It's Official. EU Players are the WORST in the world! :D

[Sir_Sinksalot]

First of all WAAAAHAHAHAHA!!

 

 

Wow... ok now that that's out of the way.

 

What's this based on? Well, at least so far as average damage dealing is concerned. 

 

I made this hilarious discovery while sifting through win rates and damage dealing averages of higher tier cruisers as I tried to ascertain some rough insight into what nation and type of cruisers were winning the most and dealing the most damage. Now obviously the winrate doesn't factor because that's based on the playerbase contained within each server against themselves and not other servers. I know that's the same deal for damage dealing in ways, BUT, these are the exact same ships, same type of random battles, same number of players per battles, same time available in each battle, same maps(I think!) and so what players are averaging for damage pre battle with the exact same ships and rules can be seen as one servers players are simply averaging higher amounts of damage per battle than what the players from another server can manage with the exact same ships.

 

The ships order of damage dealing on each server will be mostly the same order on all servers apart from some regional ship bias that might have a few Russian ships feature differently on Russian servers and a few Asian ships feature differently on Asian servers but mostly the same otherwise. Surely if one server of players are managing more damage per battle with the exact same ships that means they're on average, better players? Or can it mean something else? They're all damage farmers lol?

 

Well, these were the results I discovered so far and I compared servers with BB's too and the order of damage dealing outcome was the same again.

 

1st - Asia

2nd - RU

3rd - NA

4th - EU

It must be noted that NA and EU are very close and RU aren't that much higher.

 

Come on guys!! :P Also, I don't know what that damage dealing difference actually means in truth but thought I'd add a bit of fun to a Friday evening. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

25 minutes ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

Surely if one server of players are managing more damage per battle with the exact same ships that means they're on average, better players?

Since there is a fixed damagepool per match (kind of, healing is less of a fixed number), it could mean other ship/players are dealing less damage per battle maybe on average as well on the Asia server compared to EU f.e.? Maybe the skillgap on the EU server is smaller and damage per match more evenly distributed among players?

[Bear__Necessities]

SEA has a LOT more CV players in a smaller server. That skews it already. EU has the larger population, if not largest. So far more spread between the players. 

[Hirohito]

The data could also mean that EU has more BB and/or better BB players, even statistical flukes if the difference isn't statistically significant.
Curious though, how big is the difference between regions?

[INDIFFERENT_M_PATRICK]

It's not fair to just compare average damage.
Compare Europe and Asia:
European servers have more DDs, 3-4 on average, compared to 2 in Asia. As a result, total HP volume decreases.
The game duration of a game on the European server is shorter. European players are closer in combat than Asian players, resulting in faster matches. The first blood usually appear about 5 minutes in Europe and about 8 minutes in Asia after game's beginning. The longer the game, the more times you can heal.

Every server is equal and they all have their own characteristics.

[Verblonde]

FWIW I play regularly on both NA and EU servers, and my impression is that the players on the NA server are worse, or at least certainly more passive (they're also - I feel - more keen on CVs). Some notes though:

• I play mostly DDs in 'proper' game modes, so that colours my impressions and expectations. The NA players - on average - are noticeably more passive/prone to hiding than the EU seem to be.
• For obvious reasons, I tend to play on EU at more antisocial hours than I do on the NA server; so, it could just be that I see more 'average' players (as opposed to 'enthusiasts', for want of a better expression) on the latter.
• Although by no means universal, there seems to be a better connection on the EU between the 'points of the spear' and their support, compared to the US.
• I'm not very good, so tend not to be able to hard-carry like many on here can; as a result, I'm perhaps over-sensitive to having to play 'army of one'...

I don't know if/how this coincides with the impressions of competent multi-server players?

[ColonelPete]

Skill comparison based on average damage?

So when players are smarter and focus more DD or just face more DD on average, they are less skilled

 

[Estaca_de_Bares]

2 hours ago, irondaba said:

It's not fair to just compare average damage.
Compare Europe and Asia:
European servers have more DDs, 3-4 on average, compared to 2 in Asia. As a result, total HP volume decreases.
The game duration of a game on the European server is shorter. European players are closer in combat than Asian players, resulting in faster matches. The first blood usually appear about 5 minutes in Europe and about 8 minutes in Asia after game's beginning. The longer the game, the more times you can heal.

Every server is equal and they all have their own characteristics.

Even if we leave aside the matter of the healthpools, more DDs means average players being more conscious of their influence, thus focusing them more, dying faster and getting the snowball effect of the big guys on the team that lost them running away like headless chickens, giving away the caps, so less time for farming.

 

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

So when players are smarter and focus more DD or just face more DD on average, they are less skilled

Yep, I'm an utter potato for playing radar Minotaur, killing my natural preys and avoiding being seen by the bigger fish. I should switch to smoke and just rain shells on the most conspicuous targets, that will make me an unicum.

 

Salute.

