WTR not valid for competitive CV play

[OscarMike_]

Been looking at rankings lately, more than normal, I guess since it is Ranked season and I have noticed something that I should have noticed long ago.  Perhaps this will shed some light on other CV players that are trying to figure out why their WTR isn't as high as you would expect.

 

WTR is calculated MOSTLY (50%) by damage done.. Period. Second, 30% by average kills. The last 20% is Win%.

 

Let me start off by saying I wish Warships.Today would make win % the highest weight.  Same as to the recent changes to XP and credits WarGaming has made to improve CV rewards/stats.  Playing a CV in a competitive environment, not just Ranked, but for win% is not going to raise your WTR.  For example, if you play AS loadouts most games in, lets say US CV's, your WTR is not going to be as high because your damage potential across the server is low.  As in a Strike Essex vs AS Essex, logically across hundreds/thousands of games, Strike will deals tons more damage.  I am curious as to what stats are most valuable for finding good CV players?

 

I would think win% would be the most important. Secondly, there appears to be a new stat on Wargamings site that shows, kills from "Your" spots.  Third, for competative play, I suppose average plane kills.  What do my fellow CV players think?

 

This is just something I recently realized (call me slow lol) but yea,  Also is Warships.Today buggy lately?  Doesn't even show my last 10 days.  Been using ShipComrad lately, seems to allow better "specific" searches, such as who are top performers in specific ships.

[pewpewpew42]

Not sure what you want WG to do. They don't control WT to my knowledge.

[renegadestatuz]

Not sure what you want WG to do. They don't control WT to my knowledge.

 

You are correct. Warships.today does that and WG has nothing to do with it.

[atPrick__]

WTR isn't even valid for non competitive CV play, really. It's just a metric and a rather poor one at that. 

[SireneRacker]

Since when is WTR a reliable source of one's performance? It consists to 30% of kills, which is a factor that could not matter less.

[pewpewpew42]

 

You are correct. Warships.today does that and WG has nothing to do with it.

 

Ok, wasn't sure, thanks.

[OscarMike_]

Not sure what you want WG to do. They don't control WT to my knowledge.

 

 

You are correct. Warships.today does that and WG has nothing to do with it.

 

Correct.

 

I am not talking about WG fixing any issue, I am simply just pointing out something I have recently realized.

[CrazyHorse_Denver]

WTR isn't even valid for non competitive CV play, really. It's just a metric and a rather poor one at that.

 

But yet...how many people proudly show off this rather poor metric in their signatures as if it really means anything. Worse still are those that use this rather poor metric to stat shame others.

[Compassghost]

WTR is a garbage stat that favors divisions and high-impact damage farming.

[Anumati]

Of course its not. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong. Whats important for a competitive CV player is for them to know a myriad of other things compared to being able to farm damage. I play pub CV matches like SL games. I focus on winning and not farming damage. Problem is that without premium even though I won so much, I would lose credits most of the time because despite all my spotting and taking out key targets, I get crap rewards and my WTR isn't purple for some CVs like it should be for some ships because of the skewed standards. My metric is that you look at a player's CV winrate correlated with his number of battles, usually 100 or more.

 

50ish - average

55+ Above average

60+ Really good

65+ Upper crust

70+ Not many people get here

75+ Less than 100 people can average this over a long time <-- This is where most of my CVs are iirc                             

80+ Hello friend of mind. <-- This is where most of my CVs are iirc

[FratStar4Life]

I cannot speak for most clans but can only tell you how my clan assesses CV players. We use a blended rate of average plane kills, damage, and scrim performance. For a CV to be valuable in a competitive environment, the CV must be good at scouting ships/torpedoes, protecting friendly ships, and helping kill enemy DDs. In short the answer is no, WTR is not valuable for assessing CV performance.

[Kilpanic]

That's partly because WTR is a second-party, alternative scoring mechanic rather than a statistical measure of skill, and partly because CV gameplay is a bolted-on, parallel minigame that has little to do with actual World of Warships. 

 

*mic drop*

[WanderingGhost]

Well, I'll start off with no, winrate should not be a larger factor because A: not changing your randoms play and B: it's as meaningful as ships destroyed - I can't tell you how many matches I've seen teams carry the same person, or been on teams where I'm top of the charts, but my team can't win with a practically AFK CV on the opposing team. Only one of those three stats you truly control IS damage, kills you can spend all day ganking kills or spend your day unable to carry 11 bad players to wins - and no it does not "average out" like the WoT community in particular likes to think it does.

