Which Stats are Indicative of a Good Player?

[DaBung]

I have seen a lot of different opinions on this, how do you tell apart a good player from an bad one stats wise? I am talking more about the average players, not extreme ends of the spectrum such as unicums or complete noobs. 
 

For example: 

I have 50% winnrate, with it being a fair bit better on my favourite (and more recent) ships. Hindenburg I think is 71% or something like that. Is this good? Considering the Hindy stat is over only 26 games. My survival rate is also quite bad apparently (though I can’t find where this is), which does not surprise me as a offensive minded play style, however this pushing mindset also can lead to a bigger contribution to winning. 
 

Anyway, just interest what opinions are on things like this. 

[MadBadDave]

5 minutes ago, DaBung said:

I have seen a lot of different opinions on this, how do you tell apart a good player from an bad one stats wise? I am talking more about the average players, not extreme ends of the spectrum such as unicums or complete noobs. 
 

For example: 

I have 50% winnrate, with it being a fair bit better on my favourite (and more recent) ships. Hindenburg I think is 71% or something like that. Is this good? Considering the Hindy stat is over only 26 games. My survival rate is also quite bad apparently (though I can’t find where this is), which does not surprise me as a offensive minded play style, however this pushing mindset also can lead to a bigger contribution to winning. 
 

Anyway, just interest what opinions are on things like this. 

It should be about playing the game but the stat obsessed Russians just love us dwelling on our Win Rates.

 

I used to be sub 48% and then with practice and better ships that went above 50%,  however since the lockdowns and cack handed captain skills rework I see more losses than wins,  it’s a team game and like many I’ve carried games and got sweet fa because of useless idiots, which harms my WR, it’s a team game so how the F should I be held individually accountable when 11 others have an input into the win or lose result ?.  
 

It’s like the scoreboard how many times have you been the best player in the game and yet because your team was a bunch of idiots an equally clueless fence sitter on the winning team ends up with more xp and cash than you ?.

 

Its like saying dear striker it’s your fault you only scored 4 and lost your 10 colleagues had zero impact, btw the red defender who scored 3 own goals gets more rewards than you .

[bobtherterrible]

The thing with stats is that one bit of it on its own doesn't tell you much

 

71% on the hindy isn't bad, but over 26 games is not really terribly meaningful.

 

for example, here's my amazing performance on the Hawkins

 

looks good, right? Over 51 games so a reasonable sample......

 

Actually no it's just pure luck

 

 

if you're getting a good win rate and you have high PR and high damage, chances are that the high win rate is at least in part down to your performance.

Personally I'm just happy to be improving all the time.

[ColonelPete]

35 minutes ago, DaBung said:

Which Stats are Indicative of a Good Player?

Solo winrate after at least a 1000 matches. Preferably in many different ships.

 

[MementoMori_6030]

Imho you are good when you are overall kachi-koshi (勝ち越し), which means that you have more wins than losses.

[principat121]

4 minutes ago, MementoMori_6030 said:

Imho you are good when you are overall kachi-koshi (勝ち越し), which means that you have more wins than losses.

And achieving 32-33 or more wins in 45 matches will grant you most likely a memberschip in the OBSC, right?.

[Flosedus]

I also think that Winrate is the best indicator. A bit weighted by ship maybe since they impact average winrate slightly different. 

 

PR can be misleading I guess. For example in my Hindenburg I have this

 

Indicating that I am able to reasonably farm with that ship while being useless for the team...

[SV_Kompresor]

All of them if you look deep enough, none of them if you don't.

[Hirohito]

Solo win rate with a decent sample size is the only semi-useful individual stat.

PR by itself is not a good metric as it's too heavily based on damage, which can be manipulated in all the wrong ways (fire spam on multiple BBs especially).

If you combine high WR with high PR however, that is usually a very good indicator.

 

However, also ask yourself what a "good player" even is. Some super unicums for instance only play to up their PR/damage through artificial means, by trying to prolong the game by letting the enemy team catch back up (letting them have a cap for free/ignoring a free cap, or let BBs get away to heal up), so that the game drags on for longer where they get to score more damage.

Personally I absolutely detest such a playstyle as it can compromise a win (I personally only play for the win, not for damage) but that's how things are unfortunately.

Different people, different prirorities.

[Prophecy82]

1 hour ago, principat121 said:

OBSC

Oral-B Sonic Complete (toothbrush) ??? 

Open Bible Standard Church ?????

