no more stat shaming? [WR < 46% = plain bad]

[Sethirod]

is it correct that I can't be chat banned for calling player with a WR < 46% "plain bad"?

 

Please see from the World of Warship Official Channel on Youtube the newest video:

@12:19

 

I don't want to make the reference to "animal research", but it seems to me that the analytics department of WoWs has a quite ambivalent relation to their own rules.

But maybe it is just a translation issue....

[SV_Kompresor]

"Minimally eceptional"

[Ocsimano18]

An 55% WR player is much more skilled than a 45%WR guy, still they both lose about 5 games out of 10. I personally play to win and continuously improve my WR, but I don’t see it as an ultimate goal for everybody. Some are just out there for having fun while shooting stuff. These people complaining about bad players and doing ‘animal research’ might have good skills in this game, but have very bad people skills.

[Northern_Nightowl]

Vor 9 Minuten, Sethirod sagte:

is it correct that I can't be chat banned for calling player with a WR < 46% "plain bad"?

As per the rules, insults are to be avoided. As avoidance does not fully mean "forbidden" and, furthermore, any individual that does not manage to be better than winning more than 46 battles out of 100, can be called bad without having the facts wrong, I would say that's a harsh critic. But as long as you do not intend to attack the honour (cave: I'm German, in our laws, an insult, "Beleidigung", is a so-called "Ehrendelikt", meaning an infringement against someone's personal honour. So, I could very well make a weird language usage here, but I hope that you'll get the point nevertheless) of the opponent, you won't cross the border to an insult. Only if the context shows that the personality or something similar of the so denominated person is attacked, then you're likely guilty of insulting.

 

Regards, Nightowl

[Figment]

Stat shaming is more about a forum tactic of trying to shut someone's opinion down by simply pointing at their statistics. Though I think it's been expanded to even pointing out one might need some training at times. There's an overreaction here since if stats are properly mentioned to highlight how someone doesn't understand a specific gameplay element or unit, then that's IMO in the interest of a healthy discussion. Just as long as it is done constructively to teach, rather than to berate. Problem of course is that many people on the receiving end aren't capable of discerning the difference or handling critique, whereas those on the other side are often weary of talking to people who don't get things, but are adament they do get it.

 

It's a shame, but it's easier for mods to just ban the practice all together to keep personal attacks at a minimum, as even properly used stat analysis can lead to shaming and mocking off that person by others.

 

Lately I try to look at people's stats to evaluate their capacity level, in order to see how to approach that person in discussion, without outright mentioning their stats (unless they try to abuse my stats without checking, while theirs are much worse... That's an open invitation for hunting season).

 

20 minutes ago, Ocsimano18 said:

An 55% WR player is much more skilled than a 45%WR guy, still they both lose about 5 games out of 10. I personally play to win and continuously improve my WR, but I don’t see it as an ultimate goal for everybody. Some are just out there for having fun while shooting stuff. These people complaining about bad players and doing ‘animal research’ might have good skills in this game, but have very bad people skills.

I used to have 64% WR, but it's been sliding while being too stubbornly aggressive and going into overextensions for fun reason (attempting secondary battles for one). :)

[FooFaFie]

 

Seems accurate. And still I like this kind of players more than your standard BB-captain I-stay-In-the-back-until-it's-to-late.

[AkerJack]

I don't care about WR as I deem more important the PR. A player can loose but if he/she (and applies also to me) does everything in his/her possibilities and don't run away from battle or afk..then I don't care how many wins/losses he/she had in total...

[tocqueville8]

At 12:15 you see someone fidgeting with an all-black Rubik's cube.

Is that an anti-stress toy, or are WG employees the laziest Rubik's cube solvers on the planet?

[Padds01]

 

18 minutes ago, FieFaFoo said:

 

Seems accurate. And still I like this kind of players more than your standard BB-captain I-stay-In-the-back-until-it's-to-late.

omg hes like a  less attractive version of me

[Altsak]

11 minutes ago, Padds01 said:

 

omg hes like a  less attractive version of me

 

ooohhh, so you're a girl!

[Profilus]

41 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Is that an anti-stress toy, or are WG employees the laziest Rubik's cube solvers on the planet?

Its for <46 solvers

[BanzaiPiluso]

58 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

At 12:15 you see someone fidgeting with an all-black Rubik's cube.

Is that an anti-stress toy, or are WG employees the laziest Rubik's cube solvers on the planet?

My son removed all the stickers on a cube and "solved" it that way. I still have it as a reminder of his "genius". Little b*st*rd.

 

[Ze_Reckless]

2 hours ago, Sethirod said:

is it correct that I can't be chat banned for calling player with a WR < 46% "plain bad"?

If they sit in a CV you can call them plane bad.

[NewHorizons_1]

31 minutes ago, Ze_Reckless said:

If they sit in a CV you can call them plane bad.

 

[tocqueville8]

Just now, BanzaiPiluso said:

My son removed all the stickers on a cube and "solved" it that way. I still have it as a reminder of his "genius". Little b*st*rd.

