Jump to content
EchelonIII

Marks of Excellence

Recommended Posts

In their own perverse way, I think Wargaming has made the third mark more notable by making it nearly impossible to acquire. 

 

Yea, a "metric" which is not determined by skill but heavily relies on the circumstances you get with each game.

I call that fucked up.

How the hell is the average _good_ player (blue / light purple) supposed to get the third mark?

You have to perform astronomically well.

Even though this is a goal (which motivates), its shifting basis (last 100 games, be they good or bad ones) makes it unequally harder (which demotivates).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, a "metric" which is not determined by skill but heavily relies on the circumstances you get with each game.

I call that fucked up.

How the hell is the average _good_ player (blue / light purple) supposed to get the third mark?

You have to perform astronomically well.

Even though this is a goal (which motivates), its shifting basis (last 100 games, be they good or bad ones) makes it unequally harder (which demotivates).

What? Are you on the wrong forums?

Skill is dealing with the circumstances that you get in game. Are you trying to argue that consistently dealing damage doesn't require skill?

Why the hell should a _good_ player get the third mark? That is for elite players, good players should be able to get to the second mark with perhaps some effort.

WTF are you talking about shifting basis/demotivating? The award is for consistent play, where tank mastery awards are for singular great games. In fact I think this is the first reward for performance over time (other than the volume cap/decap/damage medals), so wtf are you bent out of shape for? If you can't play reliably at a level to get a 1st or 2nd level marker over 100 games then you need to get better, not complain that it demotivates you when you have a bad game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa whoa, easy lad. I meant no offense on my part, and I admit that I got a bit carried away with the choice of my words.

I apologize if I offended any of the good players with my ill-phrased post.

However, I'd like the discussion to be non-aggressive and constructive and would like to see this spirit on your side as well.

 

What I meant to say is not that damage does not require any form of skill - I dont know why you are suggesting that I said this. Quite the contrary is true.

What I meant to say is that achieving the third MoE appears unreasonably hard to me, where (at least according to this thread) only pleyers who perform _very high_ can achieve this at the moment.

About motivation:

Goals as motivation should be reachable / achievable. If you set yourself (or, in this case, get set) goals you cannot ever reach, these goals will at some point become mute.

Seeing that some tanks require an astronomical average damage in order to get the third mark makes the goal "third MoE" unreachable for someone not as good as those players mentioned before who achieved the third mark already.

 

What irks me is the shifting basis, as in that the margins for the marks are not absolute, but relative to the complete playersbase's average damage per tank (if I got this right). In addition to that, you have changing circumstances where it is simply impossible to perform well (weekends, where you repeatedly end up as only good player amongst reds / oranges against a team full of green/teal/blue players).

I imagine that this is even true for very skilled players - ofc I could be wrong here.

Even single games can crush your average already.

 

So, what I'm saying is that it could be a bit to hard to achieve the third mark. And this is only my uninformed opinion, more a gut feeling, and of course subjective.

 

You as a maths contributor should be able to form a more informed opinion, as you possibly understand the given formula better than me.

Could you share your elaborate thoughts on this? I'd really like to understand the points adding to the defense of this (for me: overly complex) calculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant to say is that achieving the third MoE appears unreasonably hard to me, where (at least according to this thread) only pleyers who perform _very high_ can achieve this at the moment.

I think everyone would agree the metric for the third star is too high, given that we only know about 2 players that have achieved it. I think that it should be something that is a struggle to obtain for a light purple player; actually rare rather than pretend rare.

About motivation:

Goals as motivation should be reachable / achievable. If you set yourself (or, in this case, get set) goals you cannot ever reach, these goals will at some point become mute.

Seeing that some tanks require an astronomical average damage in order to get the third mark makes the goal "third MoE" unreachable for someone not as good as those players mentioned before who achieved the third mark already.

Setting goals as motivation is fine, but that doesn't mean WG should drop the requirements so that everyone and their brother can get the award.