 

I'll also say that really, at this point, AS is really just a troll set up to use on CV's, especially with how overbuffed USN fighters and ammo counts are and the nonsense that is strafing. A strike/mix USN that is either lightly opposed or good at keeping enemy fighters distracted is 10x more valuable than any AS set up CV. And that's because it can REALLY help take down ships. Not to mention the paltry rewards Wargamng gives you for downing planes, spotting ships (not sure torps even get rewarded), or anything else that's not damage. I used to be the guy that ran AS all the time if Mix wasn't a viable option on USN. And my Winrate suffered for it because I could down 50, 60, 80% of the enemy planes myself, limiting the enemy to maybe a couple hits - but I couldn't deal damage efficiently enough to help the team because they needed help not even against DD's but taking down BB's. Or cruisers that have been over buffed into total no fly zones. Most of my losses in my most played CV's save Essex - are from running AS. Spotting, defending, almost any match I'm in and even try and run it it means not a damned thing because they need someone that can actually hit the enemy ships, and hit them hard. Until DB's are made truly viable, or they rebalance CV's so fighters aren't stupidly unbalanced and can go 1-1 and set ups are reworked to give USN proper flexibility and account for the needed change in fighters - I'm going to run strike 90% of the time because I do better with that getting wins than AS. Or until they nerf AA back down to a reasonable level, I don't care that that means getting rid of manual drops they should have never existed in the first place, and I can afford to have a limited reserve of attack planes because I'm not losing 6-28 planes attacking a completely isolated battleship.

 

Truth is, there is no truly good metric to judge CV's on - sure maybe Anumati can run AS and get wins for days, Me? I run AS I lose no matter how good I do and therefore end have having to run strike to try and make up for my teams lack of damage usually. Maybe IJN you can look at a combinations of stats because they have balanced loadouts that can defend AND  hit the enemy fairly hard. USN - you can't apply it because you can have two people use the same setups and get radically different results. There's no consistency to them with the all or nothing nonsense. Give Lex and Ranger an option that's 1,1,2 or 2,1,1 I'll jump to it in a heart beat because I HATE not having fighters, but without getting teams where I don't need to deal 60-160k damage to even have a shot at winning, I got no options but full strike or gimp myself with mix above tier 6.

 

And no one stat is ever a good metric, it should be a combination of multiple stats and actually seeing the player and all. Plenty of times on paper someone can look good, but is actually mediocre or bad and vice-versa. My favorite example is Donovan Mcnabb. On paper - he's an amazing quarterback and has great stats that could get him to the hall of fame one day. Anyone that's seen him play and real Eagles fans - they know it was the team AROUND Mcnabb that made him look good because they could catch his over and under thrown passes even when he was off target. Reasons he went from pretty good to benched for literally the worst QB in the league at the time after being traded - the other teams didn't have the tools around him to compensate.

[Mesrith]

WTR is an imperfect number at best.  As soon as something like WTR or WNx (from Tanks) is introduced, it begins losing value over time, as more and more people begin to game the system and aim for max WTR instead of pure wins.  The amount of high-tier cruisers that I see ignoring destroyers to pad fire damage on full-health battleships demonstrates this handily.

 

And yes, WTR is even worse for carriers.  I think I'm much more useful in my Hiryu than I was in my scumbag strike Lexington, but WTR disagrees.  Players that can expertly handle their fighters (I'm not one of them) and get early destroyer kills are the best CV players.

[Snargfargle]

CV gameplay is a bolted-on, parallel minigame that has little to do with actual World of Warships. 

*mic drop*

 

That's a bit harsh. Just because CV players have a top-down view doesn't mean that they are not part of the game.

