Jump to content


WHy does win rate matter? Just curious


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
119 replies to this topic

Brock7142 #1 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 03:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011
out of the 100's of threads of "Why win rate matters" "This is why win rate matters" there's always some BS theory of good player this and that, but never an explanation why it matters at all in anyway...

Why does it matter?

Serious, not trolling, being serious, why does it matter to have a high win rate?

Deadly_Stealth #2 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 1,110
  • Member since:
    04-07-2011
This is a team game, and if you cannot play well, youre hurting your team. If you were playing by yourself, win rate wouldnt matter, but since 14 others depend on you pullling your own weight, IT MATTERS!

also you never respond to my posts about this:

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1

Edited by Deadly_Stealth, Oct 09 2012 - 04:04.


FlorbFnarb #3 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 26,070
  • Member since:
    08-02-2012
Yeah, I agree: it's simply a measure of how good you are.  It doesn't reflect on you as a person any more than your ability at basketball reflects on you as a person, but then if you join a rec club basketball team you have some obligation to try and become a better player for your team's sake.

Brock7142 #4 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011
How is world of tanks different from SOCOM and other team based games, in which win rate means nothing? Or in Day of Defeat, Team Fortress, etc.?

Win rate is determined by team work, you take 1 player and pit him against 15, that player will never win. If you'd like, I can take the 70%s, and thrown in 15 40%ers, and send them all against the 70%. 70% will be garunteed to lose.

Can be seen with lone survivors trying to cap enemy base, only to discover 4 and 5 other enemy tanks are alive and right on top of him, or even 2 tanks are right on top of him as he's in the cap. (but then again, my KV-1 has solo'd 4 tanks alone, and won the match, had nothing to do with skill, it had to do with bouncy armor and them being lower tiers, but that's beside the point)

What makes win rate in this game so different from win rates in other round-team based games?

Brock7142 #5 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011

View PostDeadly_Stealth, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:03, said:

This is a team game, and if you cannot play well, youre hurting your team. If you were playing by yourself, win rate wouldnt matter, but since 14 others depend on you pullling your own weight, IT MATTERS!

also you never respond to my posts about this:

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1

I was instructed not to respond to it, or any posts in there, hense why I haven't posted in there since my last post.

InFid3L #6 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:11

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 345
  • Member since:
    07-31-2012

View PostDeadly_Stealth, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:03, said:

This is a team game, and if you cannot play well, youre hurting your team. If you were playing by yourself, win rate wouldnt matter, but since 14 others depend on you pullling your own weight, IT MATTERS!

also you never respond to my posts about this:

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1
What you just said makes no sense what so ever.  If you were playing alone, your WR would be WAY more telling that playing with 14 other jackaloons.  Example, I can count around 10 this week during the start of the match, 3 of my team mates drove their tanks off of a bridge. Then there are the 100 other things people do that is completely dumb.  So if I've done the very best I can do and have heaps of burning tanks around me, and I still lose, how is that my fault??  Fact is WR in pubs means NOTHING.  Everyone should be around 50% give or take.  It's the law of probability.  Now, if you got a guy with 40% WR, 550 Efficiency rating, and 12K battles....THAT DUDE SUCKS.  Don't expect much from him but to be a good target for the bad guys.

Brock7142 #7 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011
But when you're IN  a game, THAT ONE GAME you're in RIGHT NOW, why does your win rate matter? Why does the win rate/performance of the tank beside you or behind you or infront of you matter, in THAT game you're in RIGHT NOW?

WHy does win rate matter?

HTRK74JR #8 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:22

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 714
  • Member since:
    01-08-2012
It matters because to me it shows that i am good at the game. I get upset when idiots dont know how to play a tier 8 tank, and die because they let themselves get flanked or didnt know to angle their damn hull so rounds bounce off. I play to win, but when i have alot of fun, and the match is close, i do not care if i lose. I had fun. But if im killed by arty right off the bat, or im being hit by someone 50 meters away and i cant see them or the shots because of the foliage, it makes me mad.

OUTLAWBilly_Mays #9 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:24

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 386
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011
The theory is that X% of battles are going to be wins, and the same amount will be losses (40% I believe is the number). This is decided just by the MM. The remaining portion of your battles are supposedly decided by your individual performance, meaning that percent makes up all those 1v1's, 2v1's, etc. If you're a "good" player, the theory is that you should clutch more of those battles as you'll be more active, putting out more damage, more kills, and overall being effective. One flaw in this logic comes from platooning: a lot of these unicums who have 67% WR's platoon a lot. With the added teamwork and communication of a friend (or two), you will definitely be more effective in a coordinated attack. If you and your platoon mates are on an equal skill level and you roflstomp the other team, props to you. But, sometimes a player whose judged skill would be much less of that of his platoon mate gets carried, and artificially boosts his WR.

