Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
buzz_bomb

A thought about win rate

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

5
[TF16]
Members
83 posts
5,951 battles

The other day I was in a typical game of WoWS when I noticed a now increasingly common site, an afk ship or a ship that almost certainly was a bot. I was a bit frustrated but like goes on and ultimately we won. Which got me thinking how little it mattered that the ship was "not there" and the fact that we prevailed anyway. At least according to my understanding of general consensus an average player is someone who has a win rate of around 50% and the beginnings of a very good player is someone who has a 60% win rate. 

I thought about this and I'm beginning to think that your contribution to a game only matters 10% of the time. Thinking back to the games I've played recently I feel like there have been more game blowouts, where one side overwhelmingly defeats the other. Regardless of how well I do personally on the losing side of these blowouts I would have lost anyway. It's only those few games perhaps 1 in 10 where I felt I truly made a difference. It's also those few games that are the most fun. The ones where the winner or loser hangs in the balance till the very end. Some of the most fun and enjoyable have even been games I've lost at the very end but the ones that are most upsetting are the blowouts, even the victories because they are just no challenge at all. 

One of the things I haven't quite been able to explain is what accounts for people with win rates substantially below the average say in the 30% range? Maybe all of this makes sense since I'm part of a team of between about 10-15 people where one in ten happens to be 10%.   

How does WG make me feel like I'm having more fun more often?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts

take those thoughts a bit further...

Even a 55% player would fit the mold of being good...  that is only 5 more wins over 100 battles...  and even at 100 battles could be lucky...     over 1000 it is only 50... but now a more accurate reprsentation.

Yes AFK players, unequal #'s of div'ed players, uptiering can all affect your ability to impact each game in your favour consistently...  but in wg's mind everyone has to deal with the same thing.  (not that some of those factors couldn't be tweaked...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,058
[ARGSY]
Members
20,178 posts
14,340 battles
12 minutes ago, buzz_bomb said:

Some of the most fun and enjoyable have even been games I've lost at the very end

Agreed; I've had games that have gone to the wire and people have said in all-chat "However it ends, this has been a great battle", with agreement on both sides. 

13 minutes ago, buzz_bomb said:

It's only those few games perhaps 1 in 10 where I felt I truly made a difference.

But as you improve, you might find that ratio climbing to 3 in 20, then 1 in 5, then... 

14 minutes ago, buzz_bomb said:

the ones that are most upsetting are the blowouts, even the victories because they are just no challenge at all. 

I would challenge anyone who asserted they would rather have a magnificent defeat than an easy victory. However, I know I can be frustrated when my defeats involve sinking three ships and taking two solo caps, and then the victory which follows immediately after is so swift there is time to do very little and I bring home fewer credits than on the defeat! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts
3 minutes ago, Anonymous50 said:

This comes to mind

+100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
463
[WOLFG]
Members
867 posts

I gave up on win rate.  I always play my best to win, but as an average player my impact on the outcome of the game is nil.  People who play for stats have lotsa ways to 'work' them up.  Seal clubbing, running OP steel ships, buying the best Premium ships,  Divisioning., 19 pt. Captains in level four ships etc. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
627
[POP]
Members
1,084 posts
9,403 battles

You cant just look at win rate when playing solo.  Luck plays a big part on which side you are on.  Skill of a single ship can quickly be negated by the lack there of with your teammates.  Playing in a Div with other skilled players can help but again, even 3 skilled players cannot carry an entire match if the rest of your team potatoes.  On nights where I have to play solo I try to focus on damage and player rating, it makes things a little less frustrating when constantly on loosing teams if the rest of my stats are going up anyway.  Here is an example of Saturday nights gameplay.  Average damage up, player rating good considering it is affected by being on less than stellar teams and average xp ok all things considered.

Screenshot_20200426-084157_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
662
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,609 posts
10,459 battles

An afk ship doesn't help your team, but it doesn't charge in and get killed right away either.  In some ways, it is better than a yolo bot. 

Individual payers do make a difference over time.  In most games it might not matter, but one extra ship killed every 10 games could sway the percentage of wins by 1 or 2 games every hundred.  That slight difference could improve a players win percentage from an average 50% to 52%.  A better player with a bit more influence on the game could result in an even more significant percentage increase.  You see players with good solo win rates all the time.  It can and will continue to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts

the more battles played the less luck has anything to do with it...

