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

winrate - absurd and no logic in it

157 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[AGRES]
Players
171 posts
11,814 battles

wg placed winrate info in the main screen about player results in game 》》

 

with that, wg proclaimed this like main number about player quality.

 

why it is wrong? 

 

--' it counts team quality, no personal

 

example: player loses 10 battles in which he was 1st place in the list.

 

according to WG vodka logic, this player skill , is pure zero ( winrate is zero)

 

but reality and only  fact is 》》》he is the best of the best. 

 

solution: 

 

its similar to ranked battles.

using skill-winrate  , instead matematical winrate. 

 

skill-winrate means, that when you are in 1 place on the list, of defeated team, it will be counted like winn in your stat.

its a matematical absurdity  , but it starts to show the PURPOSE ! !!!

 

...that is players skill. 《《《《

 

 

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 11
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles

If in thousands of battles you only manage to be top of the team but can't even win more than half of them, then you aren't really a good player either. And fact is, most people don't have only 10 games and we aren't routinely encountering people with two-digit amounts of games. But someone in the four-digit numbers of games with poor winrate just is not good. And there's no point adding such a stupid stat like you suggest, which not just is pointless (having a good winrate only gives bragging rights, you don't get rewarded or penalised by the game for it), but also just serves to compensate for the ego of people who can't win, but think that damage farming gives them some entitlement to a better evaluation.

  • Cool 18
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LAFIE]
Beta Tester
5,126 posts
5,512 battles
9 minutes ago, citaDELer said:

--' it counts team quality, no personal

 

Actually not true. Fun fact, in all the games you play there is one constant, namely you

  • Cool 16
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,729 posts
18,026 battles
Vor 1 Stunde, citaDELer sagte:

wg placed winrate info in the main screen about player results in game ...

We have this kind of thread every month. OP, please run a forum search. Mod, please close.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Players
637 posts
12,536 battles
1 hour ago, citaDELer said:

--' it counts team quality, no personal

 

Can't agree with that. I run a MM monitor. Given a reasonable amount of games played a player WR correlates highly with player ability in games I participate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
375 posts
1 hour ago, HaachamaShipping said:

If in thousands of battles you only manage to be top of the team but can't even win more than half of them, then you aren't really a good player either. And fact is, most people don't have only 10 games and we aren't routinely encountering people with two-digit amounts of games. But someone in the four-digit numbers of games with poor winrate just is not good. And there's no point adding such a stupid stat like you suggest, which not just is pointless (having a good winrate only gives bragging rights, you don't get rewarded or penalised by the game for it), but also just serves to compensate for the ego of people who can't win, but think that damage farming gives them some entitlement to a better evaluation.

You can be, wr is quite malleable by playing at night, whaling, divisioning, stacking mod packs, and so on. In my last night battle I decided the battle in under 10 minutes, despite my wr not currently being 50%+. Its just that the fact that the ego of many players leans so heavily on their team wr, they refuse to accept facts to the contrary, or even want to censor this truth, like @johnny_moneto.

 

Does that mean my wr should be over 50% ? No, as I don't put in the effort inflating it just to put on a veneer, or to get into a wr circlejerk clan. 

 

If someone uses MM monitor to see what he wants, namely that a Smolensk or Thunderer spam player does well, than that is the result. Any opposite data, like a lemon doing well, or a good player not doing well in a battle, is ignored.  Asking those "good players" who finish below me what happened any time, gets a agressive reaction to the tune of what @Altsak says. 

 

 

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AGRES]
Players
171 posts
11,814 battles

ok. once more AGAIN.

 

when winrate have to be good, objective, then never in ranked will be 1st player defeated team rewardet.

 

in ranked in some way, wargaming understood the correct way in player skill.

 

in winrate still NOT = thats the proof is incorrect and ist not discusion about that.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PUPSI]
Privateer
11,664 posts
3 hours ago, citaDELer said:

with that, wg proclaimed this like main number about player quality.

no that's simply the number many/most players are interested in...

