When you play well but your teams are Hell

[Snargfargle]

The Warships Today rating takes into account the following:

Damage 50%

Kills 30%

Win Rate 20%

Therefore, it's not just about win rate.

If you get a bad run of poor teams, but personally do well, this is reflected in your WTR. While the WTR can't account for all of the factors involved in good gameplay because data on things like spotting and capping apparently are not reliable, it does give more information on one's own gameplay than the win rate alone.

Of course, this is where those who mostly division have the advantage. While they can't control the entire team thusly, they can control a significant part of it.

 

[Wulfgarn]

A year or so ago we had quite a few discussions going on this. I think some of the Tubers got in on it as well.

 

From my memory, you are correct on WTR. You can't really rely on this when looking at a DD main though.

 

When I look at peeps stats, I never look at their most recent, or even their longest. I look at their 2nd to longest figures (new phone and I don't have my links).

 

Take me for example, I'll never get any higher than 58% even though I'm really 60%/61% player. I've played so many battles, there's no way I can overcome the sins of learning the game, which general consensus is 1k games.

 

Looking at the 2nd to last figures is more in line because it's a more clear figure of what they are today.

 

 

[FleetAdmiral_Assassin]

If that is the formula that they use, I would argue that it is of little use. Kills - this is just who scores the last point of damage and is rarely ever the person who did all the work. Damage - doing 50k damage to an enemy ship hugging the map edge running away is of far less use to the team than doing 10k damage to a ship on a cap that gets it to leave the cap. And of course Winrate - which is far more determined by 23 other random people than you.

 

If they really want a rating that's worth the time to look up, they should take all activity into account including amount of time spent in cap zones (taking/contesting/number taken), spotting (ships, torps), damage upon spotting, potential damage, hit rates, etc. I would even argue that different ship types (DD, CA, BB, CV) would need slightly different formulas (which would get averaged for a player's total score) since the role of each ship is so different (some ships can inflict far more damage than others for example).

[Lillehuntrix]

I do love my Fruit Loops days - red and purple, one way or the other.

[FleetAdmiral_Assassin]

41 minutes ago, Wulfgarn said:

A year or so ago we had quite a few discussions going on this. I think some of the Tubers got in on it as well.

 

From my memory, you are correct on WTR. You can't really rely on this when looking at a DD main though.

 

When I look at peeps stats, I never look at their most recent, or even their longest. I look at their 2nd to longest figures (new phone and I don't have my links).

 

Take me for example, I'll never get any higher than 58% even though I'm really 60%/61% player. I've played so many battles, there's no way I can overcome the sins of learning the game, which general consensus is 1k games.

 

Looking at the 2nd to last figures is more in line because it's a more clear figure of what they are today.

 

 

Also, ever notice that sites like WarshipsToday keep changing the columns in their stat blocks from day to day? For example, one day your stat block may have columns for Yesterday, 7day, 30day, 180day, All.... but then the next day its 2day, 7day, 412day, 613day, All, followed the next day by Yesterday, 30day, 60day, 180day, All? They need to pick ONE and stick to it.

 

And it really sucks if your stats were hidden for any significant amount of time. Those stats are simply gone. They should rework it so if your stats are hidden - all stats are hidden, if un-hidden then they should redownload ALL your stats fresh from WG. 

[KalishniKat]

For me the most important "stat" is "are you having fun?" I found avoiding stats and enjoying the game not only is more fun, it actually improves your stats!

[GhostSwordsman]

54 minutes ago, FleetAdmiral_Assassin said:

Also, ever notice that sites like WarshipsToday keep changing the columns in their stat blocks from day to day? For example, one day your stat block may have columns for Yesterday, 7day, 30day, 180day, All.... but then the next day its 2day, 7day, 412day, 613day, All, followed the next day by Yesterday, 30day, 60day, 180day, All? They need to pick ONE and stick to it.

 

And it really sucks if your stats were hidden for any significant amount of time. Those stats are simply gone. They should rework it so if your stats are hidden - all stats are hidden, if un-hidden then they should redownload ALL your stats fresh from WG. 

That really only happens because the site doesn't seem to constantly update every day. So sometimes you get a fail average, sometimes an average over a few days, and sometimes a weekly average. Bottom line, it has more to do with the site not updating properly rather than them not making up their minds on what to use.

[Niknack9230]

Frankly I wouldn't mind seeing something instead of the win rate.  Why not having the amount of damage dealt to enemy ships in a battle.  That would actually give you a better prospective of an individual player rather than win rating.  The actual damage in a game shows that you are actually hitting ships.  Causing damage using your primary and secondary weapons systems.  

