everyone to progress because if you are not progressing at a perceived good pace people get frustrated and leave.  

 

 

Lets say your average damage gets you around 1000 base XP in a winning game and you are a good player with a 55% win rate (anecdotally average is around 48%)

This means that you are going to score 1500 base xp in 55% of your games and 1000 base xp in 45% of your game netting you an overall average of 1375 xp per game.

 

Now you focus on doing more damage and you can get your damage up but at the cost of your win rate...  You can increase your damage enough to now score 1250 base XP but your win rates tanks to 45%.  You will now earn 1875 xp on 45% of your games and 1250 xp on 55% of your games giving you an overall average of 1406 xp per game.

 

Now you focus on doing even more damage and you can get your damage up but at a further cost of your win rate...  You can increase your damage enough to now score 1500 base XP but your win rates tanks to 40%.  You will now earn 2250 xp on 40% of your games and 1500 xp on 60% of your games giving you an overall average of 1500 xp per game.

 

How I would go about trying to fix this:

I would look at how base xp is allocated and apply a hidden multiplier to each damage type (AP, HE, SAP, Fire, Flood, Torpedo, Areal bomps, Areal Torpodoes, Rockets, Secondaries) I would then also add a hidden multiplier to each of the metrics that they have (Capping, spotting, potential damage, duration a cap is contested by opposing ships, duration in the cap, spotting damage as a result of radar, spotting damage as a result of hydro, the lot). Lastly I would add a hidden multiplier for each ship (to allow for a ship that is over performing for a time)

 

Then I would use these multipliers to balance the average of the players until they are much closer.  This will have the effect that a Range based HE spammer would be getting the bulk of their xp from his HE and Fire damage and potentially a nominal amount of xp for capping while the Stealth capping torpedo boat will be getting less XP from each of capping, flooding, spotting and torpedo damage and a nominal amount of damage from fires.  If a ship is now under performing in score compared to all the others, you use the ship multiplier to nudge it one way or the other so they match up more accurately.

 

Would this work?  I have no idea but it would be more easy to balance individual ships that are over performing on the scorecard.  

Will this have an effect on the actual game play? Not likely until people figure out that a particular ship not previously used in a particular way can score well with unusual actions, perhaps the fire spewing max rage ship gets apeshit XP for capping and then WG simply dial down the xp that capping gives that particular ship.

Can WG do this? lol seriously?  Have you seen some of the recent disasters?

This will balance the score at the end of the battle and reward people that play the ship better than the average player and will also keep the potential score of the average player of all ships closer together.  Changes to the meta can also be adjusted quickly by using data from when the change comes into effect.  So a new ship is introduced, all ship's xp balance are looked at from when the new ship was introduced. 

 

Other potential fixes:

Increase the win multiplier until it means something.  To keep those on the loosing side invested they would have to offer ways to increase the intensive to play as well as ways to increase the XP back to a level that is not frustrating.  Obviously those that win more often will get a benefit from these ways to increase the XP but they are anyway arguable the better players so does it really matter?  Daily missions are a great way to do this with flags / coal / whatever.  Perhaps a modifier based on your winrate?  You loose a lot of games, then you get more xp flags.  You had a 17+ point captain on your ship, you get less commander XP flags, you win more than average, you stand a chance of getting 1 special flag rather than a 4 normal flags, I dunno, WG use some imagination.

 

tl/dr : Do more damage

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
11,787 posts
9,750 battles
16 minutes ago, SquibSurefire said:

*snip*

 

I dont really think, that most people play the way they do because they progress faster by playing like that. Since you can observe premium ships being played the same way, which wouldnt make sense since you dont need XP on those to progress anywhere.

However, you can see stupid play all the time depending on what missions WG is giving us. Need fires/citadels with BBs? Every BB starts to shoot HE... Just as an example, but you could see that the last 2 weeks~.

 

Also, i dont believe you can increase your damage endlessly, while dropping your WR into sub 50% level. Sure you can farm HE damage with a BB on other BBs, but that often gives very little rewards. Sometimes, less damage gives you more XP if you deal it to the right targets: DDs or highter tier ships (preferably DDs/Cruisers).

 

image.thumb.png.060d0b779d40f3b1780fbe31e2bdddc2.png

 

Not a lot of damage at all, yet i was first in XP and with over 2,2k it is quite good too. But basicly that entire damage was on 2 DDs, more than 50% + i killed both. I would probably need to farm 1,5 TX BBs to get the same XP out of them. And whats easier? 25k to DDs or 150k to BBs?

 

Or how about this one from yesterday:

image.thumb.png.5f70340b773c1308ba737697bc2ccdf9.png

 

First in XP with meager damage. But i didnt focus on farming those BBs. I shot a TX DD and i tried to blindshoot the Smolensk in smoke. I basicly rushed several enemies because it was won anyway and didnt care if i die or not. The smolensk survived with 3k btw before i died...

You get way more XP by prioritizing the right targets, which often gets you a higher WR aswell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
8,388 battles
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

However, you can see stupid play all the time depending on what missions WG is giving us. Need fires/citadels with BBs? Every BB starts to shoot HE... Just as an example, but you could see that the last 2 weeks~.

Yes, that argument does have some validity also

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,937 posts
15,138 battles
2 hours ago, SquibSurefire said:

how does it work? well it does not work because the multiplier (1.5 for a win) is outweighed by doing only slightly more damage in a loosing game. 

While I would not mind winning to be better rewarded, 50% more is already a lot.

And until I see actual numbers, I cannot take your speculative number crunching serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
8,388 battles
18 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

While I would not mind winning to be better rewarded, 50% more is already a lot.

And until I see actual numbers, I cannot take your speculative number crunching serious.

I 100% agree that my numbers are speculative but the point I was trying to make is that if you only care about getting XP as fast as possible and not about winning; figure out how to rack up as much damage as fast as possible, even if it gets you killed and you will be ahead of the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
7,224 posts

No it doesnt, if this game was a 1on1 maybe there would be something in those numbers but since its not there isnt, I ground  out every line in the game and a) winning simply pays better xp wise and b) there are always enough potatos on the enemy team you can farm damage from, only thing that can screw you is the ROFLSTOMP (whichever way it might go as it has the same effect) over which you have little or no control as you simply dont have time to farm damage and get base XP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×