Jump to content


Analytical posts of mine


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

LesterQuaestor #1 Posted May 17 2016 - 02:59

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9373 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    03-26-2015

 

  I've posted a number of topics with analysis of various factors relating to WoT.

 

Some of these might be of interest to newer members of the forum. I wish there was a way to easily call attention to them, but there is not.

 

Here is a summary of them, in case anyone is interested.

 

How to interpret your win rate, in long and short terms.

http://forum.worldof...erical-results/


How many win/loss streaks should we expect?

http://forum.worldof...erical-results/


A graphical representation of why you should always try hard.

http://forum.worldof...-visualization/


How common should blowouts be?

http://forum.worldof...erical-results/


Unicums cannot pad stats by platooning.

http://forum.worldof...ons-statistics/



Socks_Roast_Master #2 Posted May 17 2016 - 03:22

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15436 battles
  • 1,241
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
neat

Yuri_Doujinshi #3 Posted May 17 2016 - 03:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 22021 battles
  • 2,688
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012
Thank you for your longstanding service in proving idiots wrong through statistics. +1

CAttack1 #4 Posted May 17 2016 - 04:01

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 19354 battles
  • 1,360
  • [NOKAP] NOKAP
  • Member since:
    08-17-2014

Too bad the ** will never read this and will continue their "aimbot/cheating/MM hates me" rants.
 

[Content Moderated - Vulgarities]

- 40BelowWGA


Edited by 40BelowWGA, May 17 2016 - 18:38.


Slayer_Jesse #5 Posted May 17 2016 - 04:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 26385 battles
  • 8,954
  • [SAKU] SAKU
  • Member since:
    08-31-2013

tbh, really belongs more in the game guides section. it'l just get buried super fast in Gen disc.

 

Gratz on getting stickied.


Edited by Slayer_Jesse, May 18 2016 - 02:03.


GhostPrime #6 Posted May 17 2016 - 17:35

    Community Coordinator

  • Administrator
  • 805 battles
  • 1,530
  • [WGA-B] WGA-B
  • Member since:
    04-22-2013
Great information in these posts! :honoring:

Iron_Soul_Stealer #7 Posted May 17 2016 - 18:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 2907 battles
  • 8,420
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCAttack1, on May 16 2016 - 22:01, said:

Too bad the ** will never read this and will continue their "aimbot/cheating/MM hates me" rants.
 

[Content Moderated - Vulgarities]

- 40BelowWGA

^..And who might those players be..? :coin: Our average 'Joe'-pubbies..? < our true player base majority.

Let me know...

Spoiler

 



SmirkingGerbil #8 Posted May 17 2016 - 18:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 33603 battles
  • 4,756
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

Much appreciated. As a stat guy, I love your analysis.

 

I would only offer this. Instead of saying "your question on X is irrelevant for this analysis", you might gain more of a following if you explained why. Some you do, some you don't.

 

  "What you say is right, but not important. My model makes the assumption that a player with a 49% win rate has a 0.49 probability of winning each game. Over a large number of trials, that is a good assumption. That's all you need to know. Over a large number of battles, your average team will be... well, average. " - Yes, but a bit more detail would help the average joe no stat guy.


Edited by SmirkingGerbil, May 17 2016 - 18:38.


SmirkingGerbil #9 Posted May 17 2016 - 18:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 33603 battles
  • 4,756
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013

View PostIron_Soul_Stealer, on May 17 2016 - 11:16, said:

^..And who might those players be..? :coin: Our average pubbies..? ...our true player base majority.

Let me know...

 

 

Me

Zakume #10 Posted May 17 2016 - 20:28

    Major

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 29924 battles
  • 4,509
  • Member since:
    09-19-2010
Wow posted today and already stickied :great:

LesterQuaestor #11 Posted May 17 2016 - 21:00

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9373 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    03-26-2015

Block Quote

 you might gain more of a following if you explained why.

 

  In my experience in online discussion, it is always best to keep things both as short as possible and as to-the-point as possible. Often/usually, a very short answer suffices. It also encourages others to more fully expand on their own views or questions.

 

   I don't mind replying to people with questions. But I don't want to try to preempt follow-ups by giving too much information that few or no people will read.

