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

Personal Rating

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

182
[ONAVY]
[ONAVY]
Members
689 posts
6,085 battles

I find the metrics used in obtaining a players "Personal Rating" to be lacking. I would like to see other peoples opinions on perhaps some additional metrics that should be factored into that assumption and what you all may think they should be. This is from the WoW Stats and Numbers site. I do not know if all of them use the same metrics. The fact that planes destroyed is not a factor is absurd, if whoever is killing them it certainly is factor in winning the match and some people do have manual AA to say it is click and forget is incorrect, in my opinion the same could be said for auto target or firing any battery it is pretty much best guess. Alot of captain skills can go to AA yet it is not rewarded or recognized? That is wrong.The order of importance could also be debated as is capturing the flags or mission goals achieved factored in as well as "Time under Fire in hazard/hott zones."? I know that tonnage sent to the bottom and damage dealt should be a main factor but think other factors are being missed. I think CV's may take exception to the "Click and Forget" notion when it comes to strafing and evading. Opinions, Ideas, Suggestions Welcome...

Personal Rating - About

The Personal Rating is measure of skill in World of Warships. It measures performance in every warship and compares it to certain expected values. Differences between actual and expected values are used to calculate final Personal Rating value.

Basic assumptions:
  • values in the range of 0 - 3000,
  • colors and values similar to the well-known World of Tanks WN8,
  • WoWS is more tactical game than WoT so win rate should influence Personal Rating,
  • number of destroyed planes should be ignored - in WoWS AA is automated so no skill is needed to destroy planes. Even with CVs killing planes is very easy (click and forget)
  • elements in order of importance: damage dealt, warship kills, win rate,
Edited by C_D
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,336 battles

I think being able to factor in base XP would help make it a bit more accurate, but I don't know that the API pulls that information.  XP as it is listed on our profiles is accounting for premium (or lack thereof) so it's not the best indicator, but I think base XP would work much better at representing contributions.

 

e: that being said, I don't really pay attention to my stats anymore.  I know what I'm weak at and need to improve on, I'm not super caught up in how blue or purple I am on any given website.

Edited by Deviathan
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,863
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
3,769 posts
12,872 battles
1 minute ago, C_D said:

The fact that planes destroyed is not a factor is absurd, if whoever is killing them it certainly is factor in winning the match and some people do have manual AA to say it is click and forget is incorrect, in my opinion the same could be said for auto target or firing any battery it is pretty much best guess. Alot of captain skills can go to AA yet it is not rewarded or recognized? That is wrong.

Wholeheartedly agree.  That is why these types of ratings are subjective.  Someone "decides" what is important, gives it a weight, and....voila...a rating emerges.

As for manual AA, it's not just a click.  There is a positioning aspect...both strategically (where on the map I need to be) and tactically (how to maneuver during the engagement).  Ship positioning is a "skill" that affects aircraft kills.  The developer of the metric does not understand this "skill" piece, and subsequently dismisses aircraft kills because the kill mechanism is all RNG. 

That's why I say that the best overall, long term, metric is win rate.  It boils it all down to one number.  Sure, even that number can be subjective in some ways.  But it doesn't require any subjective decisions on what should be included or not.  Win rate is what it is.  Well, I guess you could run solo vs division rates, but that's just for an apples to apples comparison.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
351
[NAVY]
Members
999 posts
3,720 battles
10 minutes ago, C_D said:

I find the metrics used in obtaining a players "Personal Rating" to be lacking. I would like to see other peoples opinions on perhaps some additional metrics that should be factored into that assumption and what you all may think they should be. This is from the WoW Stats and Numbers site. I do not know if all of them use the same metrics. The fact that planes destroyed is not a factor is absurd, if whoever is killing them it certainly is factor in winning the match and some people do have manual AA to say it is click and forget is incorrect, in my opinion the same could be said for auto target or firing any battery it is pretty much best guess. Alot of captain skills can go to AA yet it is not rewarded or recognized? That is wrong.The order of importance could also be debated as is capturing the flags or mission goals achieved factored in as well as "Time under Fire in hazard/hott zones."? I know that tonnage sent to the bottom and damage dealt should be a main factor but think other factors are being missed. I think CV's may take exception to the "Click and Forget" notion when it comes to strafing and evading. Opinions, Ideas, Suggestions Welcome...

Personal Rating - About

The Personal Rating is measure of skill in World of Warships. It measures performance in every warship and compares it to certain expected values. Differences between actual and expected values are used to calculate final Personal Rating value.