 

13 minutes ago, citaDELer said:

in ranked in some way, wargaming understood the correct way in player skill.

so camping in the back and begin farming when most of your team is dead is skill for you? very strange interpretation...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,207 posts
14,924 battles
7 hours ago, citaDELer said:

with that, wg proclaimed this like main number about player quality.

They did no such thing. You are interpreting.

 

7 hours ago, citaDELer said:

example: player loses 10 battles in which he was 1st place in the list

according to WG vodka logic, this player skill , is pure zero ( winrate is zero)

That is not how it works. 10 matches do not say much.

 

7 hours ago, citaDELer said:

...that is players skill. 《《《《

That is damage farming skill...

 

 

You are just not understanding how it works. That is is hardly anyone elses problem and the chance of WG changing it are close to zero. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
7,053 posts

@citaDELer Dude, you finally arrived at the "holy grail" of WOWS and that is - ALL the metrics tracked by the game in your name are actually heavily influenced by the "team" you are playing with and while being "marketed" as your personal skill metrics that OFC is a total nonsense... Its nonsense because claiming that your personal battle metrics are yours and yours alone in a game that takes pride in having a (more or less) balanced ecosystem of ships in which one player shouod NOT be able to actually beat the entirety of the enemy team by themselves (which is fine btw) in one ship no matter how strong she is are kinda insane...

 

I mean  lets not kid ourselves here - yes occasionally hard carries are possible and better players will be better at being in a position to do it (positioning and situational awareness are most important skills in WOWS, far more important then aiming or whatnot) and recognising the opportunity to do so as well as taking it so they will have better WR in the end but claiming its solely personal metrics... Yeah... Right... 

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,962 posts
5,281 battles
3 hours ago, citaDELer said:

wg placed winrate info in the main screen about player results in game 》》

 

with that, wg proclaimed this like main number about player quality.

 

why it is wrong? 

 

--' it counts team quality, no personal

 

example: player loses 10 battles in which he was 1st place in the list.

 

according to WG vodka logic, this player skill , is pure zero ( winrate is zero)

 

but reality and only  fact is 》》》he is the best of the best. 

 

solution: 

 

its similar to ranked battles.

using skill-winrate  , instead matematical winrate. 

 

skill-winrate means, that when you are in 1 place on the list, of defeated team, it will be counted like winn in your stat.

its a matematical absurdity  , but it starts to show the PURPOSE ! !!!

 

...that is players skill. 《《《《

 

 

Thats why we have a more appropriate meassure of someone skill, and that is PR (personal rating).

I agree that WR number doesnt mean much, especially when many of these 'wannabe pro' are division players or/and they reset their account so they can rewrite old stats with new stats. That is pathetic.

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
2,991 posts
17,341 battles

Winrate is the easiest number to go by if you want to look at the impact a player has on the outcome of the game (after the initial 1000-2000 games where he/she learns the game).

Why? Because the aim of the game is to win matches. If you can't manage to have enough impact on games, you won't win and your winrate will be low.

Sure, it's a team game. There are 23 other players involved. However, if you don't manage to pull your weight every so often, you are useless to your 11 teammats and a blessing to the other 12.

 

Ofcourse, you can supplement that number with extra info: this info will give the intelligent viewer more in depth information on the skill. We could look at:

- division play or not?
- which classes where played?

- which tiers where played?

- which ships where played?

- what's the k/d ratio?

- hitratio of guns?

- spotting done?

- survival rate?

...

 

Unless someone is heavily messing with the first 4 of these markers, the winrate is pretty accurate. As such, generally, the winrate is a good number.

 

Now on to your claim that being top XP earner makes you the best player of your team. I could explain this again (has been done a 1000 times on these forums), but let me just give you an example:

 

 

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZSKN]
Players
37 posts
3,503 battles

I can understand the OP frustration, the game gets streaky at times and its frustrating and not fun to be on a loosing streak,where parts of the streak can be your fault,but definitely not all in your control. There were not that many blowouts before,in this WOWs is following trend of WOT. There is a room for improvement in this game,but sadly current state of the game is financially benefiting for WG so, no incentive to change.

The game needs division balance on each side every game, better radar ships allocation on teams, less HE spammer or reduce their effectivity,slightly tweaked CV-DD interaction, less RNG influence and clear system to teach and motivate new players for learning.

