361 replies to this topic

[Kettingzaag]

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 03:47 AM, said:

Yep. Most of those 3/1 KDs with low win %. Are driving high tier vehicles and get their chance to blow up an occasional scout or two before being blown up by top tanks of opposing team.

That being said, show me one such player. With 3/1 KDS and 45% wr. I dare you.

Inb4 World of Tanks. W/L and K/D stats are a joke in that game.

[Gozer]

To be snarky, the win rate stat is only dreaded by those with poor win rates.

To be serious, I say bring on the stats! I love seeing how bad I am. I also find it creepy accurate at times when that "team probability" mod in WoT is used and says I'm a team with a 85% chance to win and we win, and when I'm on one with an 85% chance to lose and we lose. Weird how stats can sometimes predict outcomes.

[Meth0s]

To get over 60% winning rate, you pretty much have to regularly run with a team, either in the competitive matches or opens (opens with 2 other friends, you can do 60%, so if you play team games and have a good team, you can do a bit higher).

Stats are fun. They aren't the end-all-be-all. Having ladders and actual competitions are better. But stats give people an idea of they are improving or not, or what is working for them. For example, if they get stats on accuracy rates for each weapon, they can review those and see if they are shooting well.

As for stats being public/private, I think some stats should be public, but some could be private (such as the more detailed stats).

[ElKobold]

LordDeathStrike, on 13 June 2012 - 03:44 AM, said:

all the way up through tier 8

Just as I said.

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 03:24 AM, said:

from people who have barely seen the game

[Kettingzaag]

MethosFurey, on 13 June 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

To get over 60% winning rate, you pretty much have to regularly run with a team, either in the competitive matches or opens (opens with 2 other friends, you can do 60%, so if you play team games and have a good team, you can do a bit higher).

MethosFurey, on 13 June 2012 - 03:52 AM, said:

For example, if they get stats on accuracy rates for each weapon, they can review those and see if they are shooting well.

Here comes the thoughtless rebuttals about how win loss means everything and that you can get over 60% w/l without playing in clans or with turtle defense.

[hornet331]

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 03:47 AM, said:

Yep. Most of those 3/1 KDs with low win %. Are driving high tier vehicles and get their chance to blow up an occasional scout or two before being blown up by top tanks of opposing team.

That being said, show me one such player. With 3/1 KDS and 45% wr. I dare you.

You wont find them as they have to survive long enough to kill someone... but this sort of players usually are the first to die.. even while using the highest possible gear in game.

[Shezmu]

I like to use stats percentages to judge how well I’m doing in a game and what areas I should improve on. But they don’t really tell you anything unless you have an amount to compare them against, how many battles you have taken part /amount of shots you have taken ect ect...

For example Player A takes part in 2 battles and wins both, in theory he would have 100% win rate. Player B takes part in 100 battles he wins 60; so again, in theory he would only have a win rate of 60%. These wins would be down to a mixture of variables, the player’s skill and experience, the skill and experience of the player’s team mates and the opposing team, type of tanks used, gold ammo and more I can’t even think of. If you only look at the win rate, most people would assume Player A was a better player even when Player B has far more experience.

[ElKobold]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:54 AM, said:

Here comes the thoughtless rebuttals about how win loss means everything and that you can get over 60% w/l without playing in clans or with turtle defense.

Sure. I play solo 80% of the time.

[hornet331]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 03:46 AM, said:

I sure do love the smell of counter arguments that prove my point.

how does normal distribution work... srsly you make yourself look stupid.

If you have a better winrate then 98% of all the other players that how to come from somewhere.. and no "luck" or random MM is not the thing that will bring you that far. Pit a player with 60% against a player with 40% in the same tank with same equipment on the same map into the same situation and you will see how thing turn out.

Shezmu, on 13 June 2012 - 03:57 AM, said:

I like to use stats percentages to judge how well I’m doing in a game and what areas I should improve on. But they don’t really tell you anything unless you have an amount to compare them against, how many battles you have taken part /amount of shots you have taken ect ect...

For example Player A takes part in 2 battles and wins both, in theory he would have 100% win rate. Player B takes part in 100 battles he wins 60; so again, in theory he would only have a win rate of 60%. These wins would be down to a mixture of variables, the player’s skill and experience, the skill and experience of the player’s team mates and the opposing team, type of tanks used, gold ammo and more I can’t even think of. If you only look at the win rate, most people would assume Player A was a better player even when Player B has far more experience.

Thats why people usual dont care about stats until you reached a certain number of games. (usually 1000+)

Edited by hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 04:05 AM.

[myke]

I like having stats, some people get encourage to play better when there is a stat. But I do believe that it should be measured independently.
Let's say KDR for people who use assault mechs, there should also be some assist stats here for people who use light mechs for scouting.
The game should provide the players commendation not just for kills, but for every role that is available for a team to succeed. I always want to pick the hardest to achieve. "Scout"

In LoL and HoN i hate it when I play with people who don't know what they are doing, or just plain trolling. I'am competitive by nature, so i want to be good at anything I do, including games.

[ElKobold]

myke, on 13 June 2012 - 04:02 AM, said:

I like having stats, some people get encourage to play better when there is a stat. But I do believe that it should be measured independently.

Let's say KDR for people who use assault mechs, there should also be some assist stats here for people who use light mechs for scouting.

This is a good idea, in fact. Something that WoT lacks.

