Jump to content


620 battles, interesting winrate stats. Draw your own conclusions.

winrate stats premium boosters booster wins losses

  • Please log in to reply
102 replies to this topic

Jaspo #21 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 03:43

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 34616 battles
  • 583
  • [SLUGZ] SLUGZ
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

View Postspud_tuber, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:35, said:

Perhaps you'll note that I haven't put forth any conclusions, I only called you on your attempt to shut down a possible conclusion someone else had after inviting us to draw our own conclusions.

 

Other possible conclusions are sample size not large enough to draw conclusions from, deliberately falsified data, you playing "grinders" you aren't as good with when boosters and/or prem are running vs keepers without, etc.

 

 

You most certainly have put forth conclusions. Reread your stuff. If I was "shutting it down" its because it was stating as fact something that is speculative, and also hinted at a bit of a personal attack stemming from your own preconceived notions. How you've presented your other possible conclusions here is how you should've presented your first. Do note that the data is most certainly not deliberately falsified, though I probably can't prove it aside from referencing my replays from that time period.



Jaspo #22 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 03:47

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 34616 battles
  • 583
  • [SLUGZ] SLUGZ
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

View PostMarkd73, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:40, said:

 

Seriously? You tell people to draw their own conclusions and then immediately try and dismiss someone who does exactly that.

Dismissing someone who is presuming me to have a preconceived notion regarding the subject of the experiment and reacting to the data in that manner rather than scientifically, is rather different that dismissing a conclusion related to the experiment. The conclusion is potentially valid, the presentation of that conclusion, not.



Jaspo #23 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 03:57

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 34616 battles
  • 583
  • [SLUGZ] SLUGZ
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

View Postrockbutcher, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:14, said:

It could also be comparing 124 games against many more.  The way you present your data is muddled.  The first line is with no prem time but boosters activated?

 

I guess your point is that we should all quit playing prem with boosters?

I clarified things a bit, hope that helps.

I'm not making a point. Almost everyone's assuming I am but I'm not. I took the time to record the results of 620 battles in a row and posted them here. You're welcome.



rockbutcher #24 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:02

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24499 battles
  • 2,212
  • [T-Y-R] T-Y-R
  • Member since:
    03-06-2015

Well it's good that you did that.  Most posters here who provide a large amount of data ARE trying to prove a point.

 

Keep in mind that there are so many moving variables in this game...x number of games in a tank you are grinding vs total number of games in your pimped out ride etc. will totally change the results you have.  I gave up on the data, focus on the tanks I enjoy playing and have been doing a lot better lately.



Jaspo #25 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:11

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 34616 battles
  • 583
  • [SLUGZ] SLUGZ
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

View Postrockbutcher, on Sep 01 2020 - 21:02, said:

Keep in mind that there are so many moving variables in this game...x number of games in a tank you are grinding vs total number of games in your pimped out ride etc. will totally change the results you have.

Indeed. I wish a lot more people would remember this.



Shinji_lkari #26 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:12

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 33600 battles
  • 213
  • [4ORCE] 4ORCE
  • Member since:
    02-29-2016
At least now we can point to Jaspo's data and experiment every time some tinfoil guy claims and presents data and experiments that players with premium accounts get rigged winning games. ;) There is a silver lining after all. 

Suicidal_Enemy #27 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 50322 battles
  • 2,016
  • Member since:
    12-01-2013

Jaspo

 

your sig is negative looking (IMO),

 

I can't say why but I personally don't like looking at it.



The_Low_Health #28 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:42

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 40437 battles
  • 734
  • [SNPAI] SNPAI
  • Member since:
    09-06-2011
*Tinfoil is now sold out in the OP's market.*

Defender2803 #29 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:43

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 22745 battles
  • 163
  • [DP] DP
  • Member since:
    08-18-2011

I would give up and deal with it. No one can explain why you suddenly have bad RNG or losing streaks or the complete opposite. I still can't explain how a PTA bounced twice off my rhomby with gold. All you will get is "it's gotta be you".

 

You will probably have a day soon where you can't lose and hit everything...next day you will get ammo racked by a blind shot from a stock two tier lower tomato.

 

All you will get here is "cancel culture"...ROFL...got to use that in a sentence.



I_QQ_4_U #30 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:46

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 27064 battles
  • 11,158
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016

View PostJaspo, on Sep 02 2020 - 02:42, said:

Following a months-long drop in my winrate with no identifiable cause, I kept track of my win/losses for 620 straight battles, and also kept track of whether I had premium time or experience boosters active.

 

Experience Booster Active (no prem account): 184 wins 224 losses 3 draws 411 battles 44.77% WR

 

Premium Account (no exp booster): 195 wins 241 losses 6 draws 442 battles 44.12% WR

 

Premium Account & Experience Booster Active: 155 wins 195 losses 2 draws 352 battles 44.03% WR

 

Neither: 65 wins 56 losses 3 draws 124 battles 52.42% WR

 

 

Apparently my feeling that I was losing more when I activated boosters wasn't just a feeling, at least not in this case.

