Andrewbassg Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 4 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: or a correct measurement of caliber of a player.. That's 100% true. There is no stat that could correctly measure a player's caliber. However, constant past 55% WR indicate (at the very least) a willingness to work towards a win. Which is the very first step. And past 60... is a clear indication of willingness and skills to achieve a win. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kruzenstern Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 27 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: I just dont see from a stats POV.. I don''t think there's an indicator or a correct measurement of caliber of a player.. This is the reason WOWS is not skill based. Yes as I stated in a previous post, anyone can create a set of stats to try and guess.. Then, its an opinion generated result. In that result, there will be a large deviation. So, by your judgement a player that has won 60% of his last 1000 matches is not a better player than one who has won 40% of his last 1000 matches, because there is no skill in wows and thus win rate cannot reflect it, yes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said: So, by your judgement a player that has won 60% of his last 1000 matches is not a better player than one who has won 40% of his last 1000 matches, because there is no skill in wows and thus win rate cannot reflect it, yes? On WR alone... Since its well documented WR can be manipulated.. The only sure way to analyze it is by using the given statistics explanation. Both are in the %5 percentile... One will reach %45 (the %90 percentile) eventually. The other one will probably reach back into the %90 percentile at %55. There's no guaranteed skill set to give the players a better WR. Nor a worst WR... In theory, AFK ships can win. The %90 percentile range is the formidable black hole in WOWS. The longer you play its more likely to end up there. Its possible the %40 player is just having fun from the start.. While the %60 player is a re-roll account and wanted to redo his progress. Just a few possibilities.. Returning to your question. You cant put one player in the gutter and the other on a pedestal with the information given. There's nothing in WOWS to compile skill.. Therefor, any attempt with the trophy stats of WOWS... Is only an opinion, and/or an educated guess. Edited April 2 by Navalpride33 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kruzenstern Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) Wow, you are so delusional, it is actually funny. 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Since its well documented WR can be manipulated. Yes it can. But even if it is, a 60% sealclubber will still be better than a 40% mouthbreather pretty much every time. 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Both are in the %5 percentile... One will reach %45 (the %90 percentile) eventually. Why? There are tons of players with 1000s of matches that are below 45% and will stay there forever. Because they are just bad. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting progress which miraculously doesn't come. Playing more regrettably has very little relevance to playing better for far too many. This is a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, people being too incompetent to see their incompetence. Which brings me to 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: The other one will probably reach back into the %90 percentile at %55. This is also highly unlikely. Again, Dunning-Kruger. Competent people DO see their errors and reflect on them and improve, rather than stagnate or even get worse. Unless he really is a sealclubber and starts playing higher tiers. 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: The %90 percentile range is the formidable black hole in WOWS. The longer you play its more likely to end up there. Aside from your black hole being a bit large since players with 45% are complete dorks and those with 55% are usually very good, this just isn't true even if you repeat it all the time. 48-52% is a place where skills can be considered possibly equal. Every percentage beyond that in either direction is a huge skill gap increase provided there are enough battles to matter. 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Its possible the %40 player is just having fun from the start.. While the %60 player is a re-roll account and wanted to redo his progress. And that changes how that the 60% guy is almost certainly a better player than the 40% guy? It doesn't matter at all why someone sucks or is good. Just that. Also I said the last 1000 battles, so rerolls should have no "advantage" in WR anyway. 25 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Returning to your question. You cant put one player in the gutter and the other on a pedestal with the information given. There's nothing in WOWS to compile skill.. Therefor, any attempt with the trophy stats of WOWS... Is only an opinion, and/or an educated guess. Maybe you can't. I can and I will, and anecdotal evidence proves my point 99% of the time. Say there was a team of 12 40% players against one with 12 60% players. They fight 10 matches with equal boundary conditions. Would you bet 100 bucks that the 40%er team wins even the 4 matches it would appear to be entitled to for the mathematically challenged? I would wager they won't even win one. You arguments say they should win five. Edited April 2 by Kruzenstern 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 10 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said: Wow, you are so delusional, it is actually funny. Yes it can. But even if it is, a 60% sealclubber will still be better than a 40% mouthbreather pretty much every time. Why? There are tons of players with 1000s of matches that are below 45% and will stay there forever. Because they are just bad. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting progress which miraculously doesn't come. Playing more regrettably has very little relevance to playing better for far too many. This is a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, people being too incompetent to see their incompetence. Which brings me to This is also highly unlikely. Again, Dunning-Kruger. Competent people DO see their errors and reflect on them and improve, rather than stagnate or even get worse. Unless he really is a sealclubber and starts playing higher tiers. Aside from your black hole being a bit large since players with 45% are complete dorks and those with 55% are usually very good, this just isn't true even if you repeat it all the time. 48-52% is a place where skills can be considered possibly equal. Every percentage beyond that in either direction is a huge skill gap increase provided there are enough battles to matter. And that changes how that the 60% guy is almost certainly a better player than the 40% guy? It doesn't matter at all why someone sucks or is good. Just that. Also I said the last 1000 battles, so rerolls should have no "advantage" in WR anyway. Maybe you can't. I can and I will, and anecdotal evidence proves my point 99% of the time. Say there was a team of 12 40% players against one with 12 60% players. They fight 10 matches with equal boundary conditions. Would you bet 100 bucks that the 40%er team wins even the 4 matches it would appear to be entitled to for the mathematically challenged? I would wager they won't even win one. You arguments say they should win five. Wow... I give you statistics... The inner workings of WOWS from agreed statistics POV... These statistics of the game have been around since beta. Even with the inclusion of subs and the changes to CVs from RTS (the last skill based platform to exists) to the kids friendly, no talent needed to play CVs of today. There haven't been any large deviation in the numbers. Not in NA population NOR in WOWS population as a whole. Every server region plays differently. MEANING, each server region will play their way and still get the WR% breakdown I posted. using your last example... 12 players %40 and 12 players %60.. In the end, its random in a sense someone has to win and someone has to lose. Its 50/50 chance of losing and winning. WR doesnt change that chance. In a hypothetical. you have to use the property of possibility. In a 10 match, which team will get must win... Since there's no stats to determine will.. I go with both teams winning 5 matches each. That will draw them back to the %90percentile.. ------------------------------------------------------------- On a final note... If for some reason, you have an issue with percentiles and population break down... Send your complaint to... Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher Father of Modern time statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakeshuffle Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 27 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said: than a 40% mouthbreather pretty much every time. Someone called for me?! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torino2dc Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 50 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said: 1 hour ago, clammboy said: I think that good players win more then bad players because they can make average players better by taking out threats and doing the small things that make it easier for us to stay alive and help out. But I really think the deciding factor is that the team with the most good players on it usually wins. One great player can carry but when he gets help from other good players it's bad news for you depending on which team there on. This sounds plausible, but then it would still have to occur in more than 50 percent of the battles if that is the explanation. Remember, we talk about WR as indicating if a player wins or loses more than half of their battles, but the problem remains that no player ever wins or loses anything, it's the teams that win or lose. Meaning, that a below 50% player ends up more often on the losing team, and the over 50% player ends up more often on the winning team. What explanation is there for this? Which is the deciding factor in all this? First, recall that in 12v12 randoms, a solo player only swings about 30% of the battles. The other 70% are either unwinnable or unloseable depending on the matchmaking (read: teammates). We know this because the very worst players still win about ~35% of their battles and the very best players only win ~65% of the battles solo. So when we're talking about WR being reflective of player skill, we focus on the ~30 out of 100 battles that can go either way. How many of those 30 battles can they flip into victories based on how well they shoot, angle, (re-)position, use consumables, communicate, etc.?1 This is why a lot of folks have trouble seeing how WR is a result of skill: the difference between an average2 player (50% WR) and a good player (53% WR) is 3 games out of every 100 that the decent player cannot convert. For most that is just too abstract to visualize, because there is no way to know where in any run of 100 games those 3 difference-making games will be found. That's the thing, no one knows. You just have to approach every match as if it's that make-or-break round. Hope that helps o7 ---- 1 Ship choice, modules, and captain-build also play a role here, which is why WR (or PR for that matter) are not direct measurements of skill, rather they are indicators. 