What mod shows your teammates PR?

[Nautic_Hunt]

5 hours ago, Aethervox said:

This is not hilarious. It is a blatant WG CHEAT as, if the MM was truly random, the average WRs would be much closer together.

I'd totally agree with you if it was a common occurrence, but it isn't.

It's common to see a deviation of a couple of % between the teams.

Let's not forget the effect that a single 67% player has on a teams average w/r as well.

I don't use potato alert to judge my chances of winning, I use it to decide who to support and who to trust to have a clue.

 

[Utt_Bugglier]

4 hours ago, desmo_2 said:

Actually, I have absolutely no problem with an opposing viewpoint.  I will concede your point that there are probably a lot of players using it who I never hear from, and may enjoy such a program.

My response was more specifically geared to the OP and how he worded his initial post.

Ok, I get you there. Yeah, MMM won’t improve what you can expect from teammates. My raje is that it might help folks adjust what they can do themselves to improve team outcomes.

[Itwastuesday]

PR is almost meaningless. Playing garbage ships well = PR, good ships well = no PR. Farming useless selfish damage = PR, making desperate moves to turn the match = no PR. Victory is the only thing that matters. I only look at account winrates.

[Jakob Knight]

17 hours ago, Unlooky said:

Only true if you were looking at a small selection of games (say 20 or so.) Law of large numbers normalizes out these loss streaks into a value approximate to your overall record. If someone plays 4000 battles with a 40% winrate, that's fairly indicative of poor play. 

 

I think that's a player issue and not a MMM program. Those types of people are not the type that should be using MMM, yet do anyways. Potato Alert and MMM both show who is also using the program and the overwhelming majority I never even see in chat. Unfortunately, there are the very vocal players who will find ways to put the blame on everyone but themselves, and MMM is just another way for them to do so. 

 

The point is that the context of the win rate is not included in the stat, and the only person who knows those are the person themselves.  Others looking at it will get only the results, not the causes.  And no, a person who plays 4000 battles in Random as they would with a team they can depend on might very well have a low win rate because they consistently depend on other people to play as a team, something lacking in Random in many battles.  Again, context is king.

 

Yes, it is a player issue.  The people who want to use such a mod are the ones who are putting an inordinate amount of importance on that stat and letting it modify their play instead of concentrating on their own performance and fighting.  Having that information in front of you while you are playing is not helpful, and even having it at the match screen does nothing except precondition your mindset.  What can you do knowing it that you can't do not knowing it?  Can you change your team?  No.  So all in all, it's a pointless mod that people are better off not using, in my opinion.

 

 

[Jakob Knight]

15 hours ago, Utt_Bugglier said:

 

Then you haven’t thought it through sufficiently. You gave eleven teammates, and have choice among them in who you support.  It is my experience that my chances of winning go up markedly if I choose to support a strong DD player on my team rather than a weak one. I even get a broad idea of how my support experience will pan out: if the DD I support is high WR with high average damage,  I expect he’ll get kills and danage in front of me, and I need mainly to give him good cover, and be ready to help him roll up the flank as we move forward. If he is high WR/low average damage, then his stock in trade is spotting, and I expect to eat well behind him, as would my other teammates.

 

 

 

And here is the proof of the fallacy  in the mindset of using win rate.  No, you do NOT have the choice about who among your team you support.  You support -all- of your team if you want to win, you don't pick and choose, or you are handing some of your teammates to the enemy.  I mentioned people who sacrifice their teammates for stats, and this is an example of that.  If you see someone in trouble, you don't sail away to preserve your stats or go to someone you think is a better skilled player....you put your own skills to the task and work harder to keep that person in trouble from causing a loss on your team roster and a weak flank.  The only way you will achieve that win is if your entire team wins, not just the players with high win rates.   

 

The team is not there to serve you.  You are all there to support each other. 

 

[ency]

I think all tactics have plusses and minuses, different risk level, and therefore difficult to say which tactics are generally more efficent. Above is mentioned a tactics where you stay closer to more skillful players and leave the less skillful far away. Difficult to say how well it works, because those who were left alone die even quicker probably while a higher skillset group may score quicker at the same time, so the tactics produces both a disadvantages and losses but also benefits probably.

In Rankeds with small MMs players are quite skillful and Primitive ship types do independently without a scout pretty well. They don't die instantly in Easycaps if a DD joins the other DD in the Difficult cap, or if 1 DD goes spot the middle area instead of Babysitting in Easycap others. My experience is that in Rankeds a DD can always ignore Easycaps, i never visited for example those during ca 600 battles which i made during Sprint 1-2. And such tactics example can serve the victory goal well, you complete all leagues that way. But those Easycap splitted group obviously would like to play so that a scout would spot torps in front of them and provides other services. In away efficent tactics, in a way ignorance for the easygroup players. But if your goal is to win then you choose the most efficent methods, and of course ignore all brainwashed methods.

