Jump to content

WoT Tank Analyzer and WeakSpots Tool

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

birgard #1 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 15:42


  • Players
  • 81 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
I'm still working on a Tank Analyzer tool for WoT and would like to pull some ideas or opinions. Criticisms are welcomed too so I can improve it.

This tool rates every vehicle in WoT based on its battle tier, tank tier, or vehicle type.
It rates vehicles on a scale of 1 to 10 on the critical areas of
Firepower, Armor, Mobility, View Range and Hit points.

You select your vehicle, and click "Analyze" and it charts out its performance.

I hope links are allowed here:-
IS-7 Performance Analyzer

Lowe Performance Analyzer

This is still in beta and a planned improvement is to allow two tanks to be selected and compared side-by-side. I'il call that tool the Tank Comparison though the name is kinda uncreative.

Any opnions/views are welcome. And I hope the links won't be removed as they are not dangerous or download anything.


Edited by birgard, Mar 10 2013 - 15:20.

tvanderhart #2 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 15:51


  • Players
  • 2985 battles
  • 4,114
  • Member since:
That's actually really well done.  However, I would suggest having weighted averages.  In my opinion, you have view range weighted too heavily, and you don't account for radio range.  Perhaps a combination of both with a slightly lower rating than say, firepower.

warmturret #3 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:00

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 29035 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
I have checked it out and I like it. Would be nice if you also had the pictures showing effective armor on different tanks along with the ones you already have.

Also I checked the 110 chinese tank and noticed that you used the 122mm gun for your analysis and that is not the top gun on it.

ggrandprey #4 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:05


  • Players
  • 39303 battles
  • 52
  • Member since:
I tried the T30 several times and the analyzer failed.  Refreshed the page and tried a different tank and it worked again.  May have a bug there.

stinkycheese #5 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:07


  • Players
  • 10657 battles
  • 229
  • [DHO3] DHO3
  • Member since:

solomondg #6 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:08


  • Players
  • 5093 battles
  • 177
  • Member since:
Nice. Maybe an additional "Armour Slope" option?

Zebra21 #7 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:12

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15200 battles
  • 399
  • Member since:
Pretty cool as a overview. I'm not sure how I would use it in practice. Maybe I'm missing something?

I also get an error in what seems to be a picture windows in the upper left of the page. Heres th error;

Your page is in Quirks mode, Galleria may not render correctly. Please validate your HTML and add a correct doctype.

Fatal error: Theme CSS could not load after 20 sec. Your browser is in Quirks Mode, please add a correct doctype.

+1 for the effort!!!

Edited by Zebra21, Feb 26 2013 - 16:15.

Balsafer #8 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 21525 battles
  • 453
  • Member since:
T110e5 having the best front armor something is wrong there.

mtnmen #9 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:23


  • Players
  • 17833 battles
  • 111
  • [RS] RS
  • Member since:
This is an interesting tool but you are going to need to weight the ratings in some ways. For the T57 heavy is rated a 3.9 out of 10 which is clearly inaccurate for the tank right now. The T110E5 is rated a 4.4 out of 10. Both of these tanks are considered elite tanks by the best tankers on the game and are constantly used in Clan Wars. The Maus, which is considered the weakest tier 10 by most good tankers is rated 5/10 which is higher than both the others.

Your armor stats are questionable because it only lists the thickness of the armor, not its effective ability. For example the T110E5 is given the highest rating while its lower hull is one of the weakest in its tier and the IS7 is given a very low rating for having 140mm of armor but its effective lower hull armor is substantially better than the T110E5s. Same for the E100/Maus when its angled.

Firepower needs adjustment as well. The 50B firepower, which is probably the second best for heavies in the game (behind the T57) is rated only as average.

The whole idea is intriguing but some modifications to make the ratings realistic are needed I think.

Good work

ggrandprey #10 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:31


  • Players
  • 39303 battles
  • 52
  • Member since:
Another idea would be to rate the gun more about DPM that max stats.  View range more on a scale of all tanks.  Having a tier 10 veiw range of 400 with the max being 410, makes that tank a "poor" / 1 for view range.  I don't think that 10 meters would really have that big of an impact.

My .02 worth

Vollketten #11 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:34


  • Players
  • 26318 battles
  • 7,092
  • Member since:
Really nice, cannot but +1 the dedication.

1) Images dont work for me either - quirks etc.
2) Some of the links are not functional AMX13-90 etc.
3) It is good to give a hit spot guide with the comparison tool.
4) Could you/will you add a global win rate indicator for the vehicle as well?

mav214 #12 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:41

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 6558 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
Haven't even looked at it yet, but +1 for your effort.