 

 

 

 

So with boosters it's 44%, no boosters it's 44% and with booster and a premium account it's 44% and this makes you feel you lose more with boosters active???

 

The last one is a much smaller amount of games, after the same amount you could have easily ended up at 44% as well.


Edited by I_QQ_4_U, Sep 02 2020 - 04:51.


Jaspo #31 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 04:55

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 34616 battles
  • 583
  • [SLUGZ] SLUGZ
  • Member since:
    03-12-2015

View PostI_QQ_4_U, on Sep 01 2020 - 21:46, said:

 

 

So with boosters it's 44%, no boosters it's 44% and with booster and a premium account it's 44% and this makes you feel you lose more with boosters active???

 

The last one is a much smaller amount of games, after the same amount you could have easily ended up at 44% as well.

Nice catch, I stand corrected! And yes, the sample size is small. As stated it was 620 consecutive games. Naturally I ran more with boosters than without.



9999bc #32 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:15

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 41601 battles
  • 753
  • Member since:
    07-01-2014
Did you play similar tanks throughout the session? It would be hard to win games in stock tanks versus elite tanks; same goes for your favorite tanks versus unfamiliar tanks.



Pipinghot #33 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 12,117
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostJaspo, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:56, said:

View PostNateRocko, on Sep 01 2020 - 19:48, said:

When you play with boosters, you feel inclined to make the most of them. And thus you push yourself into "extreme tryhard mode", which actually results in you performing significantly worse than you would if you were just playing normally. It's not the boosters, it's you.

I'm sorry, do you know me? No, no you don't, and you're jumping to conclusions nontheless. I don't do extreme tryhard mode, no. There's not a significant difference between my play on and off boosters (edit: that I am aware of), and even if there was, each individual player has, statistically, a rather limited ability to influence the battle, being only 1 of 15 participants on the team.

 

Makes me think that survival rate would've been another interesting thing to track, though. Also, individual performance per battle (simply, good, bad, or meh)

He doesn't need to know you, all he needs to know is that you're a human being and not a robot. He's not jumping to conclusion for no reason, what he's describing is completely normal and happens to nearly everyone.

 

That awareness that you talk about is the important point, it's virtually impossible that "There's not a significant difference between my play on and off boosters", I've never met someone yet who's unaffected, even when they think they're unaffected.

 

You started this thread by saying that there's "no identifiable cause" when that's false, there's a very easily identifiable cause, and your lack of being aware of that cause doesn't change anything. You're a human, humans are affected by things like running boosters, therefore the logical answer is quite simple.

 

That doesn't mean that it's guaranteed to be correct for you specifically, but when someone posts "no identifiable cause" it absolutely makes sense to point out that there's a very common cause that affects the vast majority of people. If you're looking for answers and information then you're doing the wrong think to dismiss that answer out of hand.

 

Everyone I've ever played with that was running boosters gets impatient while the boosters are running, they don't like to waste any time in between battles and very often start the next battle before they're fully mentally prepared. It's very common for people running boosters to try to "speed things up" so they an accomplish more while the boosters are running. Unless you're a cyborg or a very rare person that's essentially immune to anxiety of any form, this applies to you too. It's just basic human nature.

 

It should be painfully obvious that this is not caused by the game, Wargaming is not giving you a different MM or harder battles when you're running boosters, running premium or trying to complete a win mission, that's an absurd idea. What makes a lot more sense is that is that you're human just like everyone else and your goal should be to become more self-aware when you're running premium/boosters. Unless you're a robot (or incapable of feeling anxiety) you are affected by these things just like everyone else.



Pipinghot #34 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 12,117
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostJaspo, on Sep 01 2020 - 21:18, said:

View Postspud_tuber, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:12, said:

So, you didn't mean draw your own conclusions, you meant draw the conclusion you have but don't want to say..

 

Namely, that the game is rigged against you when you run boosters or prem time.. which of course makes no sense, as if WG were demonstrable doing that, no one would buy boosters or prem time. 

 

Hmm? I just spent two months collecting statistics and just published them here. They speak for themselves. I don't care if that's the conclusion you're drawing but I think you're a bit blind to see that you're making a number of huge assumptions and making absolute statements about them as if they are proven fact.

You posted your conclusions, not your data. If you truly want the information to speak for itself you'll publish the full table of information you collected rather than just a summary conclusion that may or may not be a valid interpretation of the data.

 

You've already tried to ignore basic, normal responses that happen to nearly all people, so you need to be careful about accusing people of being "blind to see" things.

 

If your goal is to convince people that Wargaming is doing something suspicious, you're going to need to provide your source data and not just write out three quick lines to "support" what is basically a conspiracy theory. You can believe it all you want to, but don't expect anyone else to unless you provide a lot more substance to back up your claims.


Edited by Pipinghot, Sep 02 2020 - 05:22.