In Randoms things are little bit different than in Rankeds, already maps are different, there are usually no Easycap and Difficult cap, plus other things. In Randoms i believe that it is benefitial to stay with bigger groups. Usually 1 cap gets very few ships, like 2-3 ships and better to leave it and play on other caps with more teammates. I think those skillful players are anyway prodactive so it is pointless to oversupport them.

I obviously don't support anything based on Stats, and i don't have any mods to even see any numbers. But as i gave an example above that tactics may work, and maybe TeamsWR based decicions work well too.

[Itwastuesday]

MMM gives you useful information, make no mistake about it. Pretty much before the match starts you can determine how you must play. You can head for where you're needed quickly, because you know the 40% battleship squadron always heads for certain squares, just a few minutes late to the match, and if you're near that location, the match is over. 

[Admiral_Karasu]

2 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

MMM gives you useful information, make no mistake about it. Pretty much before the match starts you can determine how you must play. You can head for where you're needed quickly, because you know the 40% battleship squadron always heads for certain squares, just a few minutes late to the match, and if you're near that location, the match is over. 

Which squares are those? I hope not the ones conveniently placed for the Sudden Crossfire Syndrome to strike.

[Itwastuesday]

1 minute ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Which squares are those? I hope not the ones conveniently placed for the Sudden Crossfire Syndrome to strike.

More like the eventual crossfire that happens when the enemy occupies 75% of the map and the corner island is revealed to strangely not be the keys to victory. 

[Admiral_Karasu]

Just now, Itwastuesday said:

More like the eventual crossfire that happens when the enemy occupies 75% of the map and the corner island is revealed to strangely not be the keys to victory. 

Imagine their surprise....

[ency]

46 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

MMM gives you useful information, make no mistake about it. Pretty much before the match starts you can determine how you must play. 

Yes, and in Rankeds it is quick read MM because only 5-6 teammates, look their concealments and gun ranges and see if someone has maybe chosen smoke intead of a radar, and look quickly how many radars enemies have, which type of DDs, see which ships are hydroless that eat torps more easily. And Wows community does almost always team splits and swims to known locations, is cap obsessive, and so on.

On some maps you can always swim to spot to certain locations, on some maps, on many times you can just do what suprises them, for example you swim to the middle of a map and spotsuprise them so they waste radars and get confused and turn around and some even instantly die from your torps. Sometimes you just go duel a DD if MM supports it, sometimes you can rush to a Buff if again the MM looks to suggest it. On some maps on radar MMs you go from longer route wasting little bit time, and without radars MM you know other efficent spots. Etc. The feeling of what to do must be clear already in the beginning. If you find yourself like you don't really know what to do, then work on that map few hundred times if needed until you get a confidence on that map. Very difficult can be CV+radar MMs but even there you eventually get the right methods.

If you don't have such confident feeling in Rankeds after MM reading, then you are not capable to complete the leagues.

Probably rating reading can suggest something useful too. But i am not sure. I only notice if someone is from a famoues clan, like these days the Twa-clan is advertised before battles and if i saw 2 times from 600 those Twa-clan players then i could assume which team probably wins, but i didn't see any point to exoeriment any unpractised new tactics those 2 times, i still used my well known methods. In 1 such battle the top clan player really outplayed my team, in another he died instanty by eating a torp, so, i guess such rating based prediction doesn't work alwayes, but i personally don't see it wise if i would change my methods based on such rating-oriented things. My methods in my opinion are very good anyway, why i should change them because the enemy team have special players.

[Wowzery]

I think more people should set their stats to private.  Piss off these people who use things like MMM.

[Itwastuesday]

9 minutes ago, Wowzery said:

I think more people should set their stats to private.  Piss off these people who use things like MMM.

Doesn't really matter. The expectation is that stat hiders are 40% or below and can't be relied on.

[Wowzery]

4 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

Doesn't really matter. The expectation is that stat hiders are 40% or below and can't be relied on.

Which is why I love hiding mine.  Let the fool think I'm 40% or below as I blow them out of the water.

[Admiral_Karasu]

6 minutes ago, Wowzery said:

Which is why I love hiding mine.  Let the fool think I'm 40% or below as I blow them out of the water.

Would that work the other way too?

Asking for that friend of mine.

[ency]

I can share 1 example from yesterday in Rankeds. It was a CV MM and i followed an alley Kleber, so we had 2 DDs in a pair and i wrote immediately to the battle chat in simple English that please Kleber open the AA when enemy CV arrives above us. But after 15 seconds the Kleber hold still AA guns off while i as a Shima kept them shooting while the CV planes were attacking us. That scenario repeated and it is famoues behaviour in Wows community, it comes from a fear towards CVs. Specially french DDs have good AA and obviously if a CV anyway is above you spotting you then your off AA doesn't benefit anything. The goal is that the CV gets less planes to return back and make less damage if only few planes left to shoot you.