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,590
Members
6,621 posts
20,658 battles
15 minutes ago, Anonymous50 said:

This comes to mind

 

 

Mitch's Bar on Hillsborough Street, Raleigh, NC.

Basically an institution at NC State. My bar of choice, played Hearts and Spades there and drank pitchers by the dozens when we should have been studying. Good times.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,806
[WORX]
Members
10,694 posts
18,577 battles
25 minutes ago, buzz_bomb said:

The other day I was in a typical game of WoWS when I noticed a now increasingly common site, an afk ship or a ship that almost certainly was a bot. I was a bit frustrated but like goes on and ultimately we won. Which got me thinking how little it mattered that the ship was "not there" and the fact that we prevailed anyway. At least according to my understanding of general consensus an average player is someone who has a win rate of around 50% and the beginnings of a very good player is someone who has a 60% win rate. 

I thought about this and I'm beginning to think that your contribution to a game only matters 10% of the time. Thinking back to the games I've played recently I feel like there have been more game blowouts, where one side overwhelmingly defeats the other. Regardless of how well I do personally on the losing side of these blowouts I would have lost anyway. It's only those few games perhaps 1 in 10 where I felt I truly made a difference. It's also those few games that are the most fun. The ones where the winner or loser hangs in the balance till the very end. Some of the most fun and enjoyable have even been games I've lost at the very end but the ones that are most upsetting are the blowouts, even the victories because they are just no challenge at all. 

One of the things I haven't quite been able to explain is what accounts for people with win rates substantially below the average say in the 30% range? Maybe all of this makes sense since I'm part of a team of between about 10-15 people where one in ten happens to be 10%.   

How does WG make me feel like I'm having more fun more often?   

From a statistics POV, every player will be in the %45 to %55 WR, this block represents the %90 percentile of the playing "active" population for all server regions.

If you encounter anything below that or anything above the %90 percentile... There is a few reasons...

  • He is not active
  • He is disabled.
  • He is just starting.

I would rather see more low stats players... Than means, my replacement is already here...

If I see less players with low stats, that means.. The game is in trouble population wise...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
627
[POP]
Members
1,084 posts
9,403 battles
13 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I would challenge anyone who asserted they would rather have a magnificent defeat than an easy victory. However, I know I can be frustrated when my defeats involve sinking three ships and taking two solo caps, and then the victory which follows immediately after is so swift there is time to do very little and I bring home fewer credits than on the defeat! 

I'll take that challenge, some of by highest damage/kill games were magnificent defeats that went down to the wire.  I ended up with more xp than the highest on the winning team.  I'll take that game over a winning blowout 100% of the time.

World of Warships Screenshot 2020.04.09 - 20.06.51.17_LI.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[MKF]
Members
583 posts
20,416 battles
2 minutes ago, HallaSnackbar said:

I'll take that challenge, some of by highest damage/kill games were magnificent defeats that went down to the wire.  I ended up with more xp than the highest on the winning team.  I'll take that game over a winning blowout 100% of the time.

World of Warships Screenshot 2020.04.09 - 20.06.51.17_LI.jpg

That situation irritates me. I enjoy playing well and being top of my team but I hate losing more

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
574
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
2,017 posts
25,646 battles
14 minutes ago, SKurj said:

the more battles played the less luck has anything to do with it...

This   +1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
574
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
2,017 posts
25,646 battles
14 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

From a statistics POV, every player will be in the %45 to %55 WR, this block represents the %90 percentile of the playing "active" population for all server regions.

If you encounter anything below that or anything above the %90 percentile... There is a few reasons...

  • He is not active
  • He is disabled.
  • He is just starting.

I would rather see more low stats players... Than means, my replacement is already here...

If I see less players with low stats, that means.. The game is in trouble population wise...

 

If there are 90% of players in that range, then there are 5% of players above that range and 5% of players below that range.  If you think that the 5% of players above a 55% win rate are there because of the three reasons you listed I think you are absolutely wrong.  They are there because they have higher skill than 95% of the players and use them to win more than 55% of their battles.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,058
[ARGSY]
Members
20,178 posts
14,340 battles
14 minutes ago, HallaSnackbar said:

I ended up with more xp than the highest on the winning team. 

