Jump to content


Top Using Stat Insults. Because Stats are Lagging, Uncertain, Baseless, Irrelevant.

stats insults

  • Please log in to reply
174 replies to this topic

Gothraul #21 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 00:44

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 3149 battles
  • 6,797
  • Member since:
    11-17-2014
As long they are not bots or actively trolling their teams I don't care what their stats are so long there is an honest effort as all that matters is honest play for which everyone benefits.

Mojo_Riesing #22 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 00:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21693 battles
  • 1,983
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

STATS can be a useful indicator for a player to measure their own progress. STATS derived from battles that tend to be more balanced, lilke Clan Wars, Strongholds, and if they ever included it, Frontline could be useful.

In Random matches where players of every skill level are thrown in, often with 3 Tier spread, where some players have every "edge" by virtue of having bonds to acquire them are probably much less useful.  Higher Tier play WILL result in better STATS.  Having players not only with higher levels of crew skills but the KNOWLEDGE of what skills to use and now with equipment has got to skew those statistical measures away from being solely about "skill level".

Worse yet and to the OP's point, in many of the replies it's clear there is some dividing line that many perceive divide "Good" players from "Bad" and then USE that to act the fool and contribute to the overall excessive toxic nature of this game.

 



Cnckiwi #23 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 00:56

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 14875 battles
  • 358
  • [SPIDY] SPIDY
  • Member since:
    09-08-2012

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 19 2020 - 09:53, said:

I saw a big argument last night between players who were using stats to insult each other's gameplay.  Why?  Stats are an empty insult.  

 

First, I've already analyzed in another thread that win rate is a lagging indicator.  It doesn't become relevant until after about 1,000 battles.  So, it's not going to show what's happening, today, unless it's for known for sure that a player has not gotten better or worse during their last 1,000 battles.  

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/622090-why-the-win-rate-stat-is-bogus-with-my-example/page__fromsearch__1

 

Second, it's not certain that other stats like WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience relate to Win Rate -- as can be seen in the graphs (attached).  My WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience have all steadily increased.  Yet my Win Rate has randomly oscillated to finally end up -- a little lower than where it began.  If there's a correlation, or not, who can say that it actually relates to any cause and effect?  

https://wotlabs.net/na/player/siege_engine

 

Third, there is broad disagreement about what constitutes stat-padding and even how to define a "cheat".  Without agreement on these issues, then the stats are baseless.   

 

Fourth, there is a lack of relevance.  There isn't any data on my gameplay that shows when I'm drinking lots of frosty beverages, or not.  So my gameplay can't be predicted based on my stats -- even if you know whether I'm drinking frosty beverages.  

 

So, when people in this game insult other's gameplay based on their stats, they are not only being rude but they are also naive of the insignificance of their insults.  

 

Play the game.  Have fun.  Stop the stat insults.  They don't prove you're a better player or a better person.  

 

 

siege-engine-stats.jpg

 

 

 

your average damage and ETC going up, but your winrate isn't is caused by the increased average tier.

you are playing more higher tier games with more HP, which means your stats will increase.

 

hope that explains those charts.

 

 

the best way to judge player skill between player a and player b is for a third player, player C (who must be a impartial and experienced player) to spectate them playing in game



Guido1212 #24 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 01:07

    Community Contributor

  • Players
  • 87118 battles
  • 9,515
  • [GFLC] GFLC
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 21:53, said:

I saw a big argument last night between players who were using stats to insult each other's gameplay.  Why?  Stats are an empty insult.  

 

First, I've already analyzed in another thread that win rate is a lagging indicator.  It doesn't become relevant until after about 1,000 battles.  So, it's not going to show what's happening, today, unless it's for known for sure that a player has not gotten better or worse during their last 1,000 battles.  

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/622090-why-the-win-rate-stat-is-bogus-with-my-example/page__fromsearch__1

 

Second, it's not certain that other stats like WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience relate to Win Rate -- as can be seen in the graphs (attached).  My WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience have all steadily increased.  Yet my Win Rate has randomly oscillated to finally end up -- a little lower than where it began.  If there's a correlation, or not, who can say that it actually relates to any cause and effect?  

https://wotlabs.net/na/player/siege_engine

 

Third, there is broad disagreement about what constitutes stat-padding and even how to define a "cheat".  Without agreement on these issues, then the stats are baseless.   

 

Fourth, there is a lack of relevance.  There isn't any data on my gameplay that shows when I'm drinking lots of frosty beverages, or not.  So my gameplay can't be predicted based on my stats -- even if you know whether I'm drinking frosty beverages.  

 

So, when people in this game insult other's gameplay based on their stats, they are not only being rude but they are also naive of the insignificance of their insults.  

 

Play the game.  Have fun.  Stop the stat insults.  They don't prove you're a better player or a better person.  

