Jump to content


Efficiency Rating Calculator


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

Flakker2 #1 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 01:33

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 37411 battles
  • 1,865
  • [HAVOK] HAVOK
  • Member since:
    07-17-2010
Foreword

Recently, I came to notice an Efficient Rating Calculator ( http://wot-news.com/...p/stat/calc/en/ ), which made me curious about how it handled its rating. I noticed it looks at your kills and other information, pulling it from Wargaming's official records, but I believe that it does not fully present us with a clear picture. I wanted to dive in deeper and analyze what makes great players what they are. I was not interested in quoting hit ratios, winning percentages, etc. as I do not think they are a true indicator of greatness.

Just for the record, it calculated my rating as 1651.47 (~3% of all players, this is me playing without using gold ammo/consumables, platoons, TCs, 100% crew or fully upgraded tanks for over 90% of my games). Arguably, it would be higher if I converted more free XP, platooned and always elited my tanks and skipped the poor ones.


Player Skill

You see what I consider skill in a battle, might be different than what are more common qualities that are examined by other players. I do not think kill count, damage, average XP, hit ratio and other statistics paint an accurate picture of a player.

I consider someone in an inferior tank defeating a superior armored and armed opponent to be a greater testament and show of skill, than someone racking up 10 kills with an IS-4 against opponents of lesser tier (which I have for the record done multiple times myself but do not consider it to be as skillful as me taking out a Tier 10 and a Tier 9 with a Tier 6/7 tank (KV-1S, about 71% crew trained after starting at 50%, have also done similar performance with AMX 13 75/90).

I am not talking about a killshot but a whole sequence of events that take into account terrain, cover, reload time, weakspots, flanking, tracks, critical damage and line of sight.


Situation

Consider the situation I was faced with recently on Sand River. I was the last tank, against a GWPanther, King Tiger, AMX50B and a JgTiger (maybe another enemy tank as well, can't remember).

Now, I knew arty would be aiming at me as soon as I lit up, so I placed myself near our base, around those buildings to the north. Soon enough, the JgTiger came crashing through one of the buildings, taking me by surprise. He knew I was there because I dispatched earlier the AMX50B with 2 shots to its flanks from the hill near our base. The AMX was moving out to reload so it was vulnerable in the open, as it tried to crest the dunes.

Anyways, this JgTiger at full health fires at me on the move at about 60m and misses. Then he keeps charging at me. I slowly take my time to aim at his right front track. That was important since I wanted him to spin away from me, and not in my direction. The shot tracked just as he was about to ram me, and I was able to grind against his left side. He attempted to back up, but I have grinded many TDs before (and I have a JgTiger so I know how it handles). We were bringing down the houses, arty was unable to splash me as I was right next to him. I could see other enemy tanks on the minimap moving towards me, so I knew I had limited time to act. It was a good choice that I picked to fight in the small town as it provided me with good cover. The JgTiger was dispatched with several more shots to the flanks. He never had a chance to escape my grip.

After I kill him the King Tiger shows around, mostly at full health. He fires on the move again but I was partially behind cover and it destroyed a part of the building. I tracked him and considered pulling back deeper in the village, but another enemy tank was coming in from the other side and would have had a shot. I charged the KT and tried to get behind him but in the brief time that took me to move up, the GWPanther was able to get a nice aimed shot and kill me. I was hoping that he may miss so I could get another kill, but no luck there.


Conclusion

Basically, I feel like I grossly outplayed several players, yet my stats would show 2 kills and certain other rather meaningless statistics. Yet, the fights themselves were MUCH harder than me one-shotting tanks in my IS-7, E-100 or T30. In those tanks, I did not have to do anything but just aim and shoot. I did not have to make as many choices as I had to when fighting in my KV-1S. In that tank, I felt like I really had to focus and play hard. I had to consider if others had an easy shot me or not, not just the target I was fighting. I felt like I was being a true tanker, where my life was depending on my good decisions at that very moment. When I am in a superior vehicle, I often tend to be overconfident and not as worried about certain situations. In other words, I am arguably a worse player then.