Basic assumptions:
  • values in the range of 0 - 3000,
  • colors and values similar to the well-known World of Tanks WN8,
  • WoWS is more tactical game than WoT so win rate should influence Personal Rating,
  • number of destroyed planes should be ignored - in WoWS AA is automated so no skill is needed to destroy planes. Even with CVs killing planes is very easy (click and forget)
  • elements in order of importance: damage dealt, warship kills, win rate,

 

Both WoWs Stats & Numbers' Personal Rating (PR) and WoWs Today's Rating (WTR) and had accurate and valid they are has been debated going for a while now. Neither formula factors in base and domination capture/defense points, potential damage, planes shot down, etc; so, they pretty much are based on damage dealt and kills; so, both PR and WTR are subjective. However, you are going to find a certain number of WoWs players who will staunchly defend that either one is a good indicator of a player's skill, which I disagree with because they are incomplete formula's IMO that only tell part of the story. Here is the rest of that page which explains WoWs Stats & Numbers' PR more:

Formula:
Personal Rating calculations are based on expected and actual values of wins, damage dealt and warships kills. To get expected values use expected values for warships (preview, json) and multiply them by number of battles played. 

Step 1 - ratios:
rDmg = actualDmg/expectedDmg
rWins = actualWins/expectedWins
rFrags = actualFrags/expectedFrags
Step 2 - normalization:
nDmg = max(0, (rDmg - 0.4) / (1 - 0.4))
nFrags = max(0, (rFrags - 0.1) / (1 - 0.1))
nWins = max(0, (rWins - 0.7) / (1 - 0.7))
Step 3 - PR value:
PR =  700*nDMG + 300*nFrags + 150*nWins
You are free to use our Personal Rating formula and expected values, however we demand, that you attribute our site by providing link to WoWS Stats & Numbers.

If you have questions contact Wiochi on World of Warships forums.

Personal Rating - Color Scale

Skill Range
Bad 0 - 750
Below Average 750 - 1100
Average 1100 - 1350
Good 1350 - 1550
Very Good 1550 - 1750
Great 1750 - 2100
Unicum 2100 - 2450
Super Unicum 2450 - 9999

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[AWP]
Members
780 posts
2,950 battles
1 minute ago, daVinci761st said:

 

 

7 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

 

I think both of you mentioned Base XP. The API does not export true base XP, it exports the base XP with premium. So if you play with premium, your base will be 50% higher than without. The issue with making an accurate rating system is finding how much influence a player has on the game. It differs extremely in WoWS and all the data needed isn’t available to 3rd party sites. They really can only use WR, damage, kills, and cap/defense. There are just way more factors in WoWS vs WoT

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,879 battles

I just ignore my stats because I am horrible with Ryujo. That is what I have been told before. I look forward to what happens in game, not the stats. That is what I use to determine how good you are.

Edited by Vangm94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[THICC]
Members
68 posts
166 battles

PR also uses averages of the playerbase using the specific ship if you are looking at ship specific PR; thus why newer ships are a lot harder to gain PR in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,371
Members
3,254 posts
9,531 battles

Imo...

All that matters in solo winrate per ship.

Anything else can perverted and exploited. But if I have a 57.46% win rate in my shima with 623 solo battles, but a 38.32% win rate in my Des Moines with 107 solo battles (true story), my Des Moines and I are probably going to be last ones chosen when picking teams for the recess kickball game.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,757
Members
9,862 posts

If only this were a game where stats mattered to the vast majority of players....:Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
351
[NAVY]
Members
999 posts
3,720 battles
1 minute ago, Belyy_Klyk said:

 

I think both of you mentioned Base XP. The API does not export true base XP, it exports the base XP with premium. So if you play with premium, your base will be 50% higher than without. The issue with making an accurate rating system is finding how much influence a player has on the game. It differs extremely in WoWS and all the data needed isn’t available to 3rd party sites. They really can only use WR, damage, kills, and cap/defense. There are just way more factors in WoWS vs WoT

Aye. As of right now, neither PR or WTR considers base & cap capture/defense in their formula based on what you said about how it is reflected in the API. WoWs Today states the data from WG on base & cap capture/defense points is inaccurate, which is why it is no longer use. also, According to WoWs Today, they do use plane kills in their formula and that they are weighted more for AA heavy ships; however, they don't reveal how and to what extent.

Here is the WTR formula used at WoWs Today - https://na.warships.today/help/warships_today_rating

The weights used for the various components of the rating are:

Average Damage 50.0% Average Kills 30.0% Win Rate 20.0% Average BaseDefense 0.0% Average Base Capture 0.0%

Ship and plane frags are weighted so that plane frags are more important for ships which on average kill more planes. On average, ship frags are 20 times more important than plane frags.

Base capture and defense points are no longer used for the rating because the data coming from WarGaming is inaccurate.

1 minute ago, Lensar said:

Imo...

All that matters in solo winrate per ship.

Anything else can perverted and exploited. But if I have a 57.46% win rate in my shima with 623 solo battles, but a 38.32% win rate in my Des Moines with 107 solo battles (true story), my Des Moines and I are probably going to be last ones chosen when picking teams for the recess kickball game.

