proposal for a new player stat: average position in team

[HassenderZerhacker]

as the thread title suggests, I would like to propose a new player stat, which is not dependent on winning.

 

I feel the average rank in the team at the end of the battle would give additional insight to players' performance.

for each ship, the game would record the player's average position in the team, averages would be drawn per battle mode, and ship.

 

I think it would provide a fresh perspective and also something to battle for even when all seems lost.

[159Hunter]

Because obviously being first in your team always implies you played the best game of all players on your team...

... hint: not

[HassenderZerhacker]

8 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

Because obviously being first in your team always implies you played the best game of all players on your team...

... hint: not

so what?

[Kartoffelmos]

2 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

so what?

 

The stat will inherently be useless as it will be even worse than the personal rating/etc. from stat-tracking sites?

 

I mean, it will track the "save a star" behaviour from ranked since (relative) damage is rewarded the most in this game, so that is something. However, do we really need to encourage such behaviour, despite the fact that only a small minority will try to pad this value (aka border-humping BBs, pointless damage-farmers, etc.)?

 

 

[HassenderZerhacker]

6 minutes ago, Kartoffelmos said:

 

The stat will inherently be useless as it will be even worse than the personal rating/etc. from stat-tracking sites?

 

I mean, it will track the "save a star" behaviour from ranked since (relative) damage is rewarded the most in this game, so that is something. However, do we really need to encourage such behaviour, despite the fact that only a small minority will try to pad this value (aka border-humping BBs, pointless damage-farmers, etc.)?

 

what would you propose?

I would like a stat that is not dependent on winning and that rewards doing better than the rest of your team.

 

Base XP without win bonus would be good too, although not as good

[Adm_Andre]

Zitat

Battles survived [%]

easy

[HassenderZerhacker]

3 minutes ago, Adm_Andre said:

easy

err.. no... that would be an incentive to hide

 

[DFens_666]

4 minutes ago, Adm_Andre said:

easy

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

I would like a stat that is not dependent on winning and that rewards doing better than the rest of your team.

 

I dont understand the reward of it?

Basicly the stat you are looking for, is the combination of all stats.

[Sunleader]

PR is better for that.

[Spartan_Renegade]

That would imply that a ship like [Thunderer] sniping HE from ~24km contributed more to the team than a ship like [Z-52] who actively keeps the enemy spotted, defends cap zones from enemies who push too far, breaks through enemy lines that actually leads to victory, unlike the spammer who racks up hundreds of thousands of (repairable)damage from enemy team to secure a higher position in the battle stats.

A higher position in battle stats =/=  Good Team player 

[HassenderZerhacker]

8 minutes ago, SpartanRenegade said:

That would imply that a ship like [Thunderer] sniping HE from ~24km contributed more to the team than a ship like [Z-52] who actively keeps the enemy spotted, defends cap zones from enemies who push too far, breaks through enemy lines that actually leads to victory, unlike the spammer who racks up hundreds of thousands of (repairable)damage from enemy team to secure a higher position in the battle stats.

A higher position in battle stats =/=  Good Team player 

no... Z-52 gets XP for capping and for spotting, etc.

 

it's also NOT a stat to reflect if someone is a good player or not, it should just reflect how someone performs compared to the other members of his team.

we just need a stat to rank players by it to compute the average position.

we could take any stat to measure it, raw XP, average damage (but this would heavily advantage BBs), etc.

 

XP is probably not the best stat, but it's the best we have? or is there another better stat?

[Spartan_Renegade]

29 minutes ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

XP is probably not the best stat, but it's the best we have? or is there another better stat?

 

Nah, but it would be nice to experiment stats with the ribbon count itself...some ribbons have a higher value than others - like 1 captured ribbon having the value of 40 main battery hit ribbons - maybe? It's similar to the one we have now but more comprehensive. The best we have now is the sum average of all things considered -- base XP

[Kartoffelmos]

4 hours ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

what would you propose?

 

Change the base "average XP per battle" statistic to not include premium account modifiers, for instance.

Yes, you will still have a stat that is dependent on win/loss, but is is more indicative of performance whilst also promoting team-beneficial/normal gameplay.

 

EDIT: Corrected a poorly worded and thus misleading sentence.

[Humorpalanta]

1 hour ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

no... Z-52 gets XP for capping and for spotting, etc.

 

it's also NOT a stat to reflect if someone is a good player or not, it should just reflect how someone performs compared to the other members of his team.

we just need a stat to rank players by it to compute the average position.

we could take any stat to measure it, raw XP, average damage (but this would heavily advantage BBs), etc.

 

XP is probably not the best stat, but it's the best we have? or is there another better stat?

Ayyyylmao. This game rewards one thing: Damage farming.

You can cap four times, defend the cap, spot for the team, whatever. You will receive (edited) because the main part of the rewards is coming from damage dealt.

 

I member the times when capping was rewarding...

[neorvo]

25 minutes ago, Humorpalanta said:

Ayyyylmao. This game rewards one thing: Damage farming.

You can cap four times, defend the cap, spot for the team, whatever. You will receive (edited) because the main part of the rewards is coming from damage dealt.