So next time someone compares you to others via some numbers or equations they have devised, ask him to calculate the coolness, audacity, snap judgement, resilience and persistence of a player in a lesser tank than his opponent. I think it is one of those things that is hard to quantify yet it exists in all players in one form or another. I think that "it" factor is what is there, or it isn't in a person. And you can not prove or show it, but you can certainly feel when you are in "its" presence.

What do you guys think about this?

Dukebarry #2 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 01:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 24073 battles
  • 2,171
  • [SG] SG
  • Member since:
    06-23-2011
Well your stats are strong and I think the Efficiency calc does them justice. Its not a perfect system but its way better than looking at Win Loss. I agree with most of your points but they seem hard to calc. The Calculator is a good place to start.

Jagr #3 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 02:17

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 9112 battles
  • 156
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
Your stats look very good (especially compared to mine) at least I'm not below average, though my Russian and European counterparts are much better.

bdplaya #4 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 02:44

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13369 battles
  • 1,812
  • [_FAL_] _FAL_
  • Member since:
    05-01-2011
I love the calculator it really shows more than win ratio. I am a good player.

MaxMike #5 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 02:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 16349 battles
  • 3,433
  • Member since:
    06-12-2011
According to my W/L ratio I am pretty average, according to the Efficiency Rating Calculator I am really good.... I would trust Efficiency Rating Calculator it cannot be wrong,http://cdn-frm-us.wargaming.net/wot/us/4.1/style_emoticons/default/Smile_blinky.gif

EchelonIII #6 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 04:55

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 13969 battles
  • 4,783
  • [BULLS] BULLS
  • Member since:
    09-11-2010
The problem with it is that it biases higher tier tanks over low tier tanks, and doesn't compare tank to tank.

Look at this guy's profile
http://worldoftanks....-Soulkeeper117/

According to the calculator, he's almost in the top 25% with an efficiency rating of 1136, yet he has no good tanks with a win ratio of even over 50%

cardgame #7 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 05:11

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 5625 battles
  • 1,174
  • Member since:
    08-15-2010
Well I play a lot of lower-tier matches and still got a 1322.

Tier 1 - 19
Tier 2 - 131
Tier 3 - 255
Tier 4 - 387
Tier 5 - 907
Tier 6 - 359
Tier 7 - 269
Tier 8 - 177

I'm more than certain such a spread cancels out any top-heavy bias.

EDIT - The average tank level indicates 5.15, pretty much right in the center.

Comrade_Ryanovski #8 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 05:29

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 25574 battles
  • 232
  • [SEUSA] SEUSA
  • Member since:
    03-07-2011
I ended up with 1784.97 woohoo!!



KilljoyCutter #9 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 05:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 16,975
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
I thought we already had a thread where this "efficiency" calc thing had a bunch of holes poked in it...

MaxMike #10 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 07:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 16349 battles
  • 3,433
  • Member since:
    06-12-2011

View PostKilljoyCutter, on Feb 12 2012 - 05:39, said:

I thought we already had a thread where this "efficiency" calc thing had a bunch of holes poked in it...


Yes it has problems but It is as a effective measure as anything else we have.

Orion03 #11 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:36

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9516 battles
  • 1,770
  • Member since:
    08-17-2011
I have no problem with it, it measures a lot of stuff and boils them down to a number for comparison. I find that it's pretty valid.

And if you use the dossier tool, you'll find that it calculates efficiency for each tank now so that you can see how well you are doing for each tank.