Tao_Te_Hobbit #35 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:31

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 30853 battles
  • 7,013
  • [TER] TER
  • Member since:
    02-28-2016

View PostPipinghot, on Sep 01 2020 - 21:17, said:

 

Everyone I've ever played with that was running boosters gets impatient while the boosters are running, they don't like to waste any time in between battles and very often start the next battle before they're fully mentally prepared. It's very common for people running boosters to try to "speed things up" so they an accomplish more while the boosters are running. Unless you're a cyborg or a very rare person that's essentially immune to anxiety of any form, this applies to you too. It's just basic human nature.

 

Which makes no sense (that I do exactly that, not the idea) since WG is handing me boosters faster than I can burn them - what difference* does really it make to have a few more (or less) battles on a popped booster?  :amazed:

 

And yet, like you say, there I am hitting that Battle!™ button as soon as I'm back in the garage.  :facepalm:

 

 

 

*A LOT!!!!!!!   :playing:

 

:teethhappy:



8_Hussars #36 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:38

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 62620 battles
  • 663
  • Member since:
    09-17-2013

1037 battles, interesting winrate stats. Draw your own conclusions.

 

 

Posted Image


Edited by 8_Hussars, Sep 02 2020 - 05:41.


Burning_Haggis #37 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 05:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 48522 battles
  • 2,532
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View Postspud_tuber, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:12, said:

So, you didn't mean draw your own conclusions, you meant draw the conclusion you have but don't want to say..

 

Namely, that the game is rigged against you when you run boosters or prem time.. which of course makes no sense, as if WG were demonstrable doing that, no one would buy boosters or prem time. 

 

There is a difference between drawing your own conclusions about the stats he was posting, and making an assumption about a fact that was not part of, nor could a person of reasonable intelligence extrapolate from, those stats.

 

Typical of any time someone shows up here with a reasonable question, deduction, or observation, the trolls, and shills show up with some form of trolling attack against the poster. Congrats, glad to see you people have not changed. 



spud_tuber #38 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 06:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 64541 battles
  • 10,550
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostJaspo, on Sep 01 2020 - 20:43, said:

You most certainly have put forth conclusions. Reread your stuff. If I was "shutting it down" its because it was stating as fact something that is speculative, and also hinted at a bit of a personal attack stemming from your own preconceived notions. How you've presented your other possible conclusions here is how you should've presented your first. Do note that the data is most certainly not deliberately falsified, though I probably can't prove it aside from referencing my replays from that time period.

Maybe you should go back and read who wrote that first response that lays out their conclusion.  Hint, it wasn't me.  I just found your dismissal of someone doing as invited something worth commenting on.   

 

Once again,  dismissing someone's conclusion in such a short way after inviting them to draw their own conclusions suggests you've a specific conclusion already in mind.  And, frankly, as pipinghot explained, it is a conclusion that fits the data you presented.   This only adds to the impression that you've a specific conclusion you want us to draw. 

 

I'll admit that you've since partially reduced this initial impression, but perhaps in the future you may wish to be more careful how you respond to people doing exactly as you invited so as to avoid further confusion.   

 

Finally, I will once again emphasize that I wasn't the one who presented the original conclusion in question...



spud_tuber #39 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 06:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 64541 battles
  • 10,550
  • Member since:
    08-26-2013

View PostBurning_Haggis, on Sep 01 2020 - 22:53, said:

There is a difference between drawing your own conclusions about the stats he was posting, and making an assumption about a fact that was not part of, nor could a person of reasonable intelligence extrapolate from, those stats.

 

Typical of any time someone shows up here with a reasonable question, deduction, or observation, the trolls, and shills show up with some form of trolling attack against the poster. Congrats, glad to see you people have not changed. 

When he invited us to draw our own conclusions, he invited exactly such speculation,  as there isn't enough data there to draw any conclusion without some speculation.  And as pipinghot explains, such behavior is a know psychological phenomenon among some people.  As such, a person of reasonable intelligence and knowledge of the behavior could reasonably extrapolate it as a possible cause. 

 

If the OP had responded with the full, edited response he has up now, rather than the short, dismissive answer still present in my quote of him,  I'd not have said anything to him.   However, as I explained to him,  when he so casually and shortly dismissed someone doing exactly as he invited them to, I chose to respond in kind.



Markd73 #40 Posted Sep 02 2020 - 06:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 35909 battles
  • 8,281
  • [2M8TA] 2M8TA
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011

View PostBurning_Haggis, on Sep 02 2020 - 04:53, said:

There is a difference between drawing your own conclusions about the stats he was posting, and making an assumption about a fact that was not part of, nor could a person of reasonable intelligence extrapolate from, those stats.

 

Typical of any time someone shows up here with a reasonable question, deduction, or observation, the trolls, and shills show up with some form of trolling attack against the poster. Congrats, glad to see you people have not changed. 

 

 

Using Ad Hominems like "shills" and "trolls" weakens your argument and makes people think you are thin skinned abd intolerant to differing opinions/perspectives.

 

Don't be that guy.







Also tagged with winrate, stats, premium, boosters, booster, wins, losses

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users