Jump to content


New WN6 Efficiency Formula Out and Making the Rounds


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
66 replies to this topic

Winterx #61 Posted Feb 18 2013 - 21:05

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 50893 battles
  • 142
  • [11GD] 11GD
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostKerberosPanzer, on Jan 24 2013 - 22:23, said:

Yay I'm yellow now!
Finally out of the red.

And I am going to get yellow-nearly-turned-green cheated away now ;)

JT_TANK_BAIT_CONNOISSEUR #62 Posted Mar 12 2013 - 01:24

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 17202 battles
  • 206
  • [-A1D] -A1D
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012
For the first 6 months of me playing this game I didn't even know what an efficiency rating was....or care.

S3AWOLF #63 Posted Apr 27 2013 - 15:13

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9562 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    10-09-2010
2 things

1- Compensation for players and platoons who clearly carry a bad team. It is not uncommon for a good platoon to share more than half the damage and kills in a match trying to carry a bad team only to lose because they just don't have enough tank left to finish off the last 3 or 4 guys or the other team caps out with a scout. I would like to see a platoon bonus efficiency or even XP for these situations so you are not drug down by bad players.

2- Company battles should not count. Too many bad players farm company battles for eff and WR. If a player primarily plays in pub matches and doesn't do a lot of company battles the pub player will be at a serious disadvantage when it comes to his stats. Since company battles usually involved a team being hand picked versus a pub match which is completely random the pub player will have a lot more to overcome. the ratio between pubs and company battles should be a factor. throw in clan wars as well.


BTW if you look at my sig you can tell where 3x weekend started. Worst thing for a player trying to get stats up is trying to play on 3x or 5x weekends. The baddies are just too strong in numbers to get away from them. On any normal day you might get 5 out of 10 matches with a decent team, but on these bonus weekends you will be lucky if you get one or two teams that aren't completely useless.

Edited by sNacKie, Apr 27 2013 - 15:16.


S3AWOLF #64 Posted Apr 27 2013 - 15:28

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 9562 battles
  • 166
  • Member since:
    10-09-2010

View PostJT111, on Mar 12 2013 - 01:24, said:

For the first 6 months of me playing this game I didn't even know what an efficiency rating was....or care.

Sometimes I wish I had never installed XVM, but I wish I had paid better attention to my stats my first 6 months as well.

Tazilon #65 Posted Jun 29 2013 - 15:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 94130 battles
  • 9,194
  • [-40-] -40-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011

View PostSnacky, on Apr 27 2013 - 15:28, said:

Sometimes I wish I had never installed XVM, but I wish I had paid better attention to my stats my first 6 months as well.

Pay attention to your REAL stats.  Ignore phony stats like WN.

Tazilon #66 Posted Jun 29 2013 - 16:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 94130 battles
  • 9,194
  • [-40-] -40-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011
If WN is so awesome why do your own examples not show a strong correlation between WN and Win Rate?  And, if you get rid of the 2 throwaways at the bottom, why does WN show very close to a WEAK correlation? (0.514)

Seems to me your own examples do nothing but demonstrate how poor WN actually is.  If there is a tenuous correlation between WN and Win Rate it can't possibly provide accurate measurement of skill - unless you want us to believe skill does not impact win rate?

You have a HUGE flaw in how you approach formulation of WN.  You base it on CORRELATION between a specific stat and WR.  Seeing some of you state you are statisticians, you should understand correlation does not equal causation.  WN proves that.  

T-O-Y.

Edited by Tazilon, Jun 29 2013 - 16:04.


teeton #67 Posted Jun 29 2013 - 20:22

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 18771 battles
  • 84
  • Member since:
    10-22-2010
sadly none of these formals work for scouts and that's mostly what i play. you can tell ppl that pad there stats like the OP by the tanks they drive and what tiers they play. i play everything "not much arty. dont like it to op but not any more" a good scout that gets 7000+ spotting damage will look like he does nothing in a game from these formals. but that's not the formals falt. its war gaming's for not including that stat in the end battle text files that these programs use. its nice to have nice stats but inflating your stats then calling your self a good player is miss leading.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users