As with everything it's a scale for your own personal development not for over inflation of ones ego.

amade #12 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12575 battles
  • 2,492
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010
I'm waiting for someone to come up with a Cooperation/Teamwork Rating Calculator. :Smile_harp:

awacs #13 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:45

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8795 battles
  • 426
  • [CHAII] CHAII
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011
You should check out world of tanks dossier, it calculates the efficiency for each of your vehicles, as well as the average.

del1001295635 #14 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 13036 battles
  • 8,029
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

View PostMaxMike, on Feb 12 2012 - 02:51, said:

According to my W/L ratio I am pretty average, according to the Efficiency Rating Calculator I am really good.... I would trust Efficiency Rating Calculator it cannot be wrong,http://cdn-frm-us.wargaming.net/wot/us/4.1/style_emoticons/default/Smile_blinky.gif
Haha, mine shows the opposite.  I'm an average player who has good luck with the matchmaker.   :D

I guess this proves that win rates mean nothing.  Take that, win rate padders!

Ducman69 #15 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:51

    Captain

  • Players
  • 4895 battles
  • 1,398
  • Member since:
    10-23-2011
I disagree, IMO the goal of each and every game is to WIN.

It doesn't matter how you accomplish it, just that you get it done.   If you're contributing to wins above average, you will have an above average win ratio.   If you are contributing to wins below average, you will have a below average win ratio.

After all, if I just sat in my IS-3 back at base, I could mop up the map and get five kills easily every match.   However, this is not how you win maps.   On the other hand, I could use my strong frontal armor, and plow through important areas, acting as a giant meat shield for various TDs and mediums behind me, who could then break through and grab the cap and kick some butt.   Being killed early on and not focusing on damage, it may not be efficient but if it WINS GAMES it doesn't matter.

And lets look at some of the inherent problems with how this "efficiency calculator" determines your efficiency for say a Russian Tier4 T-50:
Average destroyed in the battle:
1) Average damage in the battle
2) Average spotted in the battle
3) Average defense points in the battle
4) Average captured points in the battle

1) Almost entirely irrelevant for a light scout, and artillery have few hitpoints
2) Not important if you only spotted three tanks if you took out three artillery
3) Irrelevant for a light scout
4) Not likely to survive long enough to cap if you were taking out artie and then lighting up players for your own artie the entire game.

A Chaffe might not go after artie being slow, but would be spotting, damaging, breaking caps, and capturing, but the contribution may not be as significant as the T-50 taking out all the artie.  So a T-50 with a 65% win ratio may end up looking very "inefficient", and the weight for 1 through 4 are clearly biased in favor of being heavy+higher tier.   But that T-50... 65% of the time, he wins every time.   :D


Naughtius_Maximus #16 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 20801 battles
  • 7,448
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011
Eh, I still think it is not the best measurement, at least for me. When I flank and create a second angle of attack I typically only shoot if I'm safe. More importantly I aim to create a more distracted and vulnerable target so that my bigger ally can have an easier time. Of course, I don't get any exp or credits for doing that and it's only really reflected in the win rate.

The bigger problem I see is if you have an absolutely outrageous load out and it's on your most played tank. I use the stock turret Luchs; yay for auto cannons at tier 3! Kills? Pfft, occasionally. Exp? yeah good luck with that, it's low even by tier 3 standards. Using a disgustingly weak gun for the tier does that to your exp rates...

It's a nice change of pace from high tier fights however and damned if I sell it.  :Smile-playing: It's basically a more agile tier 3 T-50 (including better MM.)

Neither the calculator or indeed WoT stats measure your ability to abuse terrain. It doesn't record if you're good at flanking and distracting the enemy for your bigger buddy to kill. It also doesn't record how many poor saps think you're an easy kill and are lured into a deathtrap.  :Smile_harp:

Edit: This efficiency calculator makes me feel like I'm doing nothing at all! Nothing at all! Nothing at all!

http://www.milkandco...k/53548/detail/

awacs #17 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 08:59

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8795 battles
  • 426
  • [CHAII] CHAII
  • Member since:
    08-14-2011

View PostDucman69, on Feb 12 2012 - 08:51, said:

I disagree, IMO the goal of each and every game is to WIN.