 

But nothing will change, so just enjoy the battle moments and focus your gameplay improvement and dont watch your stats too frantically.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IAN-]
Players
2,043 posts
6,904 battles

My own opinion is that a personal WR in a randomly picked team-based game is fairly worthless as a personal skill marker. Even the best players in the game, when playing Solo, will still lose often (around 33% of games - less if a CV main) because there is only so much 1 single player can do when teamed with 11 bad players against a team of 12 "competent" ones, as the lack of skill in the 11 bad players can't be fully compensated for by the extra skill in the 1 super-unicum player.

 

Even the player (still playing today & with over 1000 games) with the best WR on the EU server - El2aZeR - only has a 71% WR because they're a CV main, with CV stats taken away their WR drops to <63% so in 1/3 of games, despite being the BEST EU player according to WR they still can't carry a team in 1/3 of their matches, which makes sense to me but apparently confuses "Team WR is the best indicator of personal skill" folks.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
967 posts
8,984 battles

Keeping the star crap is already fricking up ranked gameplay... I don't wish the same for the already fricked up randoms. You must play for the win, not for being on top of the losing side....

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,207 posts
14,924 battles
15 minutes ago, IanH755 said:

My own opinion is that a personal WR in a randomly picked team-based game is fairly worthless as a personal skill marker. Even the best players in the game, when playing Solo, will still lose often (around 33% of games - less if a CV main) because there is only so much 1 single player can do when teamed with 11 bad players against a team of 12 "competent" ones, as the lack of skill in the 11 bad players can't be fully compensated for by the extra skill in the 1 super-unicum player.

 

Even the player (still playing today & with over 1000 games) with the best WR on the EU server - El2aZeR - only has a 71% WR because they're a CV main, with CV stats taken away their WR drops to <63% so in 1/3 of games, despite being the BEST EU player according to WR they still can't carry a team in 1/3 of their matches, which makes sense to me but apparently confuses "Team WR is the best indicator of personal skill" folks.

And is he better than a 50% WR player or worse?

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
3,542 posts
9,549 battles

Any single stat that is looked at without looking at the rest is meaningless. The closest thing to a proper stat we have is PR as it measures three different stats (wr, damage, kills), but even then, PR is flawed. One of my friends for example has a horrible PR even though he's a decent player, simply because he doesn't have a lot of kills per match. In order to get a better skill measuring stat, that stat would have to take into account when matches were played in a div and when solo. It would then have to calculate the average impact that divs have on other stats and take that into account. If one was winning far more in a div for example, it would have to make the end number a bit lower and the opposite for if one was losing more in a div in order to get an correct solo value. And yes, that stat would be improved if it took into account the average place the player lands on at the end of the match, but only in combination with WR as a player that is on top of the scoreboard all the time but loses very often because they are useless to the team, should not be shown as being good.

 

TL:DR

What you're proposing is just as useless as looking just at WR. The only way to check if someone is good or bad is by looking at as many stats combined as you can.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,019 posts
46 minutes ago, domen3 said:

Any single stat that is looked at without looking at the rest is meaningless. The closest thing to a proper stat we have is PR as it measures three different stats (wr, damage, kills), but even then, PR is flawed. One of my friends for example has a horrible PR even though he's a decent player, simply because he doesn't have a lot of kills per match. In order to get a better skill measuring stat, that stat would have to take into account when matches were played in a div and when solo. It would then have to calculate the average impact that divs have on other stats and take that into account. If one was winning far more in a div for example, it would have to make the end number a bit lower and the opposite for if one was losing more in a div in order to get an correct solo value. And yes, that stat would be improved if it took into account the average place the player lands on at the end of the match, but only in combination with WR as a player that is on top of the scoreboard all the time but loses very often because they are useless to the team, should not be shown as being good.

 

TL:DR

What you're proposing is just as useless as looking just at WR. The only way to check if someone is good or bad is by looking at as many stats combined as you can.