Edited by OUTLAWBilly_Mays, Oct 09 2012 - 04:25.


slackware1995 #10 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:25

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 801
  • Member since:
    03-21-2011

View PostBrock7142, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:21, said:

But when you're IN  a game, THAT ONE GAME you're in RIGHT NOW, why does your win rate matter? Why does the win rate/performance of the tank beside you or behind you or infront of you matter, in THAT game you're in RIGHT NOW?

WHy does win rate matter?

I assume that you and/or most people play competitive games for a reason, that reason being to win. Simply put, your WR is YOUR ability to WIN. Sure, some people will say that they only play to have fun, but honestly, how many people get mad when they have a team that goes off and suicides for no gain? Why do you get mad? Because you want to win, winning is fun.

cptndunsel #11 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:25

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 827
  • Member since:
    09-25-2011
do you like playing games to lose? do you like long losing streaks??

human nature to want to win and to have more fun winning, not to mention the slight reward from doing so ($ and exp)

a_hippie #12 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:26

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 2,077
  • Member since:
    01-04-2011

View PostBrock7142, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:21, said:

But when you're IN  a game, THAT ONE GAME you're in RIGHT NOW, why does your win rate matter? Why does the win rate/performance of the tank beside you or behind you or infront of you matter, in THAT game you're in RIGHT NOW?

WHy does win rate matter?

Win rate matters because:

Winning = good

Losing = bad

Now you know. Need I elaborate more?

Vatec #13 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:28

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 518
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011

View PostBrock7142, on Oct 09 2012 - 03:59, said:

out of the 100's of threads of "Why win rate matters" "This is why win rate matters" there's always some BS theory of good player this and that, but never an explanation why it matters at all in anyway...

Why does it matter?

Serious, not trolling, being serious, why does it matter to have a high win rate?

Well, it matters because it's a competitive game. There -are- games where the whole purpose of the game is to have fun ("Cowboys and Indians," some post-modern "cooperative" board games like Witch of Salem and Defenders of the Realm, etc.). But WoT is not one of those games. There are three possible outcomes to a battle: a win (one side gets a big bonus to XP and credits), a loss (the other side gets the bonus and yours doesn't), and a draw (both sides get no bonus, i.e., both sides lose).

Given that you -can- win, and there are benefits to winning, doesn't it make sense that it's worth trying to win? Can't you have just as much fun while playing well and accomplishing the overt objective of the game (winning) as you can driving around at random blasting things? If so, why would you -not- want to win?

And if you want to win, why would you not observe the actions of those who have a record of winning? Maybe they know something you don't. Maybe watching how they play will teach you how to improve your own play.

As for your idea that the "1 player against 15 will never win," I believe you're underestimating just how good some players are. I am a mediocre player. I have won a battle in my SU-85 where I killed 12 enemy vehicles. I have won a battle in my Panzer IV (pre-nerf) where I killed 9 enemy vehicles. Same for my old KV (before it was split into KV-1 and KV-2). I have also killed 8 enemy vehicles in my Marder II and at least one other tank. I have also lost or drawn matches in which I've killed 8 or 9 enemies. But if a mediocre player like me can have exceptional battles like that, there is no doubt in my mind that a top-rank player at least has a chance against fifteen of the worst players in WoT.

(FYI, a 40% win rate is so low that it indicates that the player is actively dragging his team down; not only is he not contributing, he's actually doing something that makes his teams =more= likely to lose, like shooting teammates by accident, damaging the tracks of scouts while trying to exit the starting circle, driving in front of teammates' shots, etc.)

So no, it's not a stretch of the imagination that one of the best players could take on fifteen of the worst and manage to win.

Whee #14 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 14,397
  • Member since:
    03-22-2011
WR matters because it gives a "glimpse" of your possible level of performance. The higher the better because your team is able to count on you to "carry" or "help" the team.

WR is also important when your applying for clan.

Kewei #15 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 3,524
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

View PostVatec, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:28, said:

So no, it's not a stretch of the imagination that one of the best players could take on fifteen of the worst and manage to win.

It actually is, because they would run out of ammunition, I should know, I've run out ammunition when my team needed me the most.

Vatec #16 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 518
  • Member since:
    03-09-2011

View PostKewei, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:31, said:

It actually is, because they would run out of ammunition, I should know, I've run out ammunition when my team needed me the most.

