Jump to content


winrate is not a reflection of player skill


  • Please log in to reply
801 replies to this topic

cheapbooks #1 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:05

    Captain

  • Players
  • 39065 battles
  • 1,141
  • [CBKS] CBKS
  • Member since:
    08-21-2013

if winrate were truly a measure of player skill, then:

 

all AFK tanks would have a 0% winrate. because there is no player skill. but they don't, they have a 38% winrate

all your tanks in your garage would have the exact same winrate. but they don't, because the tank you play impacts your win rate

- there is no reason to use ammo, equipment, module research, consumables, directives, crew skills, or crew training beyond 50%. because these things are not player skill, so they would have no effect on winrate

there would be no such thing as "pay to win" in the game. pay to win is not player skill, so it would have no impact on winrate

- you should not fear gold ammo. if winrate were only player skill, then gold ammo would have 0 affect in the game

- you would never do any spotting damage, and all your damage and kills would only be on tanks that you spot yourself, because otherwise there would be teamwork, which is not individual player skill

- there would be no such thing as passive scouting, because a player with 0 skill is still able to passively scout (such as an AFK player at the base who passively scouts for the team)

access to information in the game, such as the minimap, would have no affect on the game. before any tank on the enemy team is spotted, there is no way to know or accurately predict what the enemy team will do for defense or offense. your player skill would allow you to win the game even without having any knowledge of where the enemy team is.

players in South America would have the same number of unicums as players playing in North America on the NA server, and would not be all tomatoes

- teams of SPGs, such as 15 SPGs, would have a 50% winrate against teams of 15 non-SPGs. teams of 15 LTs would have a 50% winrate against teams of 15 HTs

the matchmaker would always be balanced, because the MM would have no impact on winrate

all maps would always be balanced

- you would be able to play SPG with no minimap, with no radio, because you would not need your team to spot for you

running XVM would not improve your game

 

so if you believe that high winrate means you are a better player, then:

- you never complain about other players using gold rounds

- you don't run XVM because other player skill has no impact on your player skill

- you never complain about OP tanks

- you never complain about being on a fail team

- you never complain about pay to win

- you never research modules

- you never complain about the matchmaker

- you never complain about being bottom tier

- you never complain about losing all day or having 10 losses in a row

- you never complain about a map being unbalanced, or about being on the worse spawn

- you do not complain that your allies need to spot when you are playing SPG

- you never pay for consumables

- you don't use ammo

- you don't buy equipment

- you don't need bonds or directives

- you don't complain that bonds give an unfair advantage allowing the best players to be even better by buying better equipment

- you never call LATAM players tomatos strictly because they play with high ping times

- you never complain that you can't pen an enemy tank

- you never complain that wheeled vehicles are too fast

 

I never complain about any of the things above. 



cKy_ #2 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:23

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4516 battles
  • 2,292
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

 

Better players perform better in battle and as a result better players win more often. They do not win 100% of the time, because no one player is good enough to carry every single team. Just like how you pointed out that AFK'ers or bots or whatever don't have a 0% winrate, they have a 38% winrate. This shows that despite the AFK player putting a massive handicap on the team, there sometimes are good players that can carry a 14v15 battle. 

 

"a player with 0 skill is still able to passively scout" Then why doesn't he? Oh yeah, because he isn't skilled enough at the game to know how to effectively passive scout, he might not even know what passive scouting is. 

 

"you never call LATAM players tomatos strictly because they play with high ping times" I don't think anyone calls them bad because of their high ping (even though their ping isn't even high). Almost everyone knows that there is no correlation between ping and skill.

 

"you should not fear gold ammo. if winrate were only player skill, then gold ammo would have 0 affect in the game" Gold ammo spam generally does have very little to no impact on the battle if the player spamming the gold ammo is a bad player.

 

"teamwork, which is not individual player skill" Being able to effectively use your team to your advantage is, in fact, a part of being a skilled player. Bad players cannot and do not play as a team.

 

I'll just take this silly forum post as drunk ramblings from a frustrated below average player.



Kliphie #3 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 33005 battles
  • 5,583
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012
Simple question, why do some players win more than others?  

Veracks #4 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:30

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22932 battles
  • 573
  • [SU] SU
  • Member since:
    04-07-2011
You've missed the entire point of WR. WR is an indicator of how well one blue/purple player can carry a sack of potatoes (or tomatoes) to the finish line despite doing everything in their power to ruin this. Having a high WR means you can do this consistently, while having a low WR means you're the tomato that forces some blue/purple player to carry you at times.