Very good, should have been implemented years ago along with a non cheating MM. Most people have moved on now and probably doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
2,633 posts
10,284 battles
4 hours ago, rimmer_the said:

wr is quite malleable by playing at night, whaling, divisioning, stacking mod packs, and so on

black-man-with-question-marks-wtf-meme-does-not-understand-nigga.jpg.5a8f52c68863c1403442ab60ccb72598.jpg

Please tell me how to increase winrate with stacking mod packs. Right now this is a claim without proof. As is playing at night. As is whaling. Those things do not influence wr whatsoever. 

7 minutes ago, lossi_2018 said:

Very good, should have been implemented years ago along with a non cheating MM.

Non cheating mm? I'm assuming you're meaning no divisions, mister division hater? 

6 hours ago, citaDELer said:

it counts team quality, no personal

Not if you look at solo winrate, such as in ranked. And quite frankly I've seen you many times in ranked, more often than not you played abysmally and blamed the team. 

 

6 hours ago, citaDELer said:

example: player loses 10 battles in which he was 1st place in the list.

This is a statistical outlier. Ask El2 how many times he lost ten games in a row. Probably never. So don't claim it is the norm.... It's not. 

6 hours ago, citaDELer said:

skill-winrate means, that when you are in 1 place on the list, of defeated team, it will be counted like winn in your stat.

"Skill" winrate? You mean damage farm from the back while your team dies-winrate? It's stupid. Do you want people to camp and spam he? Because this is how you get people to camp and spam he. Just look at @DFens_666s thread in @159Hunter's post above. Is that player "skilled"? No, he is abysmal. Yet he is first of the team. 

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
11,102 posts
9,497 battles
2 hours ago, IanH755 said:

My own opinion is that a personal WR in a randomly picked team-based game is fairly worthless as a personal skill marker. Even the best players in the game, when playing Solo, will still lose often (around 33% of games - less if a CV main) because there is only so much 1 single player can do when teamed with 11 bad players against a team of 12 "competent" ones, as the lack of skill in the 11 bad players can't be fully compensated for by the extra skill in the 1 super-unicum player.

 

Even the player (still playing today & with over 1000 games) with the best WR on the EU server - El2aZeR - only has a 71% WR because they're a CV main, with CV stats taken away their WR drops to <63% so in 1/3 of games, despite being the BEST EU player according to WR they still can't carry a team in 1/3 of their matches, which makes sense to me but apparently confuses "Team WR is the best indicator of personal skill" folks.

 

But you actually did prove yourself wrong there.

If noone has a higher solo WR, doesnt that mean, he is a very skilled player, within the ships he is playing?

Personal skill is not 0 or 1. You are not only skilled if you have 100% WR, vice versa you are not only unskilled if you have 0% WR. The min-max value for WR is somewhere ranging from ~25% to ~82%. Worst Midway ive seen has 26% Solo, and @El2aZeR has 81% in his Enty solo. All other ships are somewhere in between, CVs are clearly the outlier.

Winning 100% is impossible in a 12v12 with the ships we currently have. Even 3 people cant win 100%. I think the highest ive seen was >94% in the old Hiryu 3x div. And T1 players get >90%.

 

If someone has the highest solo WR with a reasonable amount of games in a certain ship, that most likely means he is the most skilled player in that ship. Ofc this is getting a bit inaccurate since those stats include up to 5 years now with different metas and an ever growing number of ships.

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,729 posts
18,026 battles
Vor 5 Stunden, rimmer_the sagte:

Its just that the fact that the ego of many players leans so heavily on their team wr, they refuse to accept facts to the contrary, or even want to censor this truth, like @johnny_moneto.

 

LOL. Really, use the search function. The topic was discussed at great length. Opinions and points of view were exchanged in detail. And WR is nothing that makes or breaks the game like some of the bugs currently present in this game.

This thread is just a redundant copy of last month's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,464 posts
20,571 battles
8 hours ago, citaDELer said:

skill-winrate means, that when you are in 1 place on the list, of defeated team, it will be counted like winn in your stat.

its a matematical absurdity  , but it starts to show the PURPOSE ! !!!

 

Except you can place first in the team despite being completely worthless.

Stop blaming your terrible performance on anything but yourself.

