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

Please DEFAULT everyone's stats to PRIVATE (Reasons)

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

325
[BB35]
[BB35]
Members
390 posts
11,043 battles

I'd like to see the game Default everyone's stats to "PRIVATE".

- Tired of seeing Match Maker Posts on redoing it to Balance it based on Skill.

- Stat Shaming will stop

- Toxic people posting on the forums will be reduced

- People will play the game to their best ability each game rather than giving up and not playing because MMM says they have the less skilled players. (Based on W/L rate).

- Sick and tired of people saying "W/L ratio is the best method of determining best players". In my opinion the Amount of Average EXP is a better measure of a players skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
317
[LSNB]
Members
1,584 posts
4,409 battles

All valid points, though I can't imagine a reality where this is true since public stats are so commonplace in games. This might be a minor nuisance for clan recruiters and people who check stats in general, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,684
[O7]
Members
5,361 posts
11,868 battles
27 minutes ago, Gemlin said:

I'd like to see the game Default everyone's stats to "PRIVATE".

- Tired of seeing Match Maker Posts on redoing it to Balance it based on Skill.

- Stat Shaming will stop

- Toxic people posting on the forums will be reduced

- People will play the game to their best ability each game rather than giving up and not playing because MMM says they have the less skilled players. (Based on W/L rate).

- Sick and tired of people saying "W/L ratio is the best method of determining best players". In my opinion the Amount of Average EXP is a better measure of a players skill.

And you'd be wrong, since average xp is influenced by boosters and premium time. Has the least correlation with skill than any other existing metric.

Referencing a players performance to support arguments about the game they make wouldn't change. It would just change from 'your stats are bad' to 'your stats are hidden' and it would have the same effect on your argument as if they were bad.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[CTU]
Members
131 posts
16,712 battles

and damage per battle seems to be higher when you are in a lost battle, so, that can't be a metric neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,754
[KWF]
Members
4,370 posts
6,405 battles

Solo winrate is as close as we can get to a semi reliable way of gauging player skill.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,841
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,420 posts
14,165 battles
9 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Solo winrate is as close as we can get to a semi reliable way of gauging player skill.

Not even there except for the very worst and the very best players. I think average damage by tier or tier groups and kill to death are better although still not perfect. Personally even when private total matches and matches in each ship should be visible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,252
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,104 posts
4,084 battles
1 hour ago, Gemlin said:

I'd like to see the game Default everyone's stats to "PRIVATE".

- Tired of seeing Match Maker Posts on redoing it to Balance it based on Skill.

- Stat Shaming will stop

- Toxic people posting on the forums will be reduced

- People will play the game to their best ability each game rather than giving up and not playing because MMM says they have the less skilled players. (Based on W/L rate).

- Sick and tired of people saying "W/L ratio is the best method of determining best players". In my opinion the Amount of Average EXP is a better measure of a players skill.

People will complain about MM regardless, hiding stats won't do squat.

Stat Shaming might stop, but it'd only be replaced with something else.

Toxic people are going to make toxic posts regardless.

Very few people use MMM, and even fewer base their gameplay off it. Removing it won't do squat for gameplay.

W/L is the single best metric we have. No stat tells the whole story, but if you consistently win more than average you must be doing something right.

 

Every competitive game/sport wants to have a measure by which to compare players. Baseball, Football, Olympic sports, video games. That's just the way it is, WOWS is no different. People want to be able to compare themselves to other players. Some people don't want to do that, fine. But there's a lot of good things that come from having a huge pool of stats, don't let a few bad things over shadow them.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
143
[KRAK]
Members
1,354 posts
15,249 battles
1 hour ago, Pulicat said:

And you'd be wrong, since average xp is influenced by boosters and premium time. Has the least correlation with skill than any other existing metric.

Referencing a players performance to support arguments about the game they make wouldn't change. It would just change from 'your stats are bad' to 'your stats are hidden' and it would have the same effect on your argument as if they were bad.