 I can agree with this statement that Win rate shouldn't affect the judgement of a players game play rather what should affect it is the amount of damage that player causes to enemy ships in a single battle.  Personally I think it's time to change to this method.  It would be a much better scenario rather than seeing some of those players who just want to seem to bash you just because of your win rate.  Anyways yea I can agree with this.

[_ENO_]

3 hours ago, Wulfgarn said:

From my memory, you are correct on WTR. You can't really rely on this when looking at a DD main though.

 

I'd read about this awhile ago when one of the CCs was talking about padding your WTR. Not encouraging it necessarily as much as explaining what it meant. 

The way I understood it is the WTR is a measurement of the stats mentioned above against the server averages for that ship. So in your DD main example- you could still have a good WTR provided you performed above the server average in the specific DD.

Can someone confirm / correct this? 

[Snargfargle]

1 hour ago, 0crazy8s0 said:

Frankly I wouldn't mind seeing something instead of the win rate.  Why not having the amount of damage dealt to enemy ships in a battle. 

Damage alone is of not all that much benefit to the team if said damage doesn't also contribute to the sinking of ships and, more importantly, key ships. You might only do 50k damage in a match but if in the process you also sink three DDs then you have helped your team a great deal. Conversely, if you are in an HE-spamming battleship and do 250k damage to other battleships but most of that damage is subsequently healed back then you have accomplished little other than padding your own stats.

[JB_24]

16 minutes ago, ENO75 said:

 

I'd read about this awhile ago when one of the CCs was talking about padding your WTR. Not encouraging it necessarily as much as explaining what it meant. 

The way I understood it is the WTR is a measurement of the stats mentioned above against the server averages for that ship. So in your DD main example- you could still have a good WTR provided you performed above the server average in the specific DD.

Can someone confirm / correct this? 

I can confirm it!

the Des Monies , which have a 63k avg damage severwide, will often appear as a low WTR based off my stats. (I avg. 55-60 k last time I checked.)
Even though I may have higher damage for that day if I play lower level or poorer performance ships I would appear to be be a great player at only 50-60k average but if I perform the same on the Des Monies then my WTR will tank. So WTR is relatively mostly around the avg. damage of the ships you played.

Otherwise, most people who don't play higher tier ships will have low WTR regardless of how well they are doing.

[Niknack9230]

3 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

Damage alone is of not all that much benefit to the team if said damage doesn't also contribute to the sinking of ships and, more importantly, key ships. You might only do 50k damage in a match but if in the process you also sink three DDs then you have helped your team a great deal. Conversely, if you are in an HE-spamming battleship and do 250k damage to other battleships but most of that damage is subsequently healed back then you have accomplished little other than padding your own stats.

 I would rather see the damage counter rather than win rate its a bit more of a fair term than a players win rate.  Certain games yes win rates do apply to them.  But this game how ever it does not.  What you do in a battle such as damage to ships should have an effect on how good or bad of a player you are.  The point being damage shows how many times you yourself directly hit an enemy ship like I said.

[Grizley]

14 minutes ago, ENO75 said:

 

I'd read about this awhile ago when one of the CCs was talking about padding your WTR. Not encouraging it necessarily as much as explaining what it meant. 

The way I understood it is the WTR is a measurement of the stats mentioned above against the server averages for that ship. So in your DD main example- you could still have a good WTR provided you performed above the server average in the specific DD.

Can someone confirm / correct this? 

 

This is correct.

 

One of the easiest ways to pad is in a low tier DD.  The players break down into terrible at the game, so low damage/kills, good at the game, so they're capping and spotting leading to low damage, and then the padders.

 

You don't have to be especially good to have a 50k damage game in a DD that averages 10k, if that's all you're going for.  That will get you a sky high WTR, though it will hurt your win rate.

[Grizley]

1 minute ago, 0crazy8s0 said:

 I would rather see the damage counter rather than win rate its a bit more of a fair term than a players win rate.  Certain games yes win rates do apply to them.  But this game how ever it does not.  What you do in a battle such as damage to ships should have an effect on how good or bad of a player you are.  The point being damage shows how many times you yourself directly hit an enemy ship like I said.

 

Wrong wrong wrong, 1,000 times wrong.