 

I member the times when capping was rewarding...

Perhaps damage produced after spotting gives more rewards that capping, but I am not sure.

[Cyclops_]

1 hour ago, Kartoffelmos said:

 

Change base XP to not include premium account modifiers, for instance.

Yes, you will still have a stat that is dependent on win/loss, but is is more indicative of performance whilst also promoting team-beneficial/normal gameplay.

Base XP means Base XP, it does not include premium, signals modifiers etc, just look at results when you finish a battle it shows Base XP with out modifiers.

[eliastion]

3 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

Because obviously being first in your team always implies you played the best game of all players on your team...

... hint: not

Of course. However, it's more indicative of performance than things like, say

 - damage, that changes completely from class to class and from ship to ship within one class, and then rewards spamming HE at BBs more than ever trying to aim at DDs

 - "XP" stat that literally depends not just on ship and tier but even on whether you run premium or not

 

Average position in team wouldn't be say-it-all stat, there are ships and play-styles inherently better at "generating" high team position without being all that helpful for winning. Still, it would be - besides (solo) winrate the best stat to gauge performance so far. Especially considering that it could be used for some derived calculation. You could control for the ship, combine it with winrate, ignore frags and damage... and end up actually getting some new version of personal rating that wouldn't be utterly useless as a stat, for a change.

[DFens_666]

48 minutes ago, Cyclops_ said:

Base XP means Base XP, it does not include premium, signals modifiers etc, just look at results when you finish a battle it shows Base XP with out modifiers.

 

The problem is, that WG is tracking premium enhanced BaseXP themselves. So every site, which shows base XP, will always include the premium bonus.

Dont ask me why they do it...

[thiextar]

4 hours ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

I would like a stat that is not dependent on winning and that rewards doing better than the rest of your team.

Winning is the best thing to track though... atleast over hundreds/thousands of matches, it averages out all the variables

[GarrusBrutus]

Let's assume we have this stat. 

And then what? 

On Average both teams will have 6th-7th place players. 

Sometimes your team will be filled with 11-12th players and vice versa. 

Seriously, what would it add besides another stat to be toxic about towards others? 

"Muhhhh I'm 1.5th place average and you are all 11-12. Bad team mimimi." 

[Kartoffelmos]

1 hour ago, Cyclops_ said:

Base XP means Base XP, it does not include premium, signals modifiers etc, just look at results when you finish a battle it shows Base XP with out modifiers.

 

As pointed out above, the average XP given in your personal statistics includes premium modifiers, thus rendering it useless for comparitive  purposes. I was referring to statistics in my previous post and wrote in a bit of a hasty manner (I've pointed out this issue a number of times previously and writing on a phone didn't help either). The result was a poorly worded statement, so my apologies for that.

[Cyclops_]

4 minutes ago, Kartoffelmos said:

 

As pointed out above, the average XP given in your personal statistics includes premium modifiers, thus rendering it useless for comparitive  purposes. I was referring to statistics in my previous post and wrote in a bit of a hasty manner (I've pointed out this issue a number of times previously and writing on a phone didn't help either). The result was a poorly worded statement, so my apologies for that.

No problem fella, no problem 

[lup3s]

5 hours ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

no... Z-52 gets XP for capping and for spotting, etc.

 

You're not wrong, the Z will get *some* XP, but it won't be much.

Capping / spotting / tanking etc., teamplay is barely rewarded in this game. (*)

 

(*) (edit) of course teamplay can increase the chance of victory, and thus the XP you get 

[HassenderZerhacker]

5 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Let's assume we have this stat. 

And then what? 

On Average both teams will have 6th-7th place players. 

Sometimes your team will be filled with 11-12th players and vice versa. 

Seriously, what would it add besides another stat to be toxic about towards others? 

"Muhhhh I'm 1.5th place average and you are all 11-12. Bad team mimimi." 

err.. this proposed stat is not needed for that, the average damage and winrate are already enough!

[159Hunter]

6 hours ago, eliastion said:

Of course. However, it's more indicative of performance than things like, say

 - damage, that changes completely from class to class and from ship to ship within one class, and then rewards spamming HE at BBs more than ever trying to aim at DDs

 - "XP" stat that literally depends not just on ship and tier but even on whether you run premium or not

 

Average position in team wouldn't be say-it-all stat, there are ships and play-styles inherently better at "generating" high team position without being all that helpful for winning. Still, it would be - besides (solo) winrate the best stat to gauge performance so far. Especially considering that it could be used for some derived calculation. You could control for the ship, combine it with winrate, ignore frags and damage... and end up actually getting some new version of personal rating that wouldn't be utterly useless as a stat, for a change.

As position in team depends on your XP (which in term heavily relies on dmg), two indicators you find "less indicative[...]" then explain to me how something derived from these is more useful?

It still doesn't show how good you played.  Who will end higher in team: the smolensk dealing 200k dmg (to an assortment of BB and DD) or the DD doing 50k ( to the same ships as smolensk) 1 cap and spotting for 150k of that smolensk's dmg?