What is the median W/R?

[Bill_Halsey]

Okay, folks had been called all sorts of pejoratives as far as ship driving goes.  So :

1. What is the median player win rate? That way if you call someone a spud you can at least look at his stats and see if there's substance to to the allegation.

2. Why do 3rd party stat sites  (PR number) weigh damage more than W/R?

[Capt_JollyRoger]

Spuds are ones whose wr starts with a 4 or less. So a 48% would be spudly. Low 50 ish is average. 55 and up is a step over average. Anything 60 or more is good to great. Anything over 70 is uber.

 

My opinion. Others will have different numbers.

[BrushWolf]

2 minutes ago, JollyRoger6969 said:

Spuds are ones whose wr starts with a 4 or less. So a 48% would be spudly. Low 50 ish is average. 55 and up is a step over average. Anything 60 or more is good to great. Anything over 70 is uber.

 

My opinion. Others will have different numbers.

I would use a range with 48% - 52% as average with each step out of the range being that much better or worse. A 47% player is slightly below average and a 37% player should check their pulse.

[Rollingonit]

28 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

2. Why do 3rd party stat sites  (PR number) weigh damage more than W/R?

PR stands for personal rating I think. Damage is closer metric to a individual's performance than W/R.

[Navalpride33]

55 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

Okay, folks had been called all sorts of pejoratives as far as ship driving goes.  So :

1. What is the median player win rate? That way if you call someone a spud you can at least look at his stats and see if there's substance to to the allegation.

2. Why do 3rd party stat sites  (PR number) weigh damage more than W/R?

%90 of the player base are between %45 to %55 WR...

[Merc85]

57 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

Okay, folks had been called all sorts of pejoratives as far as ship driving goes.  So :

1. What is the median player win rate? That way if you call someone a spud you can at least look at his stats and see if there's substance to to the allegation.

2. Why do 3rd party stat sites  (PR number) weigh damage more than W/R?

2.  I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that they do so since for a low number of battles the PR is a somewhat better indicator of skill.   But after enough battles, I'd rather have a captain on my team that has a good w/r rather than one that farms damage.  In the latter case PR should weigh w/r more than damage imo.

[TheArc]

6 minutes ago, Merc85 said:

2.  I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that they do so since for a low number of battles the PR is a somewhat better indicator of skill.   But after enough battles, I'd rather have a captain on my team that has a good w/r rather than one that farms damage.  In the latter case PR should weigh w/r more than damage imo.

The PR calculates kill/deaths and wins more than damage. Damage can often be a garbage stat with how easy it can be to farm. 

[YouSatInGum]

Both PR and WR  should be an indicatinon of player ability but only a loose one at that.  There are too many things that either measure do not account for or weigh too lightly.  Recent performance for starters, players who play in divs, players that tank damage really well...etc.

 I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, just that blanket statements like anybody with a win rate less than 48% is below average would be incorrect a lot of the time.

[SgtBeltfed]

Both win rate and damage have flaws as far as measuring how good or bad a player is:

Win Rate can be problematic when good players have losing streaks that are out of their control and bad players can have winning streaks they didn't help with. In the long run, it should average out but after a while it's hard to measure change of any kind.

Damage is a poor measurement, as it's impacted by what your shooting at, a player that hunts DD's and kills several a match will have a lower average damage than a player hiding behind an island spamming HE into BB"s. The player hunting DD's is probably a better player, and because of how XP/credits are awarded, will be rewarded as such.

The two stats that would make an excellent means of comparing players would be "Average base XP" and "Average Finishing Place"  

[Rollingonit]

3 minutes ago, TheArc said:

The PR calculates kill/deaths and wins more than damage. Damage can often be a garbage stat with how easy it can be to farm. 

I dont think does. 

https://wows-numbers.com/personal/rating

Basic assumptions:

• values in the range of 0 - 3000,
• colors and values similar to the well-known World of Tanks WN8,
• WoWS is more strategic 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,

But I agree, dmg can be easily farmed.

[Hammer_n_Sickle]

57 minutes ago, JollyRoger6969 said:

Spuds are ones whose wr starts with a 4 or less. So a 48% would be spudly. Low 50 ish is average. 55 and up is a step over average. Anything 60 or more is good to great. Anything over 70 is uber.

 

My opinion. Others will have different numbers.

So I did 4 Random battles yesterday, and all 4 times my team lost (for just....moronic reasons) despite me personally doing pretty well. My WR "starts with a 4". Am I a "spud"? Honestly, WR is a stupid way to view a player as good or bad. You can be a terrible terrible player and get deleted in less that a minute, but if you "just so happen to" be on the Winning team, your WR will go up.