[Kettingzaag]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:

how does normal distribution work... srsly you make yourself look stupid.

If you have a better winrate then 98% of all the other players that how to come from somewhere.. and no "luck" or random MM is not the thing that will bring you that far. Pit a player with 60% against a player with 40% in the same tank with same equipment on the same map into the same situation and you will see how thing turn out.

World of Tanks isn't like Quake, bro. Win/Loss isn't the best indicator of 'skill' in modern games, and 40-60% is still pretty middle of the road when it comes to measuring 'skill'.


This is when stats could measure a player.

This is when they meant jack.

Edited by Kettingzaag, 13 June 2012 - 04:16 AM.

[hornet331]

myke, on 13 June 2012 - 04:02 AM, said:

I like having stats, some people get encourage to play better when there is a stat. But I do believe that it should be measured independently.
Let's say KDR for people who use assault mechs, there should also be some assist stats here for people who use light mechs for scouting.
The game should provide the players commendation not just for kills, but for every role that is available for a team to succeed. I always want to pick the hardest to achieve. "Scout"

In LoL and HoN i hate it when I play with people who don't know what they are doing, or just plain trolling. I'am competitive by nature, so i want to be good at anything I do, including games.

Humans are competitive by nature its a mean to survive, everyone who says otherwise is lying or denying there nature. Im for an all out stat fest, more is always better. Hell it would be nice to see weapon dmg broken down to individual guns, to see with what guns you do how much dmg, same for accuracy.

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 04:14 AM, said:

World of Tanks isn't like Quake, bro. Win/Loss isn't the best indicator of 'skill' in modern games, and 40-60% is still pretty middle of the road when it comes to measuring 'skill'.

Comparing quake and WoT

Edited by hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 04:18 AM.

[Nikbul]

ElKobold, on 13 June 2012 - 04:05 AM, said:

This is a good idea, in fact. Something that WoT lacks.

Ok, as being sad, you barely looked at the game. Open up profile, look at stats, look at them again.
What we see? You could see each STAT available for measuring each tank. For assault it would be DAMAGE, Light scout tank-Targets spotted, ETC. Plus there is much more behind stats
Battle Performance Destroyed: 11 940 Detected: 23 640 Hit Ratio: 70% Damage: 15 513 602 Capture Points: 14 077 Defense Points: 8 535

[Nikbul]

One of the most important stats in game like that:
Hit ratio
W\L ratio
Other stats becoming secondary, which will help to determine how good player perform in each role.

Stats measuring game comes to play after 1000+ battles played because it will Exclude such thing as luck, and will show actual skill. And Don't forget such thing as TACTIC! If there is a one team with good player but lock of coordination, it will loose to team with average players but good tactic and coordination.

Edited by Nikbul, 13 June 2012 - 04:22 AM.

[BlindProphet]

Yes there should be stats. There should be full sets of stats made public without having to go into the game. These stats should be at least at the level of detail of those inside the WoT client.

Why?

Because of the competitive side of things. Because they're fun. Because bad players like to cry over how they're not fair, and that is amusing.

Lets look at WoT since everyone likes to use that as the example here. Lets look at win rate. Now looking at winrate alone is genrally bad, it doesn't tell the full story, but it does give a general idea of player skill. 48-52% generally signals a completely average player 53-58 or so generally signals a good player, 59+ generally signals a player who's probably a good player but plays in nothing but platoons, and below 48 generally signals someone who's bad at the game and needs a lot of work.

Now why is this when this is a team game? Well even though its a team game, individuals well versed at the game tend to make significant contributions game after game. Those that do tend to have 53 and above win rates. Those that are bad tend to leave their teams at a disadvantage which tends to tip the battle towards a loss for their team ending up with poor win rates for those players. The excuse of 'I always get matched with bad teams' is just that, an excuse. Over time, thats just simply not the case.

But win rate is just a very general stat to look at, and should be treated as such. Many other factors can skew things one way or another. Some people play horrible horrible tanks. Some people just aren't very good at playing certain roles very well. Some people like to have fun in certain tanks even though they're not going to do much. And so on and so forth. All these things should be looked at. To be able to look at them you actually need detailed stats.

Its not like these things aren't going to be tracked anyways. Why should they be hidden away from us? Why should we when considering someone for a merc company not be able to at a glance see how much work someone might need? Why should we not be able to see what questions we should ask the person applying? Why should we have to play with this person over and over again just to get a halfway decent feel for what he may or may not be good at already and where her might need work?

The less public stats there are, the more people are going to use what little is visible to crusify someone.

[hornet331]

blindprophet, on 13 June 2012 - 04:21 AM, said:

The less public stats there are, the more people are going to use what little is visible to crusify someone.

Yep pretty much, or even worse, they write there own tools and when you don't use them you are "fail" from the start.

Edited by hornet331, 13 June 2012 - 04:24 AM.

[Kettingzaag]

hornet331, on 13 June 2012 - 04:16 AM, said:

Comparing quake and WoT

Not reading a single word that was posted.

[ElKobold]

blindprophet, on 13 June 2012 - 04:21 AM, said:

59+ generally signals a player who's probably a good player but plays in nothing but platoons

Platoon stats? Rrrright


I do agree with most of your points though.

Edited by ElKobold, 13 June 2012 - 04:38 AM.

[hornet331]

Kettingzaag, on 13 June 2012 - 04:32 AM, said:

Not reading a single word that was posted.

Welcome to my ignore list.