Jolly33 #5 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:33

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 44531 battles
  • 361
  • [CLAWS] CLAWS
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012
Whatever you need to tell yourself OP to fell better about your situation...

sleeper_agent #6 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:46

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 30454 battles
  • 2,721
  • Member since:
    06-19-2013

Amusing post. Totally wrong but amusing.

WNR may not illustrate skill on VERY small samples of games but after thousands of games it sure does...

 

You can do nothing and get a 38% WNR or whatever but you sure do need to do more to get over 50, 55 or 60%. This is why most players that form the average base fall into the 46 to 48% category.  

 

As for OP tanks, they do give you a better chance at winning , I can see that. I have a higher WNR in my defender than panther 8.8 any day of the week. But there are also players with defenders who can't crack 50% in it if their lives depended on it. There is an element of skill in playing the game. It's not the ONLY element but it is as clearly there as the sky is above you.



_Tsavo_ #7 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 13:53

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46490 battles
  • 19,863
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

View Postcheapbooks, on Apr 17 2019 - 07:05, said:

if winrate were truly a measure of player skill, then:

 

all AFK tanks would have a 0% winrate. because there is no player skill. but they don't, they have a 38% winrate Because there's 14 guys on the team who do something, but everyone is brought down by the 38% AFK player because they make it effectively 14 v 15 every single game, in favor of the enemy.

all your tanks in your garage would have the exact same winrate. but they don't, because the tank you play impacts your win rate This invalidates your entire thought and line of reasoning.  If you favor heavies, you'll win more in them, if you don't like lights, you'll probably do worse in them.  Surprise!  Also you've debunked your entire thesis right there.  Good job!

- there is no reason to use ammo, equipment, module research, consumables, directives, crew skills, or crew training beyond 50%. because these things are not player skill, so they would have no effect on winrate I'm not sure where you're going with this one, but hey, we should all play with 50% crews!  They do make vehicles better and the biggest improvements are 50 -75% crews and 75-100% crews.  Everything above that are marginal increases that do help, but won't make you gain more than a skilled player with just a 100% crew and no equipment.  They'll still outplay you.

there would be no such thing as "pay to win" in the game. pay to win is not player skill, so it would have no impact on winrate  While there are OP and strong premiums, surprise, the win rate curves are still there!  They've just been shuffled a bit.  That 50%er in the defender?  53%.  That 65% in the defender?  70%.  

- you should not fear gold ammo. if winrate were only player skill, then gold ammo would have 0 affect in the game You should assume every shot fired at you is gold anyway and do your best to not get shot.  

- you would never do any spotting damage, and all your damage and kills would only be on tanks that you spot yourself, because otherwise there would be teamwork, which is not individual player skill Have we gone into mindless drivel?  Good players make opportunities for their teams to capitalize on.  Bad players don't.

- there would be no such thing as passive scouting, because a player with 0 skill is still able to passively scout (such as an AFK player at the base who passively scouts for the team) This is dumb.

access to information in the game, such as the minimap, would have no affect on the game. before any tank on the enemy team is spotted, there is no way to know or accurately predict what the enemy team will do for defense or offense. your player skill would allow you to win the game even without having any knowledge of where the enemy team is. This is dumb.

players in South America would have the same number of unicums as players playing in North America on the NA server, and would not be all tomatoes Okay, you're off your rocker.

- teams of SPGs, such as 15 SPGs, would have a 50% winrate against teams of 15 non-SPGs. teams of 15 LTs would have a 50% winrate against teams of 15 HTs What?

the matchmaker would always be balanced, because the MM would have no impact on winrate MM is already balanced

all maps would always be balanced Okay?

- you would be able to play SPG with no minimap, with no radio, because you would not need your team to spot for you What2?

running XVM would not improve your game It stopped doing anything for me, though some may find it useful.  

 

so if you believe that high winrate means you are a better player, then:

- you never complain about other players using gold rounds I don't

- you don't run XVM because other player skill has no impact on your player skill I don't

- you never complain about OP tanks I don't

- you never complain about being on a fail team In that match I might, but bad teams happen, you deal with them and try to drag them to victory

- you never complain about pay to win I don't

- you never research modules This is stupid, you're stupid.

- you never complain about the matchmaker template MM is stupid.  