While I agree that solo winrate per ship is more accurate than overall winrate and winrate in divisions, the solo winrate is still dependant to some degree on how good the rest of your team is. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[5D]
Members
1,176 posts
7,086 battles

There is a reason why the third party sites utilize so few stats, and it's the same reason for why I only use 6 stats in my spreadsheets. They're in my signature of you want to know more.

 

You have to come up with a system that generally applies to everything. XP sounds nice, but in the api there's no differentiation between people with premium and without. Scouting sounds nice, but there are so many ships that cannot spot on a consistent basis, lest they simply die.

 

Generally the sites go with damage, as it is something everyone wants. They also go with kills, as it is critical that you put enemy threats down for good on a consistent basis. They also include win rate, as it works as a catch all. Are you an exceptional dd player that rarely gets damage, but caps and wins a lot? You'll be able to see that in the data.

 

Logically it makes sense why they do what they do. Personally in my sheets I prefer to also include battles, as experience in a ship should me worth a point of merit. I also like to include main battery accuracy as well as survivability. Survivability I find to be key, because among the better players, they usually all have exceptional survivability while also getting done what needs to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[5D]
Members
1,176 posts
7,086 battles
8 minutes ago, Lensar said:

Imo...

All that matters in solo winrate per ship.

Anything else can perverted and exploited. But if I have a 57.46% win rate in my shima with 623 solo battles, but a 38.32% win rate in my Des Moines with 107 solo battles (true story), my Des Moines and I are probably going to be last ones chosen when picking teams for the recess kickball game.

I'd agree with you, if teamplay modes weren't a thing. But division win rates in combination with divisioned other results can show how a player works with others. You have to take it understanding that it's a bit inflated, but at the end of the day solo win rate is not the end all be all.

 

Heck... my first thousand fish battles were solo... that was over two years ago.

 

I'm still barely over a thousand solo battles. It's just boring and repetitive to play alone.

 

Context matters, and a good system will incorporate as best it can some way to interpret that context in as it delivers the overall picture of someone's statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,336 battles
23 minutes ago, Vangm94 said:

I just ignore my stats because I am horrible with Ryujo. That is what I have been told before. I look forward to what happens in game, not the stats. That is what I use to determine how good you are.

When I was watching mine like a hawk, it made me a little crazy and made me play worse by trying to push it higher or stressing about one bad game, or one bad evening of battles, or my PR being weird because, despite getting high damage, I couldn't get a team to pull out a win so it wasn't as high as I felt like it needed to be.  I started to worry too much and not really enjoy playing because I was conscious of how good my personal stats looked to other people. 

Make no mistake, they're a good tool to help you figure out what you're doing wrong, maybe what you're doing right, see how you stack up against the average player, and i do believe they're generally a pretty fair indicator of how solid a player is going to be in an average match (I have yet to be surprised when someone's played poorly enough for me to look at their profile at the end of a match).  Speaking personally though, it's easy to let it get into your head and make you play worse if you get too wrapped up in watching the performance line and not taking it for what it is and trying to do better in each game you play and avoid making the same mistakes.

So in general, I don't look at them that often, I'll just pop by once in a while to see how I'm standing against average and move along.  I use the ingame summary to keep track of my average damage and winrate more than I do WOWS Numbers to be honest.

Edited by Deviathan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,371
Members
3,254 posts
9,531 battles
Just now, Spartias said:

I'd agree with you, if teamplay modes weren't a thing. But division win rates in combination with divisioned other results can show how a player works with others. You have to take it understanding that it's a bit inflated, but at the end of the day solo win rate is not the end all be all.

Division winrates are as meaningless as overall winrates. It's less a measure of your skill at warships and more a measure of your skill at selecting players to division with.

Solo win rate is the most accurate. Although an argument could be made for ranked winrate, since that's essentially solo on steroids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[THICC]
Members
68 posts
166 battles
3 minutes ago, Spartias said:

I'd agree with you, if teamplay modes weren't a thing. But division win rates in combination with divisioned other results can show how a player works with others. You have to take it understanding that it's a bit inflated, but at the end of the day solo win rate is not the end all be all.

 

Heck... my first thousand fish battles were solo... that was over two years ago.

 

I'm still barely over a thousand solo battles. It's just boring and repetitive to play alone.

 

Context matters, and a good system will incorporate as best it can some way to interpret that context in as it delivers the overall picture of someone's statistics.

Context does matter -> What If I suddenly decide to branch out to other ships after like 500 battles (Assuming my skill remains the same,  85% Solo WR), then my solo wr will always remain high until I fail in another ship enough that it brings my solo down. Because I could be great at 1 ship and stat farm that, and unless people scroll down and look at the individual ship solo wr and the differences, I will be 'super unicum'.