What irks me is the shifting basis, as in that the margins for the marks are not absolute, but relative to the complete playersbase's average damage per tank (if I got this right). In addition to that, you have changing circumstances where it is simply impossible to perform well (weekends, where you repeatedly end up as only good player amongst reds / oranges against a team full of green/teal/blue players).

I imagine that this is even true for very skilled players - ofc I could be wrong here.

Even single games can crush your average already.

Everyone is playing the same game, so they all have the same metric. This award is about comparing people playing the game and playing it consistently well. All of the other awards are a mixture of luck and skill; you need luck to have a team that sucks but lives long enough to let you do your work, and not so good to take damage or kills from you. As indicated in a lot of threads, getting better (going from green/blue into purple) is about being more consistent, and this is an award for doing that. It shouldn't be watered down so that "good" players can get the third mark, or players that perform wildly inconsistent can get it based on having some really good games and ignoring really bad games. 

So, what I'm saying is that it could be a bit to hard to achieve the third mark. And this is only my uninformed opinion, more a gut feeling, and of course subjective.

It's not a bit hard, currently it is just about impossible, as evidenced by the very very small number of players that have reached it on this server. So expanding that medal a little bit makes sense, since it is supposed to be possible to get it by performing at the 95% level. It's possible that blue/light purple is in that 5% population bracket, but based on the amount of purple that I see (maybe because it's this forum) I don't want to see it watered down too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got my response.  He says he doesn't know.  Phrasing of his response leads me to believe he is not even aware of the percentiles being set.  He seemed to think the formula answered all.  

 

I'm out of contacts at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, basically this thread is telling me to pray to good MM to get the MOE on a scout? I can do 2.2.k damage in my type 64, only 78 battles total, and my MOE percentile moves .5%. Turn around and do 4k+ between spotting and damage on Malinovka and its move 1.5%. Please RNG/MM give me the good maps :)

 

 

Edit:

I did some digging and the numbers are not encouraging. I am simply basing my data off of people who have uploaded their dossier to Vbaddict.

 

For my type 64:

I have 78 battles at the time of this post.

I have the second best damage ratio on VB behind a person with 27 battles.

I have the third best WN8 value on VB behind two people with 27 battles. 

I drop down to seventh with dpg. 

 

All type 64 drivers:

http://www.vbaddict.net/commanders.php?countryid=3&tankid=253&order=desc&sort=efficiency_wn8&

 

My type 64 page:

http://www.vbaddict.net/wn8/tomego-na-db3561c3737391175f304ddaff194ebe/china-3/type-64-253

 

With 25 drivers on the page and 63 pages of drivers, that brings up 1,575 total drivers on VB. I would venture to guess that on average, people on VB tend to average slightly higher than the average player in pubs. If I can't get my third MOE, I am confused what it is supposed to show? Even using my DPG I am in the 99.7th percentile. I'll provide an update when I hit 100 battles. I don't think I am going to be able to make it. VB says that I need to average 1,600+ DPG to get my third MOE. The hell? Noone averages that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm at a point, where I'd suggest to not even bother about the third mark on certain tanks. Whether the ammo rack is too small to have any chance to achieve the needed DPG-average (unless you only boat and only shoot penetrating HE) or tanks that are relying on their team (by either allowing them to deal damage or tanks that are virtually helpless without minimal support) or tanks that throw a set of dice to deal their damage. It doesn't really matter, the set goals are incomprehensibly set and utopic to reach and hence a waste of time and effort, as luck has a far too high influence on top of absurd skill-requirements. Kudos to those who did it, though, you have my utmost respect, luck-factor or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This from WoT...

 

On the battlefields of World War II, tanks would tally destroyed vehicles with distinctive marks along their gun barrels. This was the simplest, most powerful way to identify the most effective crews. Nevertheless, it wasn't a widely-used practice – the marks couldn’t be assigned reliably, as in a big battle, it wasn't easy to tell whose shell destroyed an enemy.