- you never complain about being bottom tier I have, though bottom tier is just more chances for really high exp games

- you never complain about losing all day or having 10 losses in a row I do.  Because if I'm losing 10 in a row, I'm doing something wrong.  Not the game.

- you never complain about a map being unbalanced, or about being on the worse spawn This is stupid.

- you do not complain that your allies need to spot when you are playing SPG Expect nothing from your allies

- you never pay for consumables This is really dumb.

- you don't use ammo Okay, you're just trolling at this point.

- you don't buy equipment Definitely trolling.

- you don't need bonds or directives they aren't needed, but if provided, I'll use them.

- you don't complain that bonds give an unfair advantage allowing the best players to be even better by buying better equipment Advanced equipment and bonds are stupid and should go away.

- you never call LATAM players tomatos strictly because they play with high ping times They have a server with low ping if they want.  

- you never complain that you can't pen an enemy tank I don't

- you never complain that wheeled vehicles are too fast I don't

 

I never complain about any of the things above. 

 

Incorrect.  Severely misguided at best.  Blatant and deliberate ignorance at worst.

 

It's long been established that the best players win about 65% of their games and the worst players about 40% of their games.  So where you  land in that spectrum is up to you.  It's part of the large teams you're on and that your influence is about 7% of the team.  Which is conveniently where almost all win rates fall from the average (average being about 49%) .

 

That is, a 45% player is not in the same league as a 55% player and they aren't in the same league as a 65% player.  

 

This entire post of yours is basically a giant troll or mindless drivel, maybe both.  I'm not sure which, honestly.  


Edited by _Tsavo_, Apr 17 2019 - 14:08.


RHeadshot #8 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:03

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5877 battles
  • 1,229
  • Member since:
    10-12-2018

View PostKliphie, on Apr 17 2019 - 13:23, said:

Simple question, why do some players win more than others? 

 

Because WG likes them more?  Just trying to guess the absurd "logic" OP would use to answer you.

NeatoMan #9 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:11

    Major

  • Players
  • 28198 battles
  • 20,721
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View Postcheapbooks, on Apr 17 2019 - 07:05, said:

if winrate were truly a measure of player skill, then:

 

all AFK tanks would have a 0% winrate. because there is no player skill. but they don't, they have a 38% winrate

all your tanks in your garage would have the exact same winrate. but they don't, because the tank you play impacts your win rate

 

I never complain about any of the things above. 

so much fail

 

The reason players don't get 0% win rates is because the size of the teams.  Your contributions get overshadowed by the 29 other players in battle.  They can, and often do make up for one player's lack of contrbution.   If these were 1 v 1, then you would see 0% win rates.  If these were 100 v 100 you'd see everyone end up even closer to 50%.

 

The way win rate is gauged is by comparing it to the average.  You can even do this on a tank by tank basis.  If you play a weak tank, but still manage a better win rate than the average for that tank, you are above average, even if your win rate is worse than the average for other tanks.

 

Obviously, there is more to win rate than that one simple number.  The smarter people know how to look deeper in the stats to give more meaning to it.  The idiots don't.  Which one do you want to be?



_Tsavo_ #10 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:33

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 46490 battles
  • 19,863
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

View PostRHeadshot, on Apr 17 2019 - 08:03, said:

 

Because WG likes them more?  Just trying to guess the absurd "logic" OP would use to answer you.

 

IT MUST BE RIGGEDD!!!!!!!

 

Or something like that.  Or so I've been told.



H0D0R_ #11 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:39

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17401 battles
  • 1,925
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    09-30-2013
What is skill

NutrientibusMeaGallus #12 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 22674 battles
  • 5,663
  • [FILOX] FILOX
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012


cKy_ #13 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:48

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4516 battles
  • 2,292
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View Post_Promote_Synergy_, on Apr 18 2019 - 01:39, said:

What is skill

 

  Skill is defined by Google as the ability to efficiently and effectively open your wallet and throw all the cash inside at a certain Belarusian company that runs a somewhat successful tanks game. 

H0D0R_ #14 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:56

    Captain

  • Players
  • 17401 battles
  • 1,925
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    09-30-2013

View PostcKy_, on Apr 17 2019 - 13:48, said:

 

  Skill is defined by Google as the ability to efficiently and effectively open your wallet and throw all the cash inside at a certain Belarusian company that runs a somewhat successful tanks game. 