Edited by Huanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts
20 minutes ago, awiggin said:

If only this were a game where stats mattered to the vast majority of players....:Smile_teethhappy:

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[5D]
Members
1,176 posts
7,086 battles
8 minutes ago, Lensar said:

Division winrates are as meaningless as overall winrates. It's less a measure of your skill at warships and more a measure of your skill at selecting players to division with.

Solo win rate is the most accurate. Although an argument could be made for ranked winrate, since that's essentially solo on steroids.

That's only true if you're being carried to that win rate. That would be reflective in that players other average stats. 

 

Unicum win rate, but average other stuff? Then your analysis is correct. Unicum everything? Lol they're probable doing the carrying.

 

It's all about context. A good system for data delivery will take context into account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

1% solo win rate

99% "is user name cometguy"

 

But really, rather than some formula, I'd rather have charts plotting how other people do in each ship, separating by mode and divisions.

Wst had something like that when it was working, and it gave me a better idea of where my strengths and weaknesses were, as well as perspective on how big of a strength/weakness it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,879 battles
14 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

When I was watching mine like a hawk, it made me a little crazy and made me play worse by trying to push it higher or stressing about one bad game, or one bad evening of battles, or my PR being weird because, despite getting high damage, I couldn't get a team to pull out a win so it wasn't as high as I felt like it needed to be.  I started to worry too much and not really enjoy playing because I was conscious of how good my personal stats looked to other people. 

Make no mistake, they're a good tool to help you figure out what you're doing wrong, maybe what you're doing right, see how you stack up against the average player, and i do believe they're generally a pretty fair indicator of how solid a player is going to be in an average match (I have yet to be surprised when someone's played poorly enough for me to look at their profile at the end of a match).  Speaking personally though, it's easy to let it get into your head and make you play worse if you get too wrapped up in watching the performance line and not taking it for what it is and trying to do better in each game you play and avoid making the same mistakes.

So in general, I don't look at them that often, I'll just pop by once in a while to see how I'm standing against average and move along.  I use the ingame summary to keep track of my average damage and winrate more than I do WOWS Numbers to be honest.

Generally speaking, I know how good I play based on some of my stats. They may not be awesome but they are not the worst thing you will see. I know I am good because of my division-mates have enjoyed my air support. I've been told and I've been complimented on how I play my Ryujo in battle and because I am... different. You will almost never see a CV that moves, sinks DDs in the first few minutes, scouts the enemy, shadows the enemy, engages the enemy, caps the enemy, and literally engage the enemy in close-quarters-combat. In addition to Ryujo herself having 24 confirmed secondary kills. Am I gloating? Yes and I am sorry. Otherwise my own proof is in my Ryujo videos in my Youtube. These Ryujo tactics I apply to 99% of my CV games and they have done me well. Do they work the same for Lady Lex, not as much but that don't mean they don't work.

Edited by Vangm94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
717
[SKDSH]
[SKDSH]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,979 posts
9,855 battles
1 hour ago, C_D said:

number of destroyed planes should be ignored - in WoWS AA is automated so no skill is needed to destroy planes.

 My Atlanta would like a word with you about how easy it is to kill enough planes to get a 'Clear Sky's ' before the cancelation and change to a CV achievement and all other types of ships .

:Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
525
[KP]
Members
1,992 posts
18,368 battles
57 minutes ago, Deviathan said:

I think being able to factor in base XP would help make it a bit more accurate, but I don't know that the API pulls that information.  XP as it is listed on our profiles is accounting for premium (or lack thereof) so it's not the best indicator, but I think base XP would work much better at representing contributions.

 

e: that being said, I don't really pay attention to my stats anymore.  I know what I'm weak at and need to improve on, I'm not super caught up in how blue or purple I am on any given website.

The only issue with base XP is if you shoot down a crap ton of planes but only do 45K damage you can still get near 2000 base XP depending on tier. There needs to be a way to take planes out of the XP equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[STW]
Members
658 posts
4,336 battles
2 minutes ago, IronMike11B4O said:

The only issue with base XP is if you shoot down a crap ton of planes but only do 45K damage you can still get near 2000 base XP depending on tier. There needs to be a way to take planes out of the XP equation.

That's quite a team contribution though isn't it?  I think I understand where you're coming from though, personal skill doesn't really play into how good you are at building an AA ship or pressing your DFAA button.

Edited by Deviathan
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,493
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,788 posts
42 minutes ago, Lensar said:

Imo...

All that matters in solo winrate per ship.

Anything else can perverted and exploited. But if I have a 57.46% win rate in my shima with 623 solo battles, but a 38.32% win rate in my Des Moines with 107 solo battles (true story), my Des Moines and I are probably going to be last ones chosen when picking teams for the recess kickball game.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×