Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
DingBat

Why you may actually need XVM

67 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

572
[WOLF4]
Members
1,091 posts
4,681 battles

If you're not aware, XVM is a mod that started with WoT. In a nutshell, it, among other things, tells you the win rate and "rate" of the players on your team and the other team. It was a source of great controversy in WoT. 

 

I've been conducting a little experiment. In my matches, I track who tells the team what to do in the opening minutes of a battle. In 30+ samples, 97% of the time the most vocal "planners" were sub-.500 win rate, sub-900 wtr players.  I was actually a little shocked.

 

I don't run XVM. Even I felt it got a little toxic in WoT. I may reconsider that decision. Have to think about this one.

Edited by DingBat
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 9
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,866 posts

Like reading player ranks, it might be useless during battle. I have to play the situation as it unfolds. Sorry if my scrub Scarnhorst sunk your Missouri one-on-one, but maybe you were busy reading stats, LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,313 posts
21,160 battles

No. 

Engenders a defeatist attitude among the already insecure types who would run the mod looking for others to blame instead of themselves.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
509
[LOU1]
Members
3,087 posts
8,164 battles

Don't really want to know what they did yesterday.  I want to see what they are going to do now, in this battle.  Plus, it distracts me to think I am being judged by the results of trying out a new line or having hit a bad streak, or worse, having hit a really good streak.  Other players are welcome to ponder the past, I have my hands full trying to figure out what is happening currently and trying to predict what the next moves will be in the current situation and environment.

I will never need XVM in WOWS...

Edited by ExploratorOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,827
[SALVO]
Members
17,156 posts
17,832 battles
9 minutes ago, slokill_1 said:

No. 

Engenders a defeatist attitude among the already insecure types who would run the mod looking for others to blame instead of themselves.

It can cause even great players to quit if they don't like their chances, because "they don't want to waste their time".  Heaven forbid they try to help their team and not abandon them like a bunch of selfish children who take their ball and go home.  In another XVM thread this past week, we even had one jerk trying to defend this sort of disgusting attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,689
Supertester, Alpha Tester
6,046 posts

No thank you.  The "benefits" of "knowing" your teammates past performance, are negated by the miasma of ill will, rationalization of bad behavior, and obsession with other peoples statistics as a means of decision making. It's best to just look at the tactical map for guidance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,201 posts
8,185 battles

No, there's really no "need" for a teammate stat analyzer mod.  Outside of your potential 2 division partners, you can't pick your teammates anyway, so whether they're good or bad is pretty irrelevant.  You're going to be in the game with them regardless.  And even if they all suck and you're very likely to lose the match, it's still a good idea to play your own best possible game anyway, as you could still potentially net useful amounts of credits, exp, mission progress, or flag-granting achievements even on a loss.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
247
[OPEC]
Members
947 posts
5,108 battles
53 minutes ago, DingBat said:

I've been conducting a little experiment. In my matches, I track who tells the team what to do in the opening minutes of a battle. In 30+ samples, 97% of the time the most vocal "planners" were sub-.500 win rate, sub-900 wtr players.  I was actually a little shocked.

Not any different from my experience running XVM for a while in tanks.  A lot of the vocal players that blame teammates for the loss are also low win rate players...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
248
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Members
780 posts
6,694 battles

You're better off just entering each match blind and playing with the hand you're dealt with. Focusing too much on other peoples' stats can lead to a defeatist or pessimistic self-fulfilling prophecy. Bad players, potato CVs, and enemy typhoon league unicum divisions are things you're just going to have to deal with. It's not called Random Battles for nothing. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,244
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,727 posts
9,120 battles

When I was more active in WoT I did use it but only to figure out who to be near and who to stay the hell away from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,157 posts
4,870 battles

look at the WoT community and you'll have the only reason you'll ever need to never implement XVM in WoWS.

it doesn't matter who's barking the orders. you're only ever going to follow them if they make sense to you anyways. you don't need a mod to tell you if someone is saying something stupid. XVM creates defeatists, hypocrites, and discrimination. there's no need for any of that in a game that should be about playing for one battle at a time. it doesn't matter your teammates' past. they're on your team now. play to win for them regardless, or find a new game to play. maybe something single player.

Edited by MidnightShamalan
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
251 posts
1,395 battles

Joining the parade, I personally used XVM for about a week in WoT just to see what all the commotion was about with it. And I can safely say after using it that I deleted it and never installed it again. :Smile-_tongue: I found that mod useful for knowing who I should roll with in order to find success... but therein lies the problem... the mod changes the way you play, by basically abandoning other players and treating others as more important based on their stats rather than the tank they were playing.