 

Win rate is the only measure that really matters.  Damage is easily manipulated by ignoring the win condition and trying to deal damage. Kills are easily manipulated by holding fire and "last hitting" heavily damaged ships.  Win rate can only be increased by playing the objectives and winning the game.

 

If you had a day with 20% win rate and 5000 WTR the proper question to be asking yourself is, how can I improve my impact on the game.  Not, why do I always get bad teams.

 

The first question will help you improve, "oh I guess spamming he at max range isn't my best option to win even if it pads WTR/damage".  "I always do a lot of damage and live but lose the game, I should be more aggressive early even I die more often and do less overall damage because early damage is worth more.

 

The second question is the loser/whiner question. It puts the blame on everyone but you. It gives you zero chance to improve.  It makes you a bitter sad person since can't figure out why someone as obviously great as you is "so unlucky".  

 

Winning isn't the most important thing, it's the only thing.

[Niknack9230]

1 minute ago, Grizley said:

 

Wrong wrong wrong, 1,000 times wrong.

 

Win rate is the only measure that really matters.  Damage is easily manipulated by ignoring the win condition and trying to deal damage. Kills are easily manipulated by holding fire and "last hitting" heavily damaged ships.  Win rate can only be increased by playing the objectives and winning the game.

 

If you had a day with 20% win rate and 5000 WTR the proper question to be asking yourself is, how can I improve my impact on the game.  Not, why do I always get bad teams.

 

The first question will help you improve, "oh I guess spamming he at max range isn't my best option to win even if it pads WTR/damage".  "I always do a lot of damage and live but lose the game, I should be more aggressive early even I die more often and do less overall damage because early damage is worth more.

 

The second question is the loser/whiner question. It puts the blame on everyone but you. It gives you zero chance to improve.  It makes you a bitter sad person since can't figure out why someone as obviously great as you is "so unlucky".  

 

Winning isn't the most important thing, it's the only thing.

Win rate doesnt mean a thing except for how many games you personally win.  What if you get a line of a few days of crap games yea that plays a big part it doesn't mean squat any more.

[Snargfargle]

15 minutes ago, 0crazy8s0 said:

 I would rather see the damage counter rather than win rate its a bit more of a fair term than a players win rate.  Certain games yes win rates do apply to them.  But this game how ever it does not.  What you do in a battle such as damage to ships should have an effect on how good or bad of a player you are.  The point being damage shows how many times you yourself directly hit an enemy ship like I said.

The ability to only deal lots of damage does not a good player make. For instance, a good BB player might position himself to tank damage as well as give it so that his allies can maneuver to positions of safety. A good CV player might contribute more by leaving his planes to spot for the team rather than having them immediately fly back to rearm so that he can farm more damage. A good CL driver might chase a pesky flanking DD, causing little damage, but also not allowing it to get anywhere near the team. A less good AA cruiser driver might just loiter near a really good the CV all game to keep it safe from plane attacks because a unicum CV is much more important to the team than an average cruiser driver. A good DD driver might herd several of the enemy into a corner and away from the team and keep them by there by sending in wide spreads of torpedoes to remind them of his presence. And the list goes on. 

[evilleMonkeigh]

If you look at large sample sizes (i.e. of 100+ games/monthly stats) this should not be an issue anyway. People obsess about daily stats because they don't understand how they work. Going off your daily stat is like judging a baseball team based on a random 3-game streak in a 162-game season.

A bit off topic:

I'd love to see more threads titled "I played like BLEEP so many times today, but my teams carried me, despite my worthless performance" but somehow people forget these games.

Funnily enough, it's those who usually have bad games/are carried that remember most strongly (and feel compelled to post about) that single 100k damage game when they lost, instead of the 4 10k-damage games that they won despite dying with little contribution.

(I know this is not what the OP was saying; it's not an attack, but just a - perhaps cynical - observation)

[CLUCH_CARGO]

One Stat that is totally missing is "How many ships the player engaged in battle"This tell tale stat speaks volumes of the type ships s/he uses and how effective the player is. The player may not have killed many ships but engaged with most of the enemy, causing to either draw fire away from the team or whittled the enemy down enough to help an ally take the secured kill. What some call sniping  can be gaged as suppression fire. When the enemy isn't shooting at you, it means you have the ability to maneuver into a better firing position.

Tanking and Sniping  are both viable tactics for team effort.
{ Communication is key in this aspect}

[evilleMonkeigh]

Quote

Tanking and Sniping  are both viable tactics for team effort.
{ Communication is key in this aspect}

Surely you can't be describing random battles....