For the ppl getting the display error......IE doesn't handle the page well at all (big freaking surprise there), but Chrome displays everything great.

Edited by mav214, Feb 26 2013 - 18:10.

8_bit_bowser #13 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:54


  • Players
  • 6790 battles
  • 107
  • [NG2] NG2
  • Member since:
So where is the ammo rack on Object 704?

Genesis0071 #14 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 16:55


  • Players
  • 6711 battles
  • 1,929
  • Member since:
WG already makes videos covering the same thing...

rhino1111 #15 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 17:04


  • Players
  • 15885 battles
  • 2,419
  • Member since:
Your ratings on alot of things are completely wrong. I hope you just threw a bunch of random stuff together for testing purposes and that these ratings weren't actually serious.

A couple examples of what I mean:
You have patton hull armor rated at like 7.5+'s.
You have the JPE100's firepower rated as average.
T11e5 is only 4/10?

many more issues with ratings I saw.

yarcod #16 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 18:03

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17620 battles
  • 334
  • Member since:
Will be a very nice tool indeed once the ratings are refined.

One thing I might add is a "premium ammo" penetration rating in the firepower category so tanks can be compared for things like clan wars.

Additionally, it might be wise to have armor ratings relative to use of premium ammo and have it weighted appropriately.  Pretty much everyone uses premium ammo now when they run into anything with decent armor.  So you might say that IS7 has "good" armor... but honestly it's paper in CW.

Weakspots are a factor too for armor.  You rate the Jagdtiger 8.8cm as "top" for armor while that's only true in a few situations.  I'm not sure how you quantify "weakspots" but I definitely wouldn't say the paper stats tell you much of anything.

Armor rating in general though should probably be weighted a little lower against the other stats you are comparing (Firepower, Mobility) because of the reasons above.

Edited by yarcod, Feb 26 2013 - 18:08.

SPOON13 #17 Posted Feb 26 2013 - 19:07


  • Players
  • 36739 battles
  • 174
  • [-TAP-] -TAP-
  • Member since:

birgard #18 Posted Feb 27 2013 - 15:26


  • Players
  • 81 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
Thank you everyone for all your feedback. Very much appreciated!!! :P

I'm in the process of fixing the reported bugs and will implement the weighted averages.
The Quirk error is fixed now and yes, this issue happens only with IE. For best results, use Firefox (a fantastic browser) or Chrome, but IE is also supported.

I'm now investigating the other bug reports. Will revert soon..

Thanks again!!

birgard #19 Posted Mar 10 2013 - 15:43


  • Players
  • 81 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
Ok, I've had the tiime to make the changes and fix the reported bugs. I'm now inviting feedback and also need your inputs on the calculation.

This is still in beta, so by all means not perfected yet.
The database version is 8.3, but will be updated to 8.4 very soon.

1) I'm unable to implement sloped armor effectiveness because that data (armor angle) is not released by WoT. So the calculations are strictly based on armor thickness.
2) Added a new category, "Clan War mode" where it is compared against only tier 10 vehicles and tier 8 SPGs.
3) Removed "Overall Rating" because I found it extremely difficult to give an overall rate to a vehicle's performance.
4) Implemented Weighted Average to Firepower and Armor.

I need your opinions on the weighted averages for Firepower and Armor.
The weighted averages are :-
For Firepower
Penetration - 1.2
Damage - 1.0
Accuracy - 0.9
Rate of Fire - 0.9
Aim Speed - 0.8

Penetration is most important for AP rounds, because if you don't pen, nothing happens.
The problem arises when computing for SPG, because SPG uses HE rounds, where pen value is not as important. And accuracy, RoF, aim speed are probably more important factors for SPG using HE rounds.
But how could you rate a Maus's gun vs a T-92 (SPG) gun (apples vs oranges)? But yet that is precisely what is happening in Clan War matches.

Weighted Averages For Armor
Front Hull - 1.4
Side Hull - 1.2
Front Turret 1.2
Side Turret 0.8

Please share your thoughts.

Here's how the T57 is rated in Clan War mode:-
T57 Heavy Tank Performance Analyzer
JagdPz E-100 Performance Analyzer

PS:- The ratings are not based on opinions. They're strictly based on the vehicle's stats, and weighted averages (explained above).
Also, it is not likely to find a particular vehicle that excels in all areas. For eg, the JPE100 may have good pen and accuracy. But poor rate of fire.
WoT is a balanced game, so there is no one super tank that will score tops in all areas.

B4BYR4C3R #20 Posted Mar 12 2013 - 12:51


  • Beta Testers
  • 6652 battles
  • 1,640
  • Member since:
Looking good mate, very nice layout and so easy to use. +1

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users