That's too bad: you can use them to make some nice patterns, otherwise.

 

Learning to solve it the easy way takes one afternoon, at most...

[BanzaiPiluso]

58 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

That's too bad: you can use them to make some nice patterns, otherwise.

 

Learning to solve it the easy way takes one afternoon, at most...

He eventually got a real cube with no stickers and learnt how to solve it on Youtube.

 

[Lootboxer]

What can be said about whole team like this (T8 game)?

[Deckeru_Maiku]

3 hours ago, AkerJack said:

I don't care about WR as I deem more important the PR.

PR greatly depends on damage done.

WR depends on winning games.

PR doesn't take into account if that damage helped to win the battles (what I would consider the "main goal")

WR doesn't take into account how much you helped to win the battles, or if you got carried by the team.

 

Conclusion: both are in fact useless to determine the skill of a player

but (!) usually good players do more carrying themselves than being carried and therefor win more games. Sometimes without getting a great PR for those battles (due to flawed base for PR)

Therefore in the end WR is still the more valuable stat to check to determine a player's skill.

[CptBarney]

PR, WR, KDR, Survival rates, Types of ships played and number of battles played should give you a very good indicator of how a player will perform on average. And also maybe some prediction if they will get better or get worse or plateau. 

[Andrewbassg]

3 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

At 12:15 you see someone fidgeting with an all-black Rubik's cube.

And all that talent is put to...'good use".....

 

[Leo_Apollo11]

Hi all,

 

18 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

PR greatly depends on damage done.

WR depends on winning games.

PR doesn't take into account if that damage helped to win the battles (what I would consider the "main goal")

WR doesn't take into account how much you helped to win the battles, or if you got carried by the team.

 

Conclusion: both are in fact useless to determine the skill of a player

but (!) usually good players do more carrying themselves than being carried and therefor win more games. Sometimes without getting a great PR for those battles (due to flawed base for PR)

Therefore in the end WR is still the more valuable stat to check to determine a player's skill.

 

Hi all,

 

A Forumite @Armorin (he even created his own WoWs DataBase for tracking stats long ago as a personal project) wrote about PR calculation some time ago:

 

On 9/27/2018 at 12:31 AM, Armorin said:

I've been taking a closer look at the PR calculations from https://wows-numbers.com/personal/rating

 

For a balanced ship, assuming average 50% win ratio, greater than 35%  win rate is required to start accumulating PR points. 65% win rate creates a multiplier of 2. A 100% win rate would yield a maximum multiplier of 4.33. Obviously beating the odds in a UP ship with less than 50% WR will yield a better multiplier than in an OP ship with greater than 50% PR.

 

Damage requires greater than 40% average damage to start accumulating PR points. 50% greater than average damage yields a multiplier of 1.83. Double average damage yields a multiplier of 2.67. Triple average damage yields a 4.33 multiplier.

 

Kill frags requires greater than 10% average kill frags to start accumulating PR points. Taking the EU server average of 0.68 kill frags (it differs greatly between ships), This yields a 0.64 multiplier. Killing 2 ships gets a 3.16 multiplier, a kraken a mighty 8.06 multiplier.

 

A loss with below 40% average damage, but 2 kill frags obtained gets 948 PR points.

A loss with below 40% average damage, but a lucky kraken obtained gets 2418 PR points.

A loss with 50% greater average damage but no kill frags gets 1281 PR points.

A loss with double average damage but no kill frags gets 1869 PR points.

A loss with triple average damage but no kill frags gets 3031 PR points.

A win, but with below 40% average damage and no kill frags yields 650 PR points.

 

At 65% win rate, only 300 PR points are being obtained from winning. So damage farming and kill stealing really does rake in the PR figures. 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

[GermanBoomercaustEnjoyer]

13 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

...Survival rates..

The most useless stat around but ok - i guess i become a CV main now to farm that stat ))))

[CptBarney]

1 minute ago, Sir_Lawrence42 said:

The most useless stat around but ok - i guess i become a CV main now to farm that stat ))))

Reading is hard i guess. Imagine combining all those other stats to get a better picture. Then also too see what ships they play to determine what they are doing.

 

Amazing how you need to explain things to people still.

[GermanBoomercaustEnjoyer]

3 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

Reading is hard i guess. Imagine combining all those other stats to get a better picture. Then also too see what ships they play to determine what they are doing.

 

Amazing how you need to explain things to people still.

I did read what you wrote and still you named the most useless stat around - dont get all pissy if you mention it in the first place lmao - also with 240 games you seem to know what stats have weight it seems )))

[Andrewbassg]

56 minutes ago, Sir_Lawrence42 said:

also with 240 games you seem to know what stats have weight it seems )))

 

Oh buddy......You really don't know., do you......

 

And....

 

1 hour ago, Sir_Lawrence42 said:

The most useless stat around but ok - i guess i become a CV main now to farm that stat ))))

...its not useless. With other stats will tell a story. And also it is telling in analyzing classes and ships....