 

I understand that some rare DDs have so weak AA that you can keep AA off, for example T8 DD Asashio AA is totally useless. But Kleber for sure should keep AA open when Cv planes arrive, and is ironic if Shima with very weak AA provides AA to Kleber.

 

The player replied in chat "Let me check your stats", and then wrote "they are not bad". Well, i have had many accounts and many ratings and how does it matter which TeamsWR i have in such AA topic?

 

That illustrates how strong is the PR/WR belief, and how misleading it is.

[Frostbow]

19 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

Doesn't really matter. The expectation is that stat hiders are 40% or below and can't be relied on.

I've always been amused at that expectation. 

Whether stats are hidden or not does not automatically mean good or bad previous performance.

I've seen a player brag about his public/unhidden stats that show 57% win rate. But when scrutinized, that win rate has been exclusively farmed using a Giulio Cesare in a tier that sees bots because most of his playtime is during off hours. 

On the flip side I've also seen players with hidden stats play a variety of ship types in an amazing and inspiring way in all tiers.

I think the proper perspective should be to anticipate all players as capable, especially those on the red team, regardless of the visibility of their stats. 

[Itwastuesday]

2 hours ago, Frostbow said:

I think the proper perspective should be to anticipate all players as capable, especially those on the red team, regardless of the visibility of their stats. 

The red team is the red team and there's no special need to adapt to their quality. The green team on the other hand, can't be trusted. It's wonderful when some can, but as a rule, no.

[Sambo_Cigars]

9 hours ago, Jakob Knight said:

The team is not there to serve you. 

 

But this is precisely what many players seem to think, and they in particular think that the destroyer is there to serve them, to take all the risk and that the destroyer is entirely expendable. In almost every ranked battle you'll find at least one battleship player lurking/snipping from an island corner (almost) for the duration of the battle. 

The really good (battleship) players do not bother with doing 'due diligence' on their team mates. They unselfishly do the heavy lifting required.

Edited 12 hours ago by Sambo_Cigars

[Ensign Cthulhu]

It's worth noting here that the OP's winrate is well into the mid fifties, high enough that he should be having a definitive influence on battles in his own right. Perhaps not automatic solo carry levels, but a decent nudge of the needle where things hang in the balance. 

Yet his tagline rages about "rigged games" as if his winrate were red, and he wants to know who sucks before it starts.

Let the end scores determine that.

[Utt_Bugglier]

7 hours ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

And here is the proof of the fallacy  in the mindset of using win rate.  No, you do NOT have the choice about who among your team you support.  You support -all- of your team if you want to win, you don't pick and choose, or you are handing some of your teammates to the enemy.  I mentioned people who sacrifice their teammates for stats, and this is an example of that.  If you see someone in trouble, you don't sail away to preserve your stats or go to someone you think is a better skilled player....you put your own skills to the task and work harder to keep that person in trouble from causing a loss on your team roster and a weak flank.  The only way you will achieve that win is if your entire team wins, not just the players with high win rates.   

 

The team is not there to serve you.  You are all there to support each other. 

 

Not only a complete and thorough misunderstanding and mischaracterization of what I said, but this part right here:

7 hours ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

No, you do NOT have the choice about who among your team you support. 

 

is the most pompous, arrogant, sneering load of wrong ever defecated out on the WoWs forums - both this one and the old.

YOU make a decision every battle about where to go, and thus a decision who you are with and supporting, and you can’t get away with saying I or anyone else has no choice.

I HAVE the choice. YOU HAVE the choice. You just make your choices in ignorance.

And honestly, your statements evince such a limited, closed-minded, shallow, and unthinking mindset, that I won’t attempt to convince you of your errors.

The only fallacy you prove is YOUR mindset of having a prefabricated template of what a player using an MMM tool MUST be thinking, and you fabricate , distort and underthink whatever is necessary to try to make your tiny-minded template fit the other person.

 

 

[HogHammer]

Please, guys and gals, keep the personal jabs out of the discussion.

[pew_pew_magoo]

Best stat to gauge a players skill is solo WR at tier 10 randoms.  
 

Tier 10 has the most gimmicks and firepower. You are punished for making a mistake more heavily. Having a good WR at 10 means you understand game mechanics and can use them to your advantage.  Normally a good PR goes hand in hand with a good WR.  

[Lady Anesjka]

12 hours ago, Wowzery said:

I think more people should set their stats to private.  Piss off these people who use things like MMM.

I blacklist those players too

[Frostbow]

2 minutes ago, Lady Anesjka said:

I blacklist those players too

Will blacklisting players make you a better player?