2 I'm using the wows-numbers descriptors for the different WR brackets -- the system has its flaws but it is the main one in use. 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thornzero Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) Lumping everyone together into a 9o% skew is convenient especially when you state everyone will get there if they play enough. The top 5% I reckon would not - they have seen it all and know what to do the majority of the time. They are more rare in the queue and I think 5% top is sound. Further, they are consistent. A 6o% unicum whom maintains loses at least 4 out of 1o on the regular. What I don't think is sound is the <45%er at 5%. These players are seen more often; which would diminish the overstated 9o%. Those accounts <45% especially in the 1ok - 2ok match range will never be part of the so called 9o%. They will never make their account average at 5o%. Both directions do not correct to 9o% and the 9o% is problematic on its own. 33 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: In a hypothetical. you have to use the property of possibility. In a 10 match, which team will get must win... Since there's no stats to determine will.. I go with both teams winning 5 matches each. That will draw them back to the %90percentile. 5o% is chance. But I would bet on the unicums winning more than less and it would not be based on luck. You're saying chance is equal and there is no skill so the only answer is 5o%. These matches are not as simple as a flip of a coin which you have reduced them too by only submitting chance as the opportunity. That is like saying no skill but 5o% luck. If it's luck your after then, I have not become a better player [once 41% in randoms now 47%] but I have become [more lucky]. Which you know is b.s.. Edited April 2 by thornzero 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, Kruzenstern said: Aside from your black hole being a bit large since players with 45% are complete dorks and those with 55% are usually very good, this just isn't true even if you repeat it all the time. 48-52% is a place where skills can be considered possibly equal. Every percentage beyond that in either direction is a huge skill gap increase provided there are enough battles to matter. Well......without wanting to fuel things, I'm gonna disagree with those numbers. I've seen plenty of ~54's doing big mistakes. Past 55 is safe to asses things. Just to be clear I don't consider myself a good player, tho I do consider that I can pull my weight. In Ranked coz that's what I care about. That being said That's the same ship on different servers. Deliberately choose this ship, coz it is highly team reliant. As you can see, the other numbers are pretty close, tho.... not WR. Edited April 2 by Andrewbassg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torino2dc Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 4 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: I find it amusing that expecting an unregulated casino to behave on the edge of the law and ethics is a 'conspiracy theory' and 'not fact based'. That's hilarious. FYI, it is a conspiracy theory and not fact based to assume WG is behaving completely transparently and legally. Unfortunately, we have literal years worth of experience with WG behaving poorly. That's the sad reality of the legacy of WG behavior and leadership. You misunderstand my position. I am not saying that WG hasn't done lots of bad things and that their leadership hasn't got systemic issues. These are a matter of record. What I am saying is that there exists a middle ground between "these people are immaculate" and "there is no evil these people won't stoop to." That middle ground comes to exists as a result of debate(s), including the one we're having right now. If we let unsubstantiated accusations of misdeeds float around uncontested, then the frame of the conversation eventually becomes completely divorced from reality. In the same way, if this forum were nothing but brainless WG cheerleading, then the conversation would also come to have no resemblance with our lived experience. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 24 minutes ago, thornzero said: A 6o% unicum Sorry bro... Unicum is not a wows stat ... ITs a 3rd party term/opinion. People misuse it all the time. ------------- As I mentioned in a previous post.. The server break down of WR population is from all server regions. Across all battle played. The highest WR everyone playing can get AND maintain is %69. No one can get or maintain a %70 regardless of how much matches you play. You can get there, but the longer you play, the less chance it will maintain it. You'll end up in the %45-%55WR which represents the %90 percentile in WOWS server global population the longer you play. In summery, using just games played and WR%. only %5 of the population will be %56 and up WR. No one can %70 that's an active player. The longer someone plays WOWS.. The more likely they will