See, if that happened to me I would be quite satisfied to eat the loss. But what is most galling is not the blowout losses where you almost carried and went down in a glorious fashion; it's the ones where you did so much and missed out on the win (and so much more XP) by a whisker because some idiot derped his way to the grave where he could easily have sat tight, lived, and not given the enemy the game-winning points (or final kill).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,806
[WORX]
Members
10,694 posts
18,577 battles
7 minutes ago, Merc85 said:

If there are 90% of players in that range, then there are 5% of players above that range and 5% of players below that range.  If you think that the 5% of players above a 55% win rate are there because of the three reasons you listed I think you are absolutely wrong.  They are there because they have higher skill than 95% of the players and use them to win more than 55% of their battles.

Not in context of this tread.,... Now, do you want to know how to avoid getting to %90percentile WR like everyone else ??? I got some 07 friends you can chat with...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
564
[R-F]
Members
333 posts
11,715 battles

Normally forum winrate discussions are not my thing, but something in the OP is something that I've personally told people before as well. I strongly believe that with very few outliers, in solo play you're probably going to win 40 and lose 40 out of every hundred games regardless of your decisions in game. Those 20 games where your choices matter are what ultimately sets your solo winrate, and why even in the very best clans you don't see many solo win rates above 60. Go to wows-numbers and click through some players in the superunicum winrate range, then check their solo. Many of them will be right around 60 I would guess. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[CVA16]
Members
5,392 posts
16,221 battles
30 minutes ago, Murcc said:

In some ways, it is better than a yolo bot. 

Can't see how. A yolo bot spots for the team and soaks up enemy fire while your team can fire back. May even be able to do same damage. An AFK is usually not even seen (except by enemy planes) until the battle is already lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,283
[PVE]
Members
4,273 posts
18,658 battles
5 minutes ago, Ossiuum said:

Normally forum winrate discussions are not my thing, but something in the OP is something that I've personally told people before as well. I strongly believe that with very few outliers, in solo play you're probably going to win 40 and lose 40 out of every hundred games regardless of your decisions in game. Those 20 games where your choices matter are what ultimately sets your solo winrate, and why even in the very best clans you don't see many solo win rates above 60. Go to wows-numbers and click through some players in the superunicum winrate range, then check their solo. Many of them will be right around 60 I would guess. 

What you are describing is the random distribution of wins/losses if, the population is a random distribution of skill to begin with.  When I first started playing this game I believe it was because my W/L rate fit in the 66% in the middle and the blow out wins or losses were the small exceptions on either side of the curve....  Now, after the 2019 debacles, we no longer "seem to have" a random distribution of skills..... So, the far left and right extremes are much much larger than 15% or so and we see a lot of win or loss stomps.....   Why I gave up Randoms completely.   I am hand disabled so my 47% I'll say "GuD enough" and stick to COOP........   This situation also allows for "long streaks" of winning or losing because a lot of the average players moved on to other things....  Friend of mine was encountering 10-14 losses in a row and "just gave up"........  Can't beat the odds and the house always wins and that, is too much for some:......no matter how hard you try to better yourself, cascading losses because of skill gaps in the population trump determinations and skill..........   Just seems to be the new normal.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
427
[ICOP]
[ICOP]
Members
459 posts
20,316 battles
20 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

See, if that happened to me I would be quite satisfied to eat the loss. But what is most galling is not the blowout losses where you almost carried and went down in a glorious fashion; it's the ones where you did so much and missed out on the win (and so much more XP) by a whisker because some idiot derped his way to the grave where he could easily have sat tight, lived, and not given the enemy the game-winning points (or final kill).

YES!  I posted here not long ago about a teammate that lost the game for us twice.  Once by being 2 secs away from capping the enemy base but leaving, and again by charging across the map at the last almost dead enemy and the showing full broadside so he could take 3 torps and get sunk.  I will remember that one as long as I play the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[USA-N]
Members
785 posts
9,252 battles

The understanding of statistics is very poor, on this forum.