Edit: on a number of occasions i was told (in game chat) not to make suggestions, or that they don't want to hear my opinion because my "wr is crap". really? wth? ... and those same players than did some yolo or whatever and kept blaming "sh!t teams" when they get killed. 

[centarina]

26 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

%90 of the player base are between %45 to %55 WR...

I am willing to bet  good half of the population is below 45% unless you only count  those who play more than 20 match per week.    vast majority  plays less than 5 match a week and those will have low 40% WR . 

 

i

[Navalpride33]

11 minutes ago, centarina said:

I am willing to bet  good half of the population is below 45% unless you only count  those who play more than 20 match per week.    vast majority  plays less than 5 match a week and those will have low 40% WR . 

Nope... Everyone and  I do mean the majority (the %90 percentile) are scattered around %45- %55 WR ( those who are active).... This is consistent not only to NA server, but across ALL server region populations.

Who ever you get to play with in Randoms?... That depends on the population in the queue.

Those who are above %56 or Below %44, represent %5 percentile for each respectively.

 

[dEsTurbed1]

54 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

%90 of the player base are between %45 to %55 WR...

Yay..... 

I'm finally one of the 90 % ers.....

 

[C14Alpha]

2 hours ago, Bill_Halsey said:

1. What is the median player win rate? That way if you call someone a spud you can at least look at his stats and see if there's substance to to the allegation.

48%

[yacskn]

1 hour ago, Bill_Halsey said:

What is the median player win rate? That way if you call someone a spud you can at least look at his stats and see if there's substance to to the allegation.

It's not really a fruitful inquiry but here it is, this is as of April 2019, in NA.

Have fun with it.

[loco_max]

4 minutes ago, yacskn said:

Have fun with it.

ah, somebody showing real data and not commenting on self bias, very rare HQ post, +1...

[Pay_Your_Torpedo_Tax]

11 minutes ago, yacskn said:

It's not really a fruitful inquiry but here it is, this is as of April 2019, in NA.

Have fun with it.

That's really depressing to look at.....

[centarina]

so 2.2 mil account has less than 100 matches, so they don't count in the stat.               and vast majority of those probably have really low WR.         also,  that is from early last year.  so how many of those account are active   and how has it changed since.

[yacskn]

Just now, Many_metal_fishes said:

That's really depressing to look at.....

Literally exactly what I was thinking.

[Bill_Halsey]

1 hour ago, RusskiySpy said:

So I did 4 Random battles yesterday, and all 4 times my team lost (for just....moronic reasons) despite me personally doing pretty well. My WR "starts with a 4". Am I a "spud"? Honestly, WR is a stupid way to view a player as good or bad. You can be a terrible terrible player and get deleted in less that a minute, but if you "just so happen to" be on the Winning team, your WR will go up.

Edit: on a number of occasions i was told (in game chat) not to make suggestions, or that they don't want to hear my opinion because my "wr is crap". really? wth? ... and those same players than did some yolo or whatever and kept blaming "sh!t teams" when they get killed. 

Well let's state my case:

I had 7000 games by 2018 with a W/R of 43% solo. Folks told me that was perfectly fine. I kept wondering if I can do better. I came across LHM's "How to Control your W/R". Took the lessons to heart. 15k solo battles, I have a W/R of 51.08% solo. And it's getting harder. I have to have a W/R of 60% or better to keep increasing nowadays. 

And as being told to shut up because my W/R doesn't back me up, yeah that as happened to me a lot when I was at the 46-48% level. Strange that they don't do that anymore.

Lert is right. Matches are won by bad teams facing off against slight worse tms. But even 1 more decent player in a tm could make the difference.

[Kenrod_Melrocity]

59 minutes ago, yacskn said:

It's not really a fruitful inquiry but here it is, this is as of April 2019, in NA.

Have fun with it.

Great data - thanks. How did you get this? Will have to brush up on my statistics to see what it means....

 

I think WR is similar to American baseball. No matter what, you are going to win 1/3 and lose 1/3 of all of you games. What happens with the remaining 1/3 dictates if you are good or if you suck.

Personally, I am trying to get my WR up and I do not pay attention to any other personal stat than that. I guess I just want to be a team player because that makes this kind of gaming unique. I think..

[BarneyStyle]

Honestly, if you’re so concerned with your win rate, create another account and start over with the experience you’ve accumulated.  Otherwise, take the good with the bad, win rate aside.

[Zombie_Snuggles]

2 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

%90 of the player base are between %45 to %55 WR...

This is by WG design. Not trying to start a conspiracy out break but this is true IMO.

[ThisIsClassic]

49 minutes ago, Many_metal_fishes said:

That's really depressing to look at.....

 

47 minutes ago, yacskn said:

Literally exactly what I was thinking.

Even more so when you consider some of the higher WR accounts are rerolls.