end up in the %90 percentile bracket (%45 to %55WR). The other %5 percentile the %44 and below.. Will probably get to the %90 percentile of %45. The numbers haven't changed in years. Since its also RANDOM.. Your experience will not be same as 5 stranger players. But rest assured, those 5 players will probably end up with a %90 percentile WR%. The longer they play WOWS. If there was a deviation, I or any others in the statistics world.. Would have pasted the deviation by now. I know, no one likes math and I dont like it either... At the same time, it cant be dismissed... Its WOWS numbers not mine.. As I noted, these are Accepted Statistics of WOWS population dispersion, across all server regions. Edited April 2 by Navalpride33 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 7 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Ummm...... https://wows-numbers.com/player/526953200,El2aZeR/ Just look around a bit. There is skill in wows... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thornzero Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 14 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said: Ummm...... https://wows-numbers.com/player/526953200,El2aZeR/ Just look around a bit. There is skill in wows... and according to naval pride logic, he will end up in the 9o% sometime after the 26,ooo matches. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said: Ummm...... https://wows-numbers.com/player/526953200,El2aZeR/ Just look around a bit. There is skill in wows... He hasen't been active in a long time... Also, the bulk of his WR% belong to RTS CVs. I did state, RTS CVs were the last skill based ship in the game. RTS CVs were the only ship in the game in where the player controlled the match. If you ask me... Can he be at in the %5 percentile? of course. Not without tricks... One of the tricks used is avoiding losing streaks... Playing only a low number of games per session. Once you lose a match, log out. Now, though its possible. I can see he doesn't play every day. When he plays, he logs off if he loses one game. Smart manipulation if you ask me. Active players, who play every day. Will end up in the %90 percentile of the server population. Edited April 2 by Navalpride33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 54 minutes ago, torino2dc said: First, recall that in 12v12 randoms, a solo player only swings about 30% of the battles. The other 70% are either unwinnable or unloseable depending on the matchmaking (read: teammates). We know this because the very worst players still win about ~35% of their battles and the very best players only win ~65% of the battles solo. So when we're talking about WR being reflective of player skill, we focus on the ~30 out of 100 battles that can go either way. How many of those 30 battles can they flip into victories based on how well they shoot, angle, (re-)position, use consumables, communicate, etc.?1 This is why a lot of folks have trouble seeing how WR is a result of skill: the difference between an average2 player (50% WR) and a good player (53% WR) is 3 games out of every 100 that the decent player cannot convert. For most that is just too abstract to visualize, because there is no way to know where in any run of 100 games those 3 difference-making games will be found. That's the thing, no one knows. You just have to approach every match as if it's that make-or-break round. Hope that helps o7 ---- 1 Ship choice, modules, and captain-build also play a role here, which is why WR (or PR for that matter) are not direct measurements of skill, rather they are indicators. 2 I'm using the wows-numbers descriptors for the different WR brackets -- the system has its flaws but it is the main one in use. Thanks. Do you happen to know if MM takes ship modules, equipment, signal flags, or captain builds into account in any way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torino2dc Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 40 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said: Do you happen to know if MM takes ship modules, equipment, signal flags, or captain builds into account in any way? We do: MM doesn't take any of that into account. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kruzenstern Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, Navalpride33 said: using your last example... 12 players %40 and 12 players %60.. In the end, its random in a sense someone has to win and someone has to lose. Its 50/50 chance of losing and winning. Well, I sometimes justify playing the lottery like that, it is 50/50, either I win or I don't win. But I know that mathematically and realistically that is complete BS... And the chances for the 40% crew in the example of winning 5 out of 10 matches is about as high as my chance of winning the Eurojackpot next time I play. If you really don't see that, you are beyond help. I hear there is also a lot of irrefutable evidence that the world is actually a flat disc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 59 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: Active players, who play every day. Will end up in the %90 percentile of the server population. You have over 20k battles. Why aren’t you at 55% wr? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said: Well, I sometimes justify playing the lottery like that, it is 50/50, either I win or I don't win. But I know that mathematically and realistically that is complete BS... And the chances for the 40% crew in the example of winning 5 out of 10 matches is about as high as my chance of winning the Eurojackpot next time I play. If you really don't see that, you are beyond help. I hear there is also a lot of irrefutable evidence that the world is actually a flat disc. statistics POV.. The Lottery and WOWS are two Different types of Animal... I already, stated what drives the statistics in WOWS. Theory of probability, server population make up by WR, no stats to determine will. Its realistic because it fall into the realm of probability. Winning 5 games and its a draw is possible and more likely. Plus or minus two matches from 5 tops. ------------------------------ The lottery on the other hand... Nothing in WOWS can compare to the lottery of your home town. Each country, state runs the lottery differently. I can't comment on lottery odds/stats. BTW. The world being flat... That, can be dispelled by the discipline physics. Now, In a statistics conversation, no one is going to bring a physics question of if the world is flat... Though, I like to entertain the question... I'm an analyst, who uses basic statistics to come to a consensus conclusion. When I see a flat earther in my vicinity... I just pray and hope he get the mental help he needs... Mental illness is no joke with me.. Seriously, don't use purple Moderators only. @Admiral_Karasu Sorry about the purple. I guess I didnt see the fine print regarding excepted font color. Any other outlawed colors? Edited April 2 by Navalpride33 No using purple, mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SureBridge Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 4 hours ago, Navalpride33 said: There's no skills in WOWS.. WOWS doesnt have any stat to indicate skill. These are two different assertions. I think that there is skill in WoWS, and that it can be trained. For the latter you could also assert that there is no skill in school, since all we have are indicators (grades) that do not directly measure skill. I'm not sure that this is a useful argument, since you can spend endless time failing to prove a negative. At it's most simple form, you can measure the "indirect" measurements of skill (win rate, kills, kills/frag, average damage) for all players over and under an arbitrary number of games, and I would anticipate that at any threshold chosen you would find that these indirect indicators were higher on the "more games" population than the "less games" population. Statistically this would be problematic if your threshold was under 10 games (very small sample size, and small N for each member of that sample) but I anticipate that this would be consistent from ~200 games and up, and likely from 100 games and up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 minutes ago, Type_93 said: You have over 20k battles. Why aren’t you at 55% wr? I like to have fun... I dont play OP/over capable ships, I play every day, and I understand win streaks and losing streaks do happen. I dont play ships that give me control of the match (RTS CVS). I'm in the %90 percentile of all the WOWS server population.. I say Im in a good spot. WR doesn't determine/define my capabilities. I hate high tier matches. In summery, I can get to %5 but I rather have fun and stay at the %90 percentile of the population. So I guess, I'm not an elitist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navalpride33 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 5 minutes ago, SureBridge said: At it's most simple form, you can measure the "indirect" measurements of skill (win rate, kills, kills/frag, average damage This is misuse of trophy stats... By using stats in a bad way, instead of what they've been intended.. Its only your opinion and its cool to mix stats together and for a guess to conclude. In the end.. There's no skills in WOWS because WOWS is not a skill oriented platform. Therefor, WG will not put a stat to gauge or indicate a certain skill set. WOWS stats only states what you done NOT, what did right now NOR what your future production will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 3 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: WOWS stats only states what you done NOT, what did right now NOR what your future production will be. That's for rerolls. For everyone else it's their collated performance record since battle number 1. As such, though, it's meaningless as an indicator skill, but it does not mean that skills are not needed to either win or to rack up damage, for instance. In terms of skill, we should then be referring to the skills that game play and meta call for, not any other player related aspects of skill. In other words, game play may warrant skills that are not readily recognized as such. I acknowledge this fact, but I don't necessarily consider pursuing those skills worth my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral_Karasu Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 @Navalpride33 Just the purple hues are 'outlawed'. They are used on DevStrike! the same way as the red font color on the Official World of Warships Forum. Nothing purple in any posts or signatures, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Type_93 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 30 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said: I dont play OP/over capable ships Now you’re just full of it bro. I think you meant to say you “Only” play op/over capable ships. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.47a4e935a3408b0a59f0a5fcb7ebddf8.png)
Recommended Posts