 

[Aethervoxx]

Who here plays on all four of these Servers? There are some general conclusions one may make according to the public data referred to.

As to which server has the worst players - how can this be answered unless one simply looks at the worst players on all the servers. I'd say all servers would have players that should not be playing at all.

Ofc, in interest of full disclosure, I'm on that meaty part of the bell curve (48% WR) so is that average (or slightly below average)?

I'm told by the troll stat shamers here (two that I know of whom have already posted in this thread) that I'm actually worse than average.

I play aggressively or more aggressive than I probably should & it's quite incredible, really, how many players on the teams I see who do worse than me. Plenty of potatoes even more fried than me.

As to my overall impression of the two servers I play on (EU & NA) - I'd say NA has to have the worse players (I have a 51% WR there - where I already had learnt the basics hence might explain the slightly better WR).

[General_Alexus]

Wasnt there serverwide KOTS turnaments? I havnt watched them and dont know the results, but I kinda can remember that the european teams dominated (correct me if I am wrong)?

Higher DD population on EU server also is a sign that we play more competetively.

[ColonelPete]

1 minute ago, General_Alexus said:

Wasnt there serverwide KOTS turnaments? I havnt watched them and dont know the results, but I kinda can remember that the european teams dominated (correct me if I am wrong)?

Higher DD population on EU server also is a sign that we play more competetively.

These tournaments are played by a tiny amount of players of each server and do not say anything about the general skill level.

These tournaments also had changing results over the years. In some the EU teams did not look that good.

[Bear__Necessities]

10 minutes ago, General_Alexus said:

Wasnt there serverwide KOTS turnaments? I havnt watched them and dont know the results, but I kinda can remember that the european teams dominated (correct me if I am wrong)?

Higher DD population on EU server also is a sign that we play more competetively.

And there have been stretches where NA teams dominated for a stretch and SEA teams. KOT's does not equate to overall player skills on the servers. 

[Trench4nt]

Okay: first of all, I see a wall of text talking about statistics without presenting numbers. 

 

Secondly, from a pure statistical point of view, three things come to my mind, on which you should present numbers before laughing:

 

1. Due to the match maker, a region prefers to play DDs or Cruisers (lower health pool) over BBs.

2. A region prefers to play ships with higher hit pools within each class (The Russians love Mr. Kremlin, the British Mrs. Conqueror).

3. A region loves to win via capture points and not by destroying ships. 

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

4 hours ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

First of all WAAAAHAHAHAHA!!

 

 

Wow... ok now that that's out of the way.

 

What's this based on? Well, at least so far as average damage dealing is concerned. 

 

I made this hilarious discovery while sifting through win rates and damage dealing averages of higher tier cruisers as I tried to ascertain some rough insight into what nation and type of cruisers were winning the most and dealing the most damage. Now obviously the winrate doesn't factor because that's based on the playerbase contained within each server against themselves and not other servers. I know that's the same deal for damage dealing in ways, BUT, these are the exact same ships, same type of random battles, same number of players per battles, same time available in each battle, same maps(I think!) and so what players are averaging for damage pre battle with the exact same ships and rules can be seen as one servers players are simply averaging higher amounts of damage per battle than what the players from another server can manage with the exact same ships.

 

The ships order of damage dealing on each server will be mostly the same order on all servers apart from some regional ship bias that might have a few Russian ships feature differently on Russian servers and a few Asian ships feature differently on Asian servers but mostly the same otherwise. Surely if one server of players are managing more damage per battle with the exact same ships that means they're on average, better players? Or can it mean something else? They're all damage farmers lol?

 

Well, these were the results I discovered so far and I compared servers with BB's too and the order of damage dealing outcome was the same again.

 

1st - Asia

2nd - RU

3rd - NA

4th - EU

It must be noted that NA and EU are very close and RU aren't that much higher.

 

Come on guys!! :P Also, I don't know what that damage dealing difference actually means in truth but thought I'd add a bit of fun to a Friday evening. 

After playing brawl with half of the players being sub 42% WR I can confirm.

[Yedwy]

Well seeing the amount of useless tu*ds floating around in Randoms I guess the OP conclusion might be spot on...

[General_Alexus]

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

These tournaments are played by a tiny amount of players of each server and do not say anything about the general skill level.

These tournaments also had changing results over the years. In some the EU teams did not look that good.

Yeah, as I said I dont remember every KOTS. That beeing said, looking at the Top players is also an indication of the overall skilllevel as this is what thouse players train with.

I didnt came up with the topic, but if I would need to answer it/give a method of deciding what server has the stronger playerbase, I would say we look at players who played similar amout of time and matches on different servers and see what the difference in winrate is on thouse servers. That gives a good approximation (aka somebody is Top 10% in EU and Top5% in US would mean EU is more competetive)

 

Ofc there are issues like ping difference and different low playercount with multiple accounts that add uncertaincy to the results.