 

Can CVs be killed by ramming or ram themselves like other ships -- yes

Do CVs have secondaries like other ships -- yes

Are CVs susceptible to being fired upon like other ships --- yes

Can CVs be attacked by strike aircraft like other ships -- yes

Do CVs have antiaircraft batteries to defend themselves from plane attacks like other ships -- yes

Can CVs cap like other ships -- yes

Do most cruisers and battleships also carry planes of some sort -- yes

Can a CV change its view to a sea-level one like other ships -- yes

Can a CV be WASD driven like other ships -- yes

Can other ships be waypoint guided like a CV -- yes

 

I'd say that CVs are, thus, part of the game. In fact, the only thing that CVs don't have that other ships do is main batteries. And the only thing that CVs do have that other ships don't is strike aircraft.

 

CV play also is more complex and difficult than DD, CA/CL or BB play in that you must control and keep track of multiple units simultaneously.

[Nachoo31]

Of course its not. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong. Whats important for a competitive CV player is for them to know a myriad of other things compared to being able to farm damage. I play pub CV matches like SL games. I focus on winning and not farming damage. Problem is that without premium even though I won so much, I would lose credits most of the time because despite all my spotting and taking out key targets, I get crap rewards and my WTR isn't purple for some CVs like it should be for some ships because of the skewed standards. My metric is that you look at a player's CV winrate correlated with his number of battles, usually 100 or more.

 

50ish - average

55+ Above average

60+ Really good

65+ Upper crust

70+ Not many people get here

75+ Less than 100 people can average this over a long time <-- This is where most of my CVs are iirc                             

80+ Hello friend of mind. <-- This is where most of my CVs are iirc

 

Sorry I don't expect to carry a match if I run an AS load out.  Only time my CVs are strike are on the IJN lines.

[poeticmotion]

WTR is calculated MOSTLY (50%) by damage done.. Period. Second, 30% by average kills. The last 20% is Win%.

 

Let me start off by saying I wish Warships.Today would make win % the highest weight.  

 

 

This, for all classes. 

 

Damage done is a key metric for some classes, but less important for others. I can be top scorer in a game by a huge margin in Farragut with 20k dmg, even if my Warspite divmate does 110k, just by spotting, capping, and hunting enemy DDs. I know that WTR measures against other ships of the same class/type, but if I focus on caps and hunting down DDs while another Farragut just focuses on doing easily healed fire damage to BBs, even though he's racking up more damage than me, I probably have the higher win rate but he has the higher WTR. This is borne out that I consistently have a low WTR in relation to my win rate  

 

There is raw damage, and there is quality damage. WTR's absurdly high weighting of average damage rewards players who seek to maximize raw damage at expense of quality damage, spotting, or class-specific high-priority tasks (capping/scouting for DDs, scouting/spotting for CVs, etc.). This is an important metric, but it's weighted too high. If it was up to me, WTR would be reweighted be something like 50% win rate and 25% each damage and kills. Even still, over a large enough sample size win rate is the only thing I care about as a metric as it's the only metric that captures whether you're doing all the little things that lead to team wins. 

[Edgecase]

WTR isn't good in general, and definitely not for competitive play. And ESPECIALLY not for CVs.

 

If anybody doubts, all you have to do is rank the following actions in terms of WTR gain vs. competitive advantage:

1. Positioning fighters so that enemy bombers cannot approach your destroyers as they cap
2. Putting a torpedo salvo into a half-health destroyer vs. a full-health battleship
3. Launching torpedoes that won't hit, but will force an enemy cruiser to turn broadside to your fleet

 

Hint: All of the above earn virtually no WTR, but yield huge value for your team.

 

WTR measures your farming ability for the most part, and there is no farming at competitive levels (well, there is, but the difference comes from coordination and not aim).

[Macabe]

WTR is pretty useless at determining competitive play capability of a player playing any class. Random is a really selfish game mode where you can say [edited] the team and just do your own thing whether that be carry or farm damage. WTR doesn't help you determine who can function as a team whatsoever. You'd be amazed how many unicums join a clan skirmish or something like supremacy and fail miserably.

[poeticmotion]

Can CVs cap like other ships -- yes

 

Some of my favorite games of all time involved a really awesome CV capping when he had an opportunity. One of which was a '[edited]it, if no one else will cap I will' YOLO when our whole team was being stupid-passive and one of which me and the CV were the only people left alive against five red ships on two brothers and the CV snuck in and capped A while I was keeping all of the surviving enemy team occupied at D, and by doing so sealed the win for us. CVs that are willing to do things like cap on the rare occasions it makes sense, or just to shame other players when it's a loss anyway, are awesome.