 

6 hours ago, rimmer_the said:

You can be, wr is quite malleable by playing at night, whaling, divisioning, stacking mod packs, and so on.

 

Playing at night has no influence over WR because average playerbase skill is universally terrible, meaning you will meet terrible players regardless of the time of day.

The amount of money you spend has no influence over WR. At best it can provide you with a better ship, but that has absolutely no use to you if you're not skilled enough to use it aka it increases the WR ceiling, it does not lower the floor.

You can filter for solo WR.

Mods show you nothing that you cannot gain with skill. Unless you're outright cheating ofc which is in violation of the rules.

 

2 hours ago, IanH755 said:

My own opinion is that a personal WR in a randomly picked team-based game is fairly worthless as a personal skill marker.

 

Then your opinion is simply wrong.

Simple truth is WR is an accurate measurement of your own skill assuming a sufficient sample size. This is because in random MM the amount of matches you will win or lose by default eventually evens out, leaving the matches you could have influenced to a win or loss and thus giving you a higher or lower WR. The distribution goes something like this (not accurate values obviously):

- 20% default loss
- 5% super unicum hard carry
- 10% unicum carry
- 15% carry
- 15% decent contribution
- 10% just need to not be incompetent
- 5% basically just don't be afk
- 20% default win

 

In addition to that if WR were to be completely random then the probability of getting a good or bad WR purely by chance is astronomical as outlined here:

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/76406-win-rate-and-luck/

 

So whether you like it or not, the WR in your individual ships is representative of your skill if you have more than a few matches played in them.

  • Cool 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,290 posts
19,976 battles
6 hours ago, rimmer_the said:

Does that mean my wr should be over 50% ? No, as I don't put in the effort inflating it just to put on a veneer, or to get into a wr circlejerk clan. 

You can get well over 50% without doing any of this. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
249 posts
16,847 battles
4 hours ago, IanH755 said:

My own opinion is that a personal WR in a randomly picked team-based game is fairly worthless as a personal skill marker. Even the best players in the game, when playing Solo, will still lose often (around 33% of games - less if a CV main) because there is only so much 1 single player can do when teamed with 11 bad players against a team of 12 "competent" ones, as the lack of skill in the 11 bad players can't be fully compensated for by the extra skill in the 1 super-unicum player.

 

Even the player (still playing today & with over 1000 games) with the best WR on the EU server - El2aZeR - only has a 71% WR because they're a CV main, with CV stats taken away their WR drops to <63% so in 1/3 of games, despite being the BEST EU player according to WR they still can't carry a team in 1/3 of their matches, which makes sense to me but apparently confuses "Team WR is the best indicator of personal skill" folks.

This argument makes no sense to me.

WoWs is complex enough that even excellent players can lose about 1/3 of Random games. That doesn't mean that winrate, or other stats, are faulty.

Take chess: even the best players in the world draw a ton of games against inferior (obviously, not too inferior) competition. And they occasionally lose. And that's a 1v1 game with perfect information on both sides. WoWs is a 12v12 game most of the time, and enemies can surprise you.

Solo WR, at least at high tiers and with some variety of ships, remains by far the best metric of a player's skill, imho.

 

What's worthless, if anything, is the skill of non-randomly picked teams, i.e. when people play in divisions a lot, with friends either below or above 50%. If some guys is 52% solo and 58% in a div, is it because his div buddies are also good and they reinforce each other, or because he's stopped playing solo and is now playing only div, so his overall improvement in the game, which comes from experience, is correlated to playing in a div, but not entirely caused by it? It's complicated...

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,531 posts
14,236 battles
6 hours ago, Hades_warrior said:

Thats why we have a more appropriate meassure of someone skill, and that is PR (personal rating).

PR isn't even a close representation of skill.

 

WR is far more accurate in marking  a players skill. But like all stats. Needs to be looked into at a detailed level.

 

Have fun breaking this account down and accusing them of "Div'ing" for wins. Or just playing "CV's" or just using "OP Premiums".

 

https://na.wows-numbers.com/player/1036458028,Vasili_One_Bonk_only/?

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×