????? 

 

[principat121]

in the context about OBSC means: Ozeki Back Scratchers Club

[MrWastee]

1 hour ago, SV_Kompresor said:

All of them if you look deep enough, none of them if you don't.

24 minutes ago, principat121 said:

[...] context [...]

dear op, within all this thread this is ur simple answer. stats mean nothing without context or relationship to other stats/factors/players. that being said, the progression itself in terms of single stats (regarding former marks of that stat) and in relation to each other is where one eye belongs. simply to check if one improves in the long, or not.

 

2cts

[triumphgt6]

PR is probably the best though likely a mixture of WR, DMG and PR really. I have an OK win rate but I play OP ships. 

[Nibenay78]

My opinion:

High winrate and decent damageoutput usually means said player in general is doing something useful so he wins more than average. 

 

Low number of battles makes the numbers less relevant as you get a higher possible deviation due to randomness.

[El2aZeR]

Solo WR in mid-high tiers over a large sample size of matches played is usually the best indicator.

[tocqueville8]

3 hours ago, DaBung said:

My survival rate is also quite bad apparently

Survival rate is pretty meaningless imho.

 

If you're winning easily, you can often trade your ship for more xp+credits without comproming your team's changes in any meaningful way. In fact, the better players might sink *more* often during easy wins, as they'll be right where it matters, not lagging 8 km behind.

 

Likewise, if you're losing horribly, surviving longer won't necessarily give your team a better shot at winning: if you want to take a gamble to turn it around, it might be better to do it sooner than later, before the point situation is too compromised.

 

Imho, good players win games. At high tiers. Even solo. Not necessarily with the most "meta" ship of the month.

[Senaika]

Any player that play while only looking at the mini map is a good player ;)

 

The best way to figure out how good a player is, it's actually in-game directly. How he position himself, how he adapt to the team strategy, the choices he makes.

 

Otherwise, here are the stats I like to look at to figure out the level of a player:

- average damage per battle

- accuracy with primary gun

- survivability rate

- number of ships played: the more he played, the more he knows about the weak/strong point of every ships. I rather have an average experienced player in my team rather than a new player with good skills

- number of battles per tier: being good at T5 doesn't mean you will be good at T10

- PR

- win rate

 

[Miscommunication_dept]

Most money spent on game?

 

The best players have Yoshino black and ARP Yamato 

[Verblonde]

4 hours ago, DaBung said:

Anyway, just interest what opinions are on things like this. 

WR with a big enough data-set, but be mindful of the context (which tiers/ships are people playing etc.).

 

On average, a better player will have a higher WR over a large enough number of battles than a less good player, all things being equal.

 

I tend to take the view that stats are only useful if they are giving you information with which to benchmark/improve (and possibly inform e.g. if I'm, say, rubbish in BBs should I buy that new expensive premium?); I do keep an eye on what my WR is doing (and in which ships), but it's mainly because I aim to try and suck marginally less as I progress...

[Verblonde]

6 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

The best players have Yoshino black and ARP Yamato

Ooo, this is good news: I have one of those, so I score 50% - better than my WR!

 

[ColonelPete]

43 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Most money spent on game?

 

The best players have Yoshino black and ARP Yamato 

That must be the reason that the average ARP Yamato performs better than the average Yamato...

[Molly_Delaney]

WinRate in Ranked 1v1....

[Captn_Crap]

1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

Solo WR in mid-high tiers over a large sample size of matches played is usually the best indicator.

This, but i would also try to look at recent stats if available and check if the WR is heavily influenced by CV play or a high number of battles in overperforming ships.

[arquata2019_]

2 minuti fa, Captn_Crap ha scritto:

This, but i would also try to look at recent stats if available and check if the WR is heavily influenced by CV play or a high number of battles in over-performing ships.

Basically me
Take a look at my general stats (leveling up a 46% WR from the start of 2020) and then at my recent ones

Am i good? lul

For real now, that & what El2 said.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

Personally i only consider solo wr and avg. ships killed to be a usefull metric to see how I am doing lately. Partially also survival rate since I play the lower damage utility classes mostly (dd and ca/cl), which can be cruicial late game.

 

Im a true 58 percenter. This includes learning the game, playing carelessly for long periods of time, grinding everything including the shitty stock versions without premium for ages and getting better at tactics the last 2-3 years.

 

When looking at recent stats for individual ships i only consider 60-100 matches per ship to be somewhat representative to my understanding of it.