 

 

siege-engine-stats.jpg

 

 

 

Stats do prove you are a better player.  That's just how the old world turns.  A player with a relevant amount of battles and better stats is a better player.

 

As for that making them a better person, not many people actually believe that, and fewer let it even be an issue.  The two are not connected in any way.

 

Insults are another issue entirely and have nothing to do with a player being objectively better than another, and have everything to do with someone being a jerk.  Bad players can excel at insults.

 

There's nothing in your stats that is unusual or proves in any way that stats aren't relevant in determining who is a good player and who isn't



Korvick #25 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 01:51

    Captain

  • Players
  • 4243 battles
  • 1,663
  • Member since:
    05-02-2013

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 22:45, said:

 

Problem is that you can't be certain of my influence on win-rate until after 1,000 battles.  My next 50 battles might be 40% wins or 60% wins.  

 

If you are asking if a stat is a precise predictor of your win rate then I think we all know this is being facetious.  Of course you can't predict it exactly.  if you were a 60% win rate player (which is an absolutely ridiculously high w/r btw) that still implies you only win 6 out of 10 games.  My win rate is sitting around 51% on my main account.  My DAILY win rate can be anything.  Two days ago I had 6 wins in a row.  Last night I had 0 for 4.  This is what random means.  But over the course of hundreds of games, they will even out.  And that is precisely how WG have predicated their entire game on.  They deliberately allow for RNG and let the process of 1000s of your games to sort things out.

 

This is NOT A PROBLEM.  This is just how things work.



RaynorShyne #26 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 02:06

    Captain

  • Players
  • 31424 battles
  • 1,888
  • [S-F] S-F
  • Member since:
    02-24-2011

View Post_AveSatanas_, on Oct 18 2020 - 16:06, said:

 

Except they do. Using a combination of a few different stats (avg tier, winrate, WN8 and avg dmg) will absolutely show how good or bad a player is.

No.  It doesn't.

 

It shows performance over a snap-shot in time with enough variables and outliers to fill a football stadium.

 

That's why you see so many re-rolls in the game.   The idea is the "restart" to make stats better by dropping the games of inexperience.

 

WOT before patch 8.0 or 9.17 was effectively a completely and utterly different game than it is today.   

 

So, yes, take:

  • two players... 
  • playing on the exact same machines 
  • on the exact same internet connection
  • playing the exact same tanks
  • with the exact same configuration
  • against the exact same enemy
  • over an exact period of time (50-100 battles)
  • with the exact same level of experience

 

....and you'll have an equal comparison.

 

Of course - you won't, because that's silly.   You got a high-score on a videogame.   Yay for you!   Know what you can extrapolate from that with analytics?   That you got a high-score on a videogame..   

 

Everything else is hyperbole.



redjkent #27 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 03:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 110169 battles
  • 1,912
  • [Y2KBB] Y2KBB
  • Member since:
    07-24-2014

View Post_AveSatanas_, on Oct 18 2020 - 22:06, said:

 

Except they do. Using a combination of a few different stats (avg tier, winrate, WN8 and avg dmg) will absolutely show how good or bad a player is.


oh yes there better at a video game and that makes it ok to be as toxic as you can, now tell me when your a top tier doctor then that matters 



I_QQ_4_U #28 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 03:34

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 27426 battles
  • 11,475
  • Member since:
    10-17-2016
Yeah stats mean a lot when some raging idiot makes yet another crackpot tinfoil post. Ever notice how the vast majority of them are pretty bad players?

_VIBECHECK_ #29 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 03:47

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6390 battles
  • 141
  • [TINDR] TINDR
  • Member since:
    07-04-2020

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 22:53, said:

I saw a big argument last night between players who were using stats to insult each other's gameplay.  Why?  Stats are an empty insult.  

 

First, I've already analyzed in another thread that win rate is a lagging indicator.  It doesn't become relevant until after about 1,000 battles.  So, it's not going to show what's happening, today, unless it's for known for sure that a player has not gotten better or worse during their last 1,000 battles.  

http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/622090-why-the-win-rate-stat-is-bogus-with-my-example/page__fromsearch__1

 

Second, it's not certain that other stats like WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience relate to Win Rate -- as can be seen in the graphs (attached).  My WN8, Average Damage, and Average Experience have all steadily increased.  Yet my Win Rate has randomly oscillated to finally end up -- a little lower than where it began.  If there's a correlation, or not, who can say that it actually relates to any cause and effect?  

https://wotlabs.net/na/player/siege_engine

 

Third, there is broad disagreement about what constitutes stat-padding and even how to define a "cheat".  Without agreement on these issues, then the stats are baseless.   

 

Fourth, there is a lack of relevance.  There isn't any data on my gameplay that shows when I'm drinking lots of frosty beverages, or not.  So my gameplay can't be predicted based on my stats -- even if you know whether I'm drinking frosty beverages.  