Lookit, you are not playing against perfectly average players, in Random battles. You are playing against everyone, the good and the very good, and the bad and the very bad. Everyone is in "in the pot", and a possible opponent.

Therefore, your own skill level is not deterministic of the outcome, over time, except in perverse circumstances (seal clubbing in CVs).

Consider a six sided die. Imagine you are a six, always. Now imagine that you and nine other random numbers from 1 to 6 are in a match against 10 perfect threes. Your high number matters. You have given you team a better chance, by being higher than average, because you are up against perfectly average players. 

However, random battles are not like this. In random battles, your high skill is offset by the chance that the other team also drew a high skill player. It is also offset (to normal odds) by the chance you have a complete potato on your team, and they do not.

In order to improve the teams chances of winning, you need to be better than their average player. You can't know this to be true, until after the draw has been made. You are not fighting a preconfigured team of perfectly average bots.

Now, the exceptions to this rule occur when highly skilled players go seal clubbing, especially in very influential ships like CVs and strong BBs. Why? Well, in the normal course of events, low tiers have a greater percentage of new players. Therefore, the average skill level is indeed lower than "the general" population. A very highly skilled player who is fighting all beginners is an anomaly, beyond the statistical norm. A very highly skilled player at tier X is just another player in the pool of all players.

It follows that the way to get a high win rate is to go seal clubbing, or less nefariously to grind many new ship lines. Those who do this, who go back to the low tiers to grind many different lines of ships, even after they have learned the way of the game, will surely have a slightly higher than average win rate, over time. Those who purchase a premium tier X on their first day, and who never play any other tier, are likely to have a slightly lower than average win rate.

The way to boost win rate most significantly is to get skilled at CVs, and then go seal clubbing at the lowest tier. Why? Becuase this class of ship is extremely influential on the battle outcome. If the general opposition CV is a new player, someone who is playing CV but not seal clubbing, then the outcome is very heavily biased in favour of the seal clubber. Even when seal clubbers abound at low tiers, even where half of all CVs in tier 6 are seal clubbers padding their stats (hello!), the rest of the games will be so heavily skewed in favour of the seal clubber that their stats will improve very significantly, in a short amount of time.

Win rate tells you more about the way the player has progressed through how many lines, rather than anything else. Someone who grinds one line, and only one line, and then sticks with their beloved tier X in that line, is likely to have a sub standard win rate. Not because they are a bad player, but because, for most of their playing career, they were punching above their weight division. Someone who, like me, likes to try out many different lines of ships and nations, will surely end up with a slightly positive win rate, because they will end up seal clubbing at the lower tiers, as they train more lines over time.

Someone who is actively trying to boost their win rate as much as possible, by seal clubbing with CVs relentlessly (if such people exist), will likely have a significantly high win rate.

Put simply, if you wish to win more often, pick fights you are more likely to win. Pick up that club, and go after them baby seals.

Otherwise, you are just another player in the random pot, and 50% is what you can expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,453
[WOLFG]
Members
29,075 posts
8,322 battles
1 hour ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I would challenge anyone who asserted they would rather have a magnificent defeat than an easy victory.

Challenge accepted.

My satisfaction with the game is based on my personal performance. Parlaying that into a win is merely a bonus. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
553
[OO7]
Members
481 posts
27,255 battles

I still find going solo to be enjoyable. I'm under the belief you go solo for stats and divs for winning. However, with 3 man divs you tend to get a lot of blowouts. I find it very enjoyable to try to carry a team that tries their hardest to throw

(Recent solo btw)

wr.png.1f9e0013875d5e1068036cd0146b51c3.png

Edited by eagle_lance
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
2,138 posts
8 minutes ago, SidTheBlade said:

Win rate tells you more about the way the player has progressed through how many lines, rather than anything else. Someone who grinds one line, and only one line, and then sticks with their beloved tier X in that line, is likely to have a sub standard win rate. Not because they are a bad player, but because, for most of their playing career, they were punching above their weight division. Someone who, like me, likes to try out many different lines of ships and nations, will surely end up with a slightly positive win rate, because they will end up seal clubbing at the lower tiers, as they train more lines over time.

wr overall is less of an indicator of skill than wr in any one particular ship... agreed...  i would look at # of battles and wr for a particular ship before even looking at overall..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×