Depends on the tank. If an SU-85 can carry enough ammo to kill twelve enemies, how likely is it that it doesn't have enough left for the last three?

A Hetzer, OTOH, could have some problems.

In any case, the argument isn't that the unicorn is guaranteed to win; the argument is merely that the fifteen weak players are =not=.

Brock7142 #17 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011

View PostVatec, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:28, said:

Well, it matters because it's a competitive game. There -are- games where the whole purpose of the game is to have fun ("Cowboys and Indians," some post-modern "cooperative" board games like Witch of Salem and Defenders of the Realm, etc.). But WoT is not one of those games. There are three possible outcomes to a battle: a win (one side gets a big bonus to XP and credits), a loss (the other side gets the bonus and yours doesn't), and a draw (both sides get no bonus, i.e., both sides lose).

Given that you -can- win, and there are benefits to winning, doesn't it make sense that it's worth trying to win? Can't you have just as much fun while playing well and accomplishing the overt objective of the game (winning) as you can driving around at random blasting things? If so, why would you -not- want to win?

And if you want to win, why would you not observe the actions of those who have a record of winning? Maybe they know something you don't. Maybe watching how they play will teach you how to improve your own play.

As for your idea that the "1 player against 15 will never win," I believe you're underestimating just how good some players are. I am a mediocre player. I have won a battle in my SU-85 where I killed 12 enemy vehicles. I have won a battle in my Panzer IV (pre-nerf) where I killed 9 enemy vehicles. Same for my old KV (before it was split into KV-1 and KV-2). I have also killed 8 enemy vehicles in my Marder II and at least one other tank. I have also lost or drawn matches in which I've killed 8 or 9 enemies. But if a mediocre player like me can have exceptional battles like that, there is no doubt in my mind that a top-rank player at least has a chance against fifteen of the worst players in WoT.

(FYI, a 40% win rate is so low that it indicates that the player is actively dragging his team down; not only is he not contributing, he's actually doing something that makes his teams =more= likely to lose, like shooting teammates by accident, damaging the tracks of scouts while trying to exit the starting circle, driving in front of teammates' shots, etc.)

So no, it's not a stretch of the imagination that one of the best players could take on fifteen of the worst and manage to win.

If we took 15 40%, and one 70%, tossed them all in the same tanks, same modules, etc. and pit all 15 against that 1, law of attrition would dictate that one player will garuntee to lose. (See "Picher of water and a cup theory")
I've personally seen players drive off bridges, even block shots I"m trying to take, only to find out they are 50 and someitmes 60%ers, and result in me dying from it.

I've also seen 55% players drive Maus, and completely trash the entire game for its own team.

I am 45% win rate, and yet, I have games in my T-34-85 even, in which I destroyed 7 tanks in a row, was the only one holding down the southern flank, and my team still lost because despite the 13 at the northern flank, and the SPG at the main base, they all die and my base gets capped.

SO would that game have been my fault to have lost? When almost every game I'm in the top 3 position at the end of battle screen for XP gained, am I still at fault for the loss?

KilgorSoS #18 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 11,792
  • Member since:
    07-23-2011
If it matters, then it matters, or should matter to each player for several reasons.

This game rewards success, and punishes failure...by the way in which credits and XP are awarded.
Winning more means MORE XP and MORE credits...so...
Grinds are easier, and faster
Stock Tank syndrome is shortened
Credits are much less of a worry, or not a worry at all.

So regardles of the ego-factor, etc. Winning more certainly makes the game more enjoyable, in these ways, as well as others. I win more, I play well, and I am rarely flamed or insulted in game. This of course is much better then the alternative...isn't it?

DinkyDau #19 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:38

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 418
  • Member since:
    10-11-2011
I like to win.  Winning makes me feel good.  I don't have to win all the time but a good win rate compared to a poor win rate makes me feel better and I enjoy the game a hell of a lot more.  I never think about win rate when playing a game. I would rather be playing with a team with good win rates than a team with poor win rates.  It does make a difference........IMO   :Smile_glasses:

Brock7142 #20 Posted Oct 09 2012 - 04:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 0 battles
  • 4,675
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011

View PostVatec, on Oct 09 2012 - 04:36, said:

Depends on the tank. If an SU-85 can carry enough ammo to kill twelve enemies, how likely is it that it doesn't have enough left for the last three?

A Hetzer, OTOH, could have some problems.

In any case, the argument isn't that the unicorn is guaranteed to win; the argument is merely that the fifteen weak players are =not=.

But then what about volume of fire? if 15 tanks have direct LoS and direct aim on a 70%er, the volume of fire alone, if all are the same tank, would destroy that 70% in their first volley....