 



LesterQuaestor #12 Posted May 17 2016 - 21:01

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9373 battles
  • 1,025
  • Member since:
    03-26-2015

Block Quote

 Wow posted today and already stickied

 

  I'm so touched. I'm... I'm...    :honoring:

moogleslam #13 Posted May 18 2016 - 15:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 24077 battles
  • 2,420
  • [REL-A] REL-A
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

I just read through every post in every one of your topics, and quite simply, this is some of the most impressive information on these forums.  

 

I was ready to reply to so many nonsense comments, but then I saw that you had already done so, with a much more eloquently worded and scientific answer than I could have mustered.  Your head, brain, and mind are all equally impressive.  Unlike some self proclaimed statisticians on these forums, you generally post this information and responses in a very humble manner.  Keep doing that.

 

If everyone could read and understand all of this, these forums would be a happier place, and people would start taking responsibility for their own Win Rates instead of making dozens of threads to shift the blame elsewhere.  If people could even just understand the lack of value in a small sample size, we'd be half way there.  I'm just going to give up trying to make people adopt logic into their lives, and I'll send them here instead.

 

Also, a shout out to NeatoMan who contributed some useful information in several of these topics.



I_KILL_YOU_TODAY #14 Posted Jun 09 2016 - 04:07

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7847 battles
  • 30
  • [PZRGD] PZRGD
  • Member since:
    01-31-2013
Thanks for this mass of info!

iBreakthrough #15 Posted Aug 01 2016 - 01:24

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2 battles
  • 10
  • Member since:
    07-31-2016
Thanks for the information my friend

CaptCaveman60 #16 Posted Aug 07 2016 - 21:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 47897 battles
  • 49
  • [HOOD] HOOD
  • Member since:
    05-25-2011

View PostSmirkingGerbil, on May 17 2016 - 18:36, said:

Much appreciated. As a stat guy, I love your analysis.

 

I would only offer this. Instead of saying "your question on X is irrelevant for this analysis", you might gain more of a following if you explained why. Some you do, some you don't.

 

  "What you say is right, but not important. My model makes the assumption that a player with a 49% win rate has a 0.49 probability of winning each game. Over a large number of trials, that is a good assumption. That's all you need to know. Over a large number of battles, your average team will be... well, average. " - Yes, but a bit more detail would help the average joe no stat guy.

and of course you don't tell about the 25% RNG or the really bad match making. but i would guess that has nothing to do with winning or losing.



Cpl_Maida #17 Posted Aug 22 2016 - 17:51

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 29310 battles
  • 1,056
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    06-21-2014

Wow - just stumbling on these posts now - fantastic stuff.  I feel like if people actually read these posts 95% of the tinfoil hat posts about rigged MM, etc. would disappear.

 

Great work OP!



Riesenschnauzer #18 Posted Nov 10 2016 - 16:20

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 23984 battles
  • 112
  • [SIDE] SIDE
  • Member since:
    07-31-2012

View PostCAttack1, on May 16 2016 - 21:01, said:

Too bad the ** will never read this and will continue their "aimbot/cheating/MM hates me" rants.
 

[Content Moderated - Vulgarities]

- 40BelowWGA

 

Well the good news is that th new "fair play" rules will basically wipe everything but the "MM is rigged" component. 

 



FlaTDieTSodaZ #19 Posted Nov 15 2016 - 09:50

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 12 battles
  • 16
  • Member since:
    11-15-2016
Thanks for the advice on those topics!

Iron_Soul_Stealer #20 Posted Jan 01 2017 - 01:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 2907 battles
  • 8,420
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostRiesenschnauzer, on Nov 10 2016 - 10:20, said:

 

Well the good news is that th new "fair play" rules will basically wipe everything but the "MM is rigged" component. 

 

 

^..I agree that this is certainly a great step in the right direction by Wargaming, however....

There is still the ongoing/unresolved problem with a certain assisted gaming program {modification} that uses a publicly visible in-game player stat feature. Until WG either bans it outright...or implements this mod feature directly into its vanilla client so everyone has it, there will be many that still believe we have an unfair/unbalanced playing field. I remain one of them.

 

 






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users