 

So, when people in this game insult other's gameplay based on their stats, they are not only being rude but they are also naive of the insignificance of their insults.  

 

Play the game.  Have fun.  Stop the stat insults.  They don't prove you're a better player or a better person.  

 

 

siege-engine-stats.jpg

 

 

You are drastically overestimating the impact you're having in game. In the sample set you provided, your average damage is 655 with an average tier of ~6.7 and an average wn8 of ~1200. I hate to tell you buddy but even if you're doing better than you were before, you're not doing enough to really influence the flow of the game. In my tier 6s I typically average 1k damage per game or more.

 

Furthermore using XVM I regularly see players with around a 1200 wn8 that all have 47-49% winrates. Your winrate is therefore right where I would expect it to be for the wn8 you're performing at and the damage you are doing.


Edited by _VIBECHECK_, Oct 19 2020 - 03:48.


_AveSatanas_ #30 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 04:16

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 511 battles
  • 259
  • Member since:
    05-22-2020

View PostRaynorShyne, on Oct 19 2020 - 02:06, said:

No.  It doesn't.

 

It shows performance over a snap-shot in time with enough variables and outliers to fill a football stadium.

 

That's why you see so many re-rolls in the game.   The idea is the "restart" to make stats better by dropping the games of inexperience.

 

WOT before patch 8.0 or 9.17 was effectively a completely and utterly different game than it is today.   

 

So, yes, take:

  • two players... 
  • playing on the exact same machines 
  • on the exact same internet connection
  • playing the exact same tanks
  • with the exact same configuration
  • against the exact same enemy
  • over an exact period of time (50-100 battles)
  • with the exact same level of experience

 

....and you'll have an equal comparison.

 

Of course - you won't, because that's silly.   You got a high-score on a videogame.   Yay for you!   Know what you can extrapolate from that with analytics?   That you got a high-score on a videogame..   

 

Everything else is hyperbole.

 

Sounds like a bunch of excuses on your part

 

"You're not better than me because we're not equal!"



TastyPastry #31 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 04:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 33443 battles
  • 2,286
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

I'm confused as to why anyone would argue stats don't matter in this game, yet stats clearly matter in pretty much all other competitive activities, whether it be sports, job hunting, or whatever. 

 

I think you started with the idea that stats don't matter, and looked for proof that you are right. It's easy to say stats don't matter, when you play 13000 games and are still below average in terms of win rate. Excuses don't make you better, unfortunately. I've been down that road, so I understand where you're coming from, but I also know it's not any way to improve. 



RaynorShyne #32 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 06:39

    Captain

  • Players
  • 31424 battles
  • 1,888
  • [S-F] S-F
  • Member since:
    02-24-2011

View Post_AveSatanas_, on Oct 18 2020 - 21:16, said:

 

Sounds like a bunch of excuses on your part

 

"You're not better than me because we're not equal!"

Take a class on Statistics.   Learn about variance.   Learn what a statistical sample is.  Learn what a population is.

 

 

The current Stats in World of Tanks are like the top of the screen in an old school videogame.   It's a high score, Brother.  

 

that's all.

 

Stop looking for the meaning of life in them.



_AveSatanas_ #33 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 06:44

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 511 battles
  • 259
  • Member since:
    05-22-2020

View PostRaynorShyne, on Oct 19 2020 - 06:39, said:

Take a class on Statistics.   Learn about variance.   Learn what a statistical sample is.  Learn what a population is.

 

 

The current Stats in World of Tanks are like the top of the screen in an old school videogame.   It's a high score, Brother.  

 

that's all.

 

Stop looking for the meaning of life in them.

 

Keep making excuses



TastyPastry #34 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 08:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 33443 battles
  • 2,286
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

View PostRaynorShyne, on Oct 19 2020 - 01:39, said:

The current Stats in World of Tanks are like the top of the screen in an old school videogame.   It's a high score, Brother.  

 

Doesn't a high score indicate a player who's better than others? If the high score meant nothing, why doesn't everyone have the high score? 



rustyJunk #35 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 09:47

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 5738 battles
  • 1,135
  • [CAPAC] CAPAC
  • Member since:
    08-23-2020

View PostCnckiwi, on Oct 18 2020 - 17:56, said:

 

the best way to judge player skill between player a and player b is for a third player, player C (who must be a impartial and experienced player) to spectate them playing in game

 

Even that can be misleading.  Only ***you*** know your strengths and weaknesses.   For example there was a battle yesterday where things were going badly with about 5 players left on the enemy side.   One player was spectating and started berating me because I did not handle things in the more traditional way and failed to realize what I was doing.   But as he noticed that even though we were losing team members (mostly bad ones) I kept killing enemies he stopped.   By the time I was engaging the last enemy left from a hidden position he had changed his tone and was praising my strategy.  We would have lost (and I would have died quickly) if I had followed traditional strategy and tactics, but instead we won.

