ranked battles over rated, and Beta will be here for many years.

[Kenliero]

With time, all winrates should settle to the middle, and only ranks change, right?

 

isn't it the purpose of this system, to make everyone play with equal players, which means in theory, you should get no more wins than losses? Eventually it should be balanced by players of equal skill and go exactly 50/50, if there wouldn't be any draws....

 

So... do we all end up with 45-47% winrates in the end, while it is the ranks that actually tell the skill level, instead of winrate?

[Sake78]

 

Sorry but those fluctuations you're wanting to rule out are actually part of normal statistical occurrences/results 

Maybe I wasn`t clear enough, for which I appologise. I was talking more about small or "manageable" fluctuations.

 

You still want player 1 from both cases, and the fluctuations will be closer to the "mean", ala 1.5 - 2.5 rather than 0 - 4 (so, my "bell" or "curve" will be taller / tighter), or 50k - 90k rather than 0k - 140k. 

 

The logic behind it is you want someone you can depend in all your games, "to pull his weight", not only in half of them, which will be a gamble at best. Any profi game boils down to mathematics - how to deplete enemy HP before mine. And that excludes gambling and promotes rock solid consistency, based on whatever target each team sets.

 

So... do we all end up with 45-47% winrates in the end, while it is the ranks that actually tell the skill level, instead of winrate?

Finally someone that gets it. Skill MM will always push everyone to 50% over long enough games. Sure, it is not everyone, but a significantly higher number will gravitate around 45 - 55% than actual random games - also fewer out of those averages.

 

[Siagor]

Finally someone that gets it. Skill MM will always push everyone to 50% over long enough games. Sure, it is not everyone, but a significantly higher number will gravitate around 45 - 55% than actual random games - also fewer out of those averages.

 

Exactly.

 

Ranked battles could be a major shift in bragging rights here. "Yes, I'm 50% winrate, but look at my Rank".

[Admiral_noodle]

 

 

Exactly.

 

Ranked battles could be a major shift in bragging rights here. "Yes, I'm 50% winrate, but look at my Rank".

 

Given how win rate works and how this mode works I think that's exactly the point. 

[Tugnut]

You do know that most xvm haters are the great players..... when you can see a players worth on screen before the game gets going they are a target.... must kill the guy with 70% wr first and the rest will crumble.  So the good players and in wows would be even harder for them to hide in battle due to cv dd ect.

 

And thats why i agree with there should be no mod xvm in game.  And no not because i am a great player as i am definitely not.. but not fair on players that are good to be singled out before the game is even started.

[Siagor]

 

Given how win rate works and how this mode works I think that's exactly the point. 

 

 

Which opens one interesting question:

 

for Ranked battles to succeed (enough players on all Ranks, no waiting time) the best players must accept their winrate will fall from, say 60% to 52-55%, even 51% on the top rank. Will they be willing?

 

[Sake78]

Which opens one interesting question:

 

for Ranked battles to succeed (enough players on all Ranks, no waiting time) the best players must accept their winrate will fall from, say 60% to 52-55%, even 51% on the top rank. Will they be willing?

 

In ranked . Nothing stopping them to "sealclub" randoms like before. Because fewer will have "unicum" win rates, fewer in general will have higher win rates overall, but it will really depend strictly on how many random gaves versus how many ranked games they have. Win Rate is not a reliable statistic anyway, so it shouldn`t matter too much.

 

I also think that being high rank is well worth the drop in WR. You are trading useless statistics for real rewards and "bragging rights", as they are more than just "yeah, but you played 100 games in the *insert OP ship name*".

[fnord_disc]

All these people arguing against Ranked don't really understand how statistics and large datasets work.

[Admiral_noodle]

All these people arguing against Ranked don't really understand how statistics and large datasets work.

 

It's the same in random when discussing win rate or how much they lose... Not just ranked

[varis]

The list goes on and on. simple fact is. this game will never have its released title, not until the dev team finishes work on it. and we all know comign from WOT, that even now WOT isnt out of beta. not while tech trees are added, missions and modes are being added. All of which means balancing.

WOWS has yet to implement Royal navy / russian / german and many more tech tree's.

we know the cruisers are getting a second tech tree line.

 

simple fact is wargaming is in denial to think somehow this game is release material, when quite clearly this game is no where near.

 

You mix dead and released, but I agree that the game was released a few months too early.

[Admiral_noodle]

This whole "release" thing is spurious. The game has been "released" in OBT. New content balancing and tweaking will go on for years (and that's good!).

 

It's much better this way. I don't want the game to be "finished" and never developed. Saying its "not ready" for release is daft. It was released as soon as it was out of alpha in reality!

 

Much fuss over a word. Can we just have a game which gets looked after?

[FredKarno]

All these people arguing against Ranked don't really understand how statistics and large datasets work.

 

I'd dearly like to understand more about how statistics and chance impinge on rank, win rates etc, but I don't. GronAkon's post above is useful and interesting though.

 

Sadly, for me, the subjective truth is that I'm not enjoying ranked battles much at all. I don't think I've ever tried harder to like and enjoy a game more than this one. I'd dearly like to feel rewarded for effort and to some extent skill, tactical as well as just pixel-pointing, but it's proving very difficult.

 

I'd like to obtain some reward from all my gaming time, reward just being a feeling of accomplishment and enjoyment I suppose, but I'm beginning to understand that I can only feel that around half the time in this game. Half my gaming time is too precious to sacrifice to the gods of chance and statistics.

 

Septic.

[RepSrb]

there is nothing out of ordinary to understand, it shows in first post in first 2 graphs  http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/27867-snapshot-stats-of-the-eu-server/

sure they are left and bottom heavy ,but as people progress more trough tiers it will become more mid ranged and elyptical ...

 

there is no need to bring out schroedingers cat or smthing there is law of symetry- if there is a very good player on 1 side-> probably there is another one on the enemy side...

sure only 1 may win -but his HP would be weak and other players would finish him off.

also people skill progreses trough tiers so some may learn allot and  become much better, while some who wee good might stagnate.