 

On top of that, the fact that the mod gave you a percent chance to win was just absurd. What's worse is that people actually believed in that number like it was a god and not only announced defeat and expressed anger right at the start of the battle based on how low that imaginary percent was, but also insulted and bullied the statistically weak players as well! People were being bullied online because a mod was telling everyone else around them that they were a bad player. In my opinion that's just downright despicable and that mod should have been banned when it's implications unfolded. I get that a lot of effort goes into updating and creating mods like that, and I'm sure the developers never intended for it to be used in such a way, but that mod is just one of the many reasons I rarely play WOT anymore, and that's because the community is so agonizingly toxic that it hurts my soul that people would act in such a way towards each other... in a VIDEO GAME, of all things.

 

We don't need a mod like that in WOWS. You don't have to follow what the peep in chat says obviously, though in this game even more so than WOT you need to support eachother. So even if you knew the player you were supporting was statistically weak... you're playing a team game, and they need your help and you would have gave it to them anyway... all a mod like that would add to this game would be the toxicity that comes with it. So to think of even considering something like that in WOWS... no thank you. I would never run such a thing in this game, and even if it were to become a thing, I'd report it for the bullying that would come with it, as seen with XVM. This community is actually quite good, and I'd love to see it stay that way... and a mod like that in my opinion is just not welcome.

Edited by AllysaRockz
Because long post... *shrug*
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,803
Members
9,997 posts
2 hours ago, DingBat said:

If you're not aware, XVM is a mod that started with WoT. In a nutshell, it, among other things, tells you the win rate and "rate" of the players on your team and the other team. It was a source of great controversy in WoT. 

 

I've been conducting a little experiment. In my matches, I track who tells the team what to do in the opening minutes of a battle. In 30+ samples, 97% of the time the most vocal "planners" were sub-.500 win rate, sub-900 wtr players.  I was actually a little shocked.

 

I don't run XVM. Even I felt it got a little toxic in WoT. I may reconsider that decision. Have to think about this one.

You answered your own question as to why XVM isn't needed....

You already know not to listen to other players, what other information do you need? :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,157
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,195 posts
18,949 battles

XVM is already here. And even if not you can use warships.today on a second screen. The only thing I check is CV's. If yours suck and the other is a unicum the only thing you can do is to farm as much damage as you can before you are back to port. Same is up against purple divisions and your teams is mostly below 45% players. What it helps also for is to single out priority targets. So much for the theory. I have teams in WoT with a below 20% win chance leaving the battlefield as victors. Like with most real battles there is one rule: you cannot predict the best action  at the start of a game since you have no idea what the enemy is doing. And never underestimate luck. So much for the theory.

In reality XVM has drawbacks. First of all it's those who abuse it for stat shaming. If you are called out for being bad will not improve your behavior in the battle. You may even just went afk because of it. Worse is stat shaming to the opposite team. Calling out your DD sucks is mildly bad sportsmanship and should be punished. Also those who start the match with: we are gone lose it because of so many bad players. Even if you may have a chance some people will not give their best because they belive it.

The only truth is what Quaffer said. You will see very fast by yourself who is bad and who is not. If you give your best and understand to read the map you do your part for a winnning the battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
631
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,465 posts
11,815 battles

There once was a mod that took the stats and rated ,like xvm, on playwrs panel.

Then WG gave everyone the option to put a players account to private.

Then they just broke the link ability for mod. 

As far as I know, there is no way to get XVM like realtime states in a match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
440 posts
12,829 battles
3 hours ago, DingBat said:

97% of the time the most vocal "planners" were sub-.500 win rate, sub-900 wtr players.  I was actually a little shocked.

40% of the time the potato-planners make the right call anyway.

57% of the time the team agrees to the first plan announced.

38% of the time half the team goes the opposite direction to the plan they agreed to at the start.

... so XVM still doesn't really matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,061
Members
3,828 posts
14,189 battles

As  far as I'm concerned, you're in a match to fight a battle. Not to compare stats of other players and crow about your own.

Focus on the fight, not player stats.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[BIAS]
Alpha Tester
316 posts
9,558 battles
20 minutes ago, Magic_Fighting_Tuna said:

I wrote off or should I say laughed my *** of XVM back in WOT when they claimed it said we had a 1% chance of winning and we ended up wiping the floor with the enemy team.

I, too, have difficulty with interpreting basic statistics.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×