Over the last 200 battles in Moskva, my win rate is 33% with that ship.  Total combined 342 battles (including the 140 battles from two years ago) gets me a over the years average of 41% with 38K damage, which is just over half the server average. Not going into how Moskva compares to the new Russian Cruiser T10s.

So does this mean that the other 11x200x.66 players who lost battles along with me had lower than average skills at those individual battle moments ? Did I loose because of one of them (or two or three) had a bad match and made big mistakes? 

Or, was the underlying thread of those 1452 total players I was teamed up with over those 200 games who also lost basically due to my OWN bad play ? To answer that, I would like to be able to look at recent Moskva stats since the cruiser line split. Granted, I don't see Moskvas any more (or rarely), but I do see the newest RU CAs at T10 constantly.

I do hide my stats now, and get focused fired early a lot less in Moskva than before. There are some really savy players looking to divide up 66K HP early in the game. So with the incognito approach, the early pile on I used to get has been brought under some control, and I'm staying longer alive in those games. Someone who has good unhidden win rate stats is still the ship not to tick off.

Edited by Ericson38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,684
[O7]
Members
5,361 posts
11,868 battles
6 hours ago, Ericson38 said:

Over the last 200 battles in Moskva, my win rate is 33% with that ship.  Total combined 342 battles (including the 140 battles from two years ago) gets me a over the years average of 41% with 38K damage, which is just over half the server average. Not going into how Moskva compares to the new Russian Cruiser T10s.

So does this mean that the other 11x200x.66 players who lost battles along with me had lower than average skills at those individual battle moments ? Did I loose because of one of them (or two or three) had a bad match and made big mistakes? 

Or, was the underlying thread of those 1452 total players I was teamed up with over those 200 games who also lost basically due to my OWN bad play ? To answer that, I would like to be able to look at recent Moskva stats since the cruiser line split. Granted, I don't see Moskvas any more (or rarely), but I do see the newest RU CAs at T10 constantly.

I do hide my stats now, and get focused fired early a lot less in Moskva than before. There are some really savy players looking to divide up 66K HP early in the game. So with the incognito approach, the early pile on I used to get has been brought under some control, and I'm staying longer alive in those games. Someone who has good unhidden win rate stats is still the ship not to tick off.

I can't really tell what you're asking, but I'll guesstimate. A lost battle is not wholly on one person, but many contributing factors. The same can be said for a won battle. You can contribute negatively in a victory and positively in a loss. Generally, the more positive contributions you have, the better your odds of winning battles. Over long periods of time, instead of saying "i've won 60% of my previous battles" you would say "i have about 60% in favor odds of winning the next battle" but it's very loose. You could be playing a ship you don't know and not have the same ability to contribute positively, or vice versa. 

Over many, many battles, your winrate is a marker of your ability to contribute, and the better players are almost always in high winrates (not better than average winrates, HIGH winrates. 60%ish solo, much higher for division etc.)

I'd guarantee you nobody is focusing you because of your stats or your name recognition or whatever. The reality is more likely that 1. you just think that is what's happening or 2. you stopped going to places where people will focus you early game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
143
[KRAK]
Members
1,354 posts
15,249 battles

I also don't move Moskva as much at the start and let about 2 minutes pass before heading somewhere. Unfortunately, that leaves some team members exposed when they could use its radar at a CAP, which would also greatly increase early elimination. With 14 km best case detection, I was constantly in gun battles and an early juicy out. I still loose battles in it the majority of the time, just takes a little longer, but same outcome. She has battle cruiser handling and turret rotations, while detection is higher by than my Montana.

BTW, my absolute favorite ships to play are the Italian cruisers.

Edited by Ericson38

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
527
[GRAVE]
Members
1,268 posts
18,770 battles
On 7/20/2020 at 5:42 PM, Gemlin said:

Sick and tired of people saying "W/L ratio is the best method of determining best players". In my opinion the Amount of Average EXP is a better measure of a players skill.

If the person in question runs no XP boosting camos or signals, and standard account, and averages <900 XP while playing mostly T8-10, then average EXP is a good measure. However, since it is nearly impossible to tell if that person is running any of the above XP Boosters, you cannot use EXP to determine how good he/she is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×