It doesn't matter how you accomplish it, just that you get it done.   If you're contributing to wins above average, you will have an above average win ratio.   If you are contributing to wins below average, you will have a below average win ratio.

After all, if I just sat in my IS-3 back at base, I could mop up the map and get five kills easily every match.   However, this is not how you win maps.   On the other hand, I could use my strong frontal armor, and plow through important areas, acting as a giant meat shield for various TDs and mediums behind me, who could then break through and grab the cap and kick some butt.   Being killed early on and not focusing on damage, it may not be efficient but if it WINS GAMES it doesn't matter.

And lets look at some of the inherent problems with how this "efficiency calculator" determines your efficiency for say a Russian Tier4 T-50:
Average destroyed in the battle:
1) Average damage in the battle
2) Average spotted in the battle
3) Average defense points in the battle
4) Average captured points in the battle

1) Almost entirely irrelevant for a light scout, and artillery have few hitpoints
2) Not important if you only spotted three tanks if you took out three artillery
3) Irrelevant for a light scout
4) Not likely to survive long enough to cap if you were taking out artie and then lighting up players for your own artie the entire game.

So a T-50 with a 65% win ratio may end up looking very "inefficient", and the weight for 1 through 4 are clearly biased in favor of being heavy+higher tier.   But that T-50... he's duh WINNING.

Got to agree. My last game in my e-50 I had 7500 damage, but made 2 mistakes that cost the game. First I shouldn't have charged when the others charged. Could have done much more just to hang back and snipe. Second, being overconfident and charging  into enemy base with only 150 hp left and getting one-shotted by the e-75. Should have waited for the 800hp e-50 go first and then kill the e-75 collaboratively.

amc999 #18 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 09:58

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 5949 battles
  • 617
  • [NA2EU] NA2EU
  • Member since:
    07-24-2011

View PostMaxMike, on Feb 12 2012 - 02:51, said:

According to my W/L ratio I am pretty average, according to the Efficiency Rating Calculator I am really good.... I would trust Efficiency Rating Calculator it cannot be wrong,http://cdn-frm-us.wargaming.net/wot/us/4.1/style_emoticons/default/Smile_blinky.gif

I have no choice but to trust the calculator and I'll tell you why: I'm continuously improving my stats every day. My kills per game is going up, my hit ratio is going up,  my DMG per game is going up, everything but my W/L ratio.
With my Grille for example I'm averaging 3 kills per game but I went down from 64% to 55% even though the spread between the kills and games just keeps getting bigger. The only thing reflecting that I am not such a bad player is the efficiency calculator. It may not be perfect, but it's the best thing I have right now to evaluate me as an individual and not be affected by the performance of the teams I get drafted with.

Ducman69 #19 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 10:12

    Captain

  • Players
  • 4895 battles
  • 1,398
  • Member since:
    10-23-2011

View Postamc999, on Feb 12 2012 - 09:58, said:

I have no choice but to trust the calculator and I'll tell you why: I'm continuously improving my stats every day. My kills per game is going up, my hit ratio is going up,  my DMG per game is going up, everything but my W/L ratio.
I don't believe there is a single player on the forum that can't say the same.

The more you play this game, the more credits and XP you earn.   That means better modules, better equipment, better crews, and higher tier tanks.    All of those things should result in improved hit ratio, more damage, and higher kills.   And the efficiency rating will go up as you increase tier even if you play exactly the same.

You would certainly expect a TierX tank to do far more damage and as top dog on every game have more kills than a TierV tank (and miss less with those expensive higher tier rounds), but if the player isn't consistently better than TierX tanks on the other team he is facing his win ratio is going to drop.   And that is one challenge, the faster up the tree you go, the harder it is to maintain your win ratio as your counterpart in MM is generally more and more experienced.   :)

777pwner #20 Posted Feb 12 2012 - 10:14

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 8008 battles
  • 487
  • [JAGZ] JAGZ
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
I'm just an average player :(


Gotta start working on them stats of mine.

1084.15




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users