[ColonelPete]

16 minutes ago, General_Alexus said:

Yeah, as I said I dont remember every KOTS. That beeing said, looking at the Top players is also an indication of the overall skilllevel as this is what thouse players train with.

No, it is not, as explained.

[DDMafiaAssociateMember]

EU has a larger population. That is why we're winning KOTS more as of late; there are simply more competitive clans on EU.

 

All the servers are largely the same skill wise, the only difference is in culture, that is, EU and CIS like to get stuck in and play aggro, SEA humps the map border and NA is somewhere in the middle.

[General_Alexus]

Just now, ColonelPete said:

No, it is not, as explained.

In fact it is, Top-Starcraftplayers from Europe are known to play on Korean servers because they want to train with the best. The Korean top players (who beat most of europe for years) had the innate advantage of having better training because they could play on the korean servers with harder competition. A tiny difference in the mean of the standartdistribution (of each server) makes a huge difference in the edge of the distribution (thouse are the top players compeating in turnaments)

[Andrewbassg]

5 hours ago, Verblonde said:

FWIW I play regularly on both NA and EU servers, and my impression is that the players on the NA server are worse, or at least certainly more passive (they're also - I feel - more keen on CVs). Some notes though:

• I play mostly DDs in 'proper' game modes, so that colours my impressions and expectations. The NA players - on average - are noticeably more passive/prone to hiding than the EU seem to be.
• For obvious reasons, I tend to play on EU at more antisocial hours than I do on the NA server; so, it could just be that I see more 'average' players (as opposed to 'enthusiasts', for want of a better expression) on the latter.
• Although by no means universal, there seems to be a better connection on the EU between the 'points of the spear' and their support, compared to the US.
• I'm not very good, so tend not to be able to hard-carry like many on here can; as a result, I'm perhaps over-sensitive to having to play 'army of one'...

I don't know if/how this coincides with the impressions of competent multi-server players?

If I may to jump in a bit. There are quite numerous playstyle differences between  NA and EU. Eu tends  to be more self oriented and NA tends to be more cooperative  and a lets roll together kinda thing.

Also on NA timetable  is a key factor. The best play experience is usually at our early morning hours extending a bit to our noon  when the  container drop renew. Meaning 04 am to 12.00 .

Playing at our evening/late night  hours.....is an absolutely dreadful experience.

 

Still overall, there is a marked decline in player quality on NA.

[ColonelPete]

3 minutes ago, General_Alexus said:

In fact it is, Top-Starcraftplayers from Europe are known to play on Korean servers because they want to train with the best. The Korean top players (who beat most of europe for years) had the innate advantage of having better training because they could play on the korean servers with harder competition. A tiny difference in the mean of the standartdistribution (of each server) makes a huge difference in the edge of the distribution (thouse are the top players compeating in turnaments)

We are talking about WoWs.

The competitive crowd in Starcraft is MUCH bigger. We have too much variation in WoWs, unless you think that the quaterly changes of winners in these competitions reflect quarterly changes of average skill of the server population...

[General_Alexus]

13 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

We are talking about WoWs.

The competitive crowd in Starcraft is MUCH bigger. We have too much variation in WoWs, unless you think that the quaterly changes of winners in these competitions reflect quarterly changes of average skill of the server population...

What has size of the community to do with the argument? What is a fact for Starcraft is to some extent also a true for WOWS. Its just simply a fact that having better competition in training makes you better overall, why do you think elite schools are a thing in RL?

[ColonelPete]

11 minutes ago, General_Alexus said:

What has size of the community to do with the argument? What is a fact for Starcraft is to some extent also a true for WOWS. Its just simply a fact that having better competition in training makes you better overall, why do you think elite schools are a thing in RL?

You do not train with the whole community. The US has some of the best universities in the world, while the average education level is pretty low. How do they do that? They attract the best and brightest from all over the world and do not depend on their own scientists.

[Stockensprotz]

Well for everyone who deals a lot of damage there must be someone who TAKES a lot of damage. Damage does not appear out of thin air (unless a CV preys on you...) Is the second one a great player too?

 

Its the same logic that says "The average income in this reagion is blablabla, therefore it must be full of rich people" when in reality a just couple of millionaires skew the numbers a bit. Maybe you should not give us the average damage but the median damage?

[Gvozdika]

Alas my friends these comparisons are pointless. Allow Gvozdika to furnish you with a brief summary of each server (free from bias or prejudice - sort of). 

 

EU Server - biggest in terms of numbers of players (I believe?). All speaking different languages so co-ordination is somewhat dubious. However it is the best server because I am on it. 

 

NA Server - currently consisting of about 7 whales and possibly 1 or 2 people who accidentally logged onto the wrong game server by mistake. 

 

SEA Server - weird. They're all just weird. 

 

RU Server - a drunken maelstrom of chaos - a true cacophony of vodka, anti-freeze and RASHA STRONK. The playerbase isn't much better either.