 

I guess I don't have skill then. EEEEEEEEEE

the_dude_76 #15 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 14:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 34304 battles
  • 5,321
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011
LOL!!! Just because there are a variety of factors which will determine whether or not you win or lose doesn't mean that you are not one of those factors! Everyone else has to deal with all of the things that you mention so in the end those factors will even out from one player to the next. The single factor that is on you and only you is your performance. This is the single factor that sets one player apart from the next. I mean surely you are smart enough to understand that it's not just some bizarre coincidence that the best players have the highest win rates??

PuddleSplasher #16 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 15:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 39429 battles
  • 3,200
  • [6-ACR] 6-ACR
  • Member since:
    07-11-2011

To the OP.  +1 for a well thought out prose.

 

It takes balls to post on a troll forum your thoughts and reasoning wether correct or wrong.

 

Though I agree with you, I am sure there are many insecure people out there that cannot state their true feelings for fear of ridicule.

 

Speak up for yourself in life as it's the only chance you ever get.

 

Say what you mean and if others don't like what you have to say! Then they can cross the road and walk in the opposite direction.

 



TonksForNothing #17 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 15:09

    Captain

  • Players
  • 7413 battles
  • 1,209
  • Member since:
    10-06-2012

all AFK tanks would have a 0% winrate. because there is no player skill. but they don't, they have a 38% winrate

 

Then how do some players drop below 38%, how do others rise above it?

 

all your tanks in your garage would have the exact same winrate. but they don't, because the tank you play impacts your win rate

 

You are aware that some players are better with some tanks then they are with others right?

 

The problem seems to be that you've taken the stance that "Winrate = Playerskill, entirely" which is obviously false. What winrate is, is a reflection of your ability to influence a match in the following ways:

 

- Your winrate will be > server average if you can positively influence a match, and < server average if you have a negative impact on matches.

- The greater your deviation from the average, the more matches your skills allow you to influence, either for better or for worse.

 

A bad player with a really low winrate constantly makes decisions that snatch defeat from the cruel unforgiving maw of victory. They drag an ill suited tank to an important spot blocking the proper tank from using it and then dying leaving a corpse the enemy can use for cover. They take the biggest damage dealer and hide in a corner when even a bot would at least be spotting base and then potato out for 0 damage when the match was already long lost. They are a near constant detrimental asset.

 

A really good player with a high winrate is more able to identify clutch moments where a certain action could disable the enemy in such a way as to stop their flank push or force them into a defensive position. They know exactly where their tank needs to be and when to better suit the what the team is doing. They can rally the average players with their knowledge of the map and what the enemy team is likely to do pushing a swing match into a pubstomp no problem.



cKy_ #18 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 15:31

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 4516 battles
  • 2,292
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-29-2018

View PostPuddleSplasher, on Apr 18 2019 - 02:06, said:

To the OP.  +1 for a well thought out prose.

 

It takes balls to post on a troll forum your thoughts and reasoning wether correct or wrong.

 

Though I agree with you, I am sure there are many insecure people out there that cannot state their true feelings for fear of ridicule.

 

Speak up for yourself in life as it's the only chance you ever get.

 

Say what you mean and if others don't like what you have to say! Then they can cross the road and walk in the opposite direction.

 

 

Buddy, it is better to be thought of as a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

da_Rock002 #19 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 15:42

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9704 battles
  • 3,771
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View PostKliphie, on Apr 17 2019 - 07:23, said:

Simple question, why do some players win more than others? 

 

 

lol

so why do we wind up in losing battles where we were a top scorer on our team?

so why do we wind up in losing battles where we scored more damage than most of the victorious players?

so why do we wind up in winning battles even though we played lousy?

so why do we wind up in winning battles when we died within minutes of the start?

so why do we wind up in winning battles when nothing went right for us?



da_Rock002 #20 Posted Apr 17 2019 - 15:45

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 9704 battles
  • 3,771
  • Member since:
    11-24-2016

View Postthe_dude_76, on Apr 17 2019 - 08:59, said:

LOL!!! Just because there are a variety of factors which will determine whether or not you win or lose doesn't mean that you are not one of those factors! Everyone else has to deal with all of the things that you mention so in the end those factors will even out from one player to the next. The single factor that is on you and only you is your performance. This is the single factor that sets one player apart from the next. I mean surely you are smart enough to understand that it's not just some bizarre coincidence that the best players have the highest win rates??

 

 

just because you are one of many factors doesn't mean your influence is significant.


 

For example, newbies in their first thousand battles (sometimes more) ….   (maybe less)






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users