 

So, you really need to spectate a player over a number of encounters, and remember that people's play style and effectiveness will be different in team, platoon and solo game play.   Me, although there are exceptions with some partners I typically perform much better solo than platooned.



Pipinghot #36 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 10:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 25960 battles
  • 12,324
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 17:47, said:

View PostPipinghot, on Oct 18 2020 - 23:44, said:

Your analysis was filled with flaws and was debunked by multiple people.

I asked in the other thread for people to tell me where my analysis was flawed.  I got mostly compliments on my analysis.

The first two pages of that thread are essentially one giant collection of debunk, there certainly were not a bunch of compliments on your analysis. Tsavo, in particular, did and excellent job of explaining why your OP in the other thread was incorrect.

 

Having said that, allow me to clarify. Your statements that "win rate is a lagging indicator" and "It doesn't become relevant until after about 1,000 battles" are true. But, what you're leaving out is that once you have 1,000+ battles it becomes relevant and stays relevant for the remainder of your WoT "career".

 

Stats do lag current performance but in no way does that mean that they're uncertain, baseless nor irrelevant. The key is understanding what your stats are telling you.

 

 

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 17:48, said:

View PostPipinghot, on Oct 18 2020 - 23:44, said:

Why yes, yes they do.

Except in my case, no, no they didn't.  Maybe try looking at the attached graphs in the OP?  

You're interpreting my answer the wrong way, but to be fair to you the statement is open to being interpreted more than one way, so I'll rephrase and expand on it.

 

To rephrase: Having better stats than other players does mean that someone is better at the game than other players. And, when when considering a player's stats it's critical to understand how "Average Tier Played" fits into the stats.

 

The charts you posted are perfectly normal, regardless of win rate. What your charts leave out is an understanding of how Average Tier Played affects those other stats in your charts. Nearly every player in the game sees their Avg. Damage, WN8 and Avg. XP increase as they move up to higher tiers even when their WR does not increase. If you don't understand why this is then you need to go back and re-read Tsavo's post.

 

You must develop a better understanding of how Avg. Tier interacts with those other stats if you're ever going to understand the story that your stats are telling you.

 

I still agree with the point that people should not use stats as a tool for insults, but again that includes people being honest about what their stats say. Players with better stats are indeed better players at the game than players with worse stats. Stats are not uncertain, baseless nor irrelevant if you understand them properly.



GSOR3301_AVR_FS #37 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 10:23

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 519 battles
  • 338
  • [ZAKO] ZAKO
  • Member since:
    10-05-2016

View PostSiege_Engine, on Oct 18 2020 - 23:36, said:

But, for the humps like me, you won't be able to use my stats to predict my next 50 games.  

 

Stats aren't to my knowledge really used to do that though. Stats are just an image of a player's skill overall, but even a unicum has a bad game or two every now and again and so even if you were to see a unicum in a game, you can't guarantee that they would have a game on par with their performance just because they have those stats. It does however suggest that more likely than not to perform better than a player with worse stats and a player of that standard is more likely to know what to do in battle to win the game for their team. No one is really looking at your last 50 Games or your next 50, but your last 1k and then your overall (in your case 13,326 Battles), which do provide an accurate example of your performance.



coconut2011 #38 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 10:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 73978 battles
  • 2,543
  • [AWOO] AWOO
  • Member since:
    08-09-2011

It is always the players without good stats saying stats is useless.



_VIBECHECK_ #39 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 18:41

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6390 battles
  • 141
  • [TINDR] TINDR
  • Member since:
    07-04-2020

View PostRaynorShyne, on Oct 19 2020 - 06:39, said:

Take a class on Statistics.   Learn about variance.   Learn what a statistical sample is.  Learn what a population is.

 

 

The current Stats in World of Tanks are like the top of the screen in an old school videogame.   It's a high score, Brother.  

 

that's all.

 

Stop looking for the meaning of life in them.

If I get the "high score" consistently over thousands of games and you do not, which of us likely has a better grasp of the game mechanics? 


Edited by _VIBECHECK_, Oct 19 2020 - 18:41.


virus_SHAME #40 Posted Oct 19 2020 - 18:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 8378 battles
  • 4,469
  • [GSKYO] GSKYO
  • Member since:
    05-01-2012

I feel like this is a flawed argument.  Stats do correlate a player's overall skill. 

 

While I do agree with the notion of not insulting players based on stats.

 

And before anyone attempts to, I am bad at this game and I'm aware of it.  I try to stay out of higher tiers so I don''t mess up people's games and enjoyment.







Also tagged with stats, insults

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users