Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

847 Excellent


About Bill1923

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

2,451 profile views
  1. What is even worse is the self-defeating knowledge of meaningless stats.
  2. Bill1923

    DD vs Sub

    Shows what F.Sherman knows! 17.14 shots/min. X 8 guns = 137 shots per minute -- Marceau 40.00 shots/min. X 3 guns = 120 shots per minute -- Sherman 1,850 maxHE X 137 = 253,450 maxHE DMG -- Marceau 1,800 maxHE X 120 = 216,000 maxHE DMG -- Sherman 2,450 maxAP X 137 = 335,650 maxAP DMG -- Marceau 2,700 maxAP X 120 = 324,000 maxAP DMG -- Sherman
  3. Bill1923

    DD vs Sub

    My Marceau has the fastest speed of any T-X DD, but I still don't find running down and depth charging a sub the best way to kill one. Instead, I prefer to maintain distance and use the Marceau's best-of-class DPM to gun down subs.
  4. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    It doesn't matter whether you give advice or not, you don't make the 20K-post cutoff!
  5. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    Haha - I ran a service that analyzed statistical models; all I had to know was how to hire PhDs who knew about statistics. But they did give me an honorary pocket protector when I retired.
  6. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    I am well aware there is no statistical basis involved in what I did and I never claimed there was. I took a look at a tiny bit of easily available information related to something I was curious about.
  7. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    To avoid the possibility of "naming and shaming" players, I will not specifically identify players in the sample. However, you can get your own sample by picking names from all of the unpinned threads on a page of the General Game Discussion sub-forum. I just went through that exercise and added 9 new names to my previous sample. The results shown below did not change much.
  8. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    Guilty as charged! And lazy to boot! The 20K-game cutoff was totally arbitrary so I would get some information, but not have to deal with looking up too many players. Pulling names from forum posts was simply expedient. If I was a programmer, I might have created a script to use the API to access raw game data; maybe somebody with appropriate skills will do so. The results I posted are certainly not in any way statistically significant. The thing that originally piqued my curiosity was a thread in which a number of veteran/experienced/long-term players declared that issues in the game had prompted them to play Co-op exclusively or nearly exclusively. My reaction was that the thread had probably attracted a handful of "me too" outliers and many high-volume players could not possibly have retreated to Co-op. My impromptu and unscientific sample potentially suggests otherwise.
  9. Bill1923

    What Wargaming And the NA Team can improve on?

    I am sure your explanation is accurate and very learned, but it is irrelevant to my observation about where WG has chosen to focus work.
  10. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    Yes, Grasshopper, but that would involve a much larger sample of players and I am lazy.
  11. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    That information was not available from the source I used for the data, but it would be very interesting.
  12. Bill1923

    Very Experienced Players

    The stats include Random, Ranked, Ranked (Legacy), and Co-op from this page. Everyone has their own definition of what is enjoyable.
  13. Some comments a few days ago by and about experienced players largely playing Co-op games piqued my curiosity. I set out to see how very experienced players engage with the game. I arbitrarily chose a minimum of 20,000 games as my standard for very experienced players. For convenience, I went through a page of forum topics searching for such players and found a random sample of 34 names. Below is what I found from reviewing the stats of those 34 players and encompassing nearly a million games. Types of Games Played: 14 players had a majority of Random games, while 20 players had a majority of Co-op games. Ranked Games: 10 players had less than 1% of their games in Ranked and only 4 players had more than 10% of their games in ranked. Types of Games Played by Player Win Rate: The high 17 players, with an average W/R of 54.97%, played 56% Random games and 39% Co-op games. The low 17 players, with an average W/R of 49.09%, played 27% Random games and 68% Co-op games. Both groups played about 4.8% Ranked games. Below are some additional stats by game type. NOTE: clarifications have been added in italics.
  14. Bill1923

    Feedback on Ranked! What do you think?

    2,000 mandatory Co-op games before buying the way to Tier-X? You first.
  15. Bill1923

    Feedback on Ranked! What do you think?

    1) The smaller format is enjoyable, but might be better if it was changed (i.e. 5, 6, or 7 ships) by season, sprint, or league. 2) Progression can be good, but playing to Save-A-Star is counterproductive and should be eliminated. Some (many) players don't want to progress to higher leagues, so make the advancement Qualifier an opt-in. 3) Ranked has its own flavor, which is appropriate. The most important thing Ranked needs is variety to attract players and keep their attention. The all-Tier-X season effectively excluded far too many players. The current 8-9, 8-9, 10 season is a little better, but a 6-7, 8-9, 10 season seems nearly ideal to maximize choice and participation.