The same happens in World of Tanks – when the heat is on, how easy is it to see who really “destroyed” an enemy vehicle? One might easily win an even one-on-one battle where both combatants start with the same HP, but many times a tank can finish off an already heavily-damaged tank or one-shot the weaker vehicles. Obviously, these destructions shouldn't all be considered “equal.”

Marks of Excellence

On the other hand, this is World of Tanks, a game that produces tons of real-time data. As you know from seeing after-battle reports, it's possible to record the damage inflicted by every player in every battle. How much damage is dealt largely depends on player skill -- the influence of teammates becomes secondary, unlike the amount of battles won. But a list of numbers can only be so impressive, which is why we're taking a note from those tank aces of the past and introducing marks of excellence.

These marks reward such players who have high average damage in a given vehicle. They call attention to players, showing everyone they can be the most effective tank commanders in the battle. Marks of excellence are awarded based on the difference between the player’s average damage in the vehicle and the average damage done by all players in the vehicle. In this way, acquiring the marks is not dissimilar from mastery badges. By using average damage as the parameter, damage dealt upon spotting is also accounted for, meaning that light tanks are also eligible for getting marks, even if they're not high damage-dealing vehicles.

Starting with update 9.1, these marks will be computed for every tank, putting all players on an even field at its inception. Damage stats are collected every day, with several previous days accounted for, too.

Historically, it was tank aces who got the marks on their guns, so requirements for acquiring them in World of Tanks are similarly high: getting basic marks requires a player break into the top 35% of players for a specific tank; second tier marks demand a top 15% finish, and ultimate marks are rewarded only to the top 5% of players.

Developing the Marks

Along with the physical marks, all players are assigned a rating that indicates that player’s effectiveness in that specific vehicle. The rating is calculated over a series of battles, not just one highly-successful performance. Marks are issued in a staged manner from low to high. On average, you might need to participate in 50 to 100 battles in order to earn the highest rating. To that end, only random battles are considered.

Once a mark is obtained, it becomes permanent on your stats and is not subject to removal or demotion. But, at your discretion, you may choose whether to display these marks on your tanks, switching them on or off to be displayed for yourself or other players.

National Marks

Vehicles will receive skill marks as depicted below. A number of historians and consultants were involved in the selection and placement of every mark.

 

Meaning...forgive us, we'll make the rules up while we play.

 

More mumbo-jumbo...

Starting with 9.1 update of World of Tanks there will be a new kind of achievement - a distinctive mark on the barrel of the tank called the Marks of Excelelnce. Historically, these markers reflected the number of destroyed enemy vehicles which used to be the only possible display of performance indicator for the crew fighting of that machine.

 

Most the players are measured on their personal effectiveness in combat, average experience, and average damage on the specific tank. Experience per Random Battle is already taken into account for calculating the mark’s class and high average damage will be encouraged with the marks on the barrel of the weapon. This means the higher damage the player does compared with the results of other owners of the same tank, the higher the degree of achievement and more marks on barrel of said tank.

 

Records are maintained separately for each tank since the release of version 9.1. Battles conducted before the update will not be counted. This was implemented to create a level playing field for all players. Statistical damage will likely change every day. Also please take into account any changes to the game, such as patch updates.

 

The calculations for the last several battles results on the tank are taken only for Random Battles. Historically markers were attributed tank aces. As such they are not easy to achieve. The calculations is as follows:

-          One Mark equals better damage than the Top 35% of players in that tank.

-          Two Marks equals better than the Top 15% of players.

-          Three Marks equals better damage than the Top 5% of players in that tank.

 

The indicator is displayed for each tank in the "Service Record"> "Vehicles"> "Awards" explicitly: "Your score damage better than (X)% of players on the same tank."

 On average, for assigning a higher level of achievement may take from 50 to 100 or more battles. This can only be awarded to tanks Tier V and higher.

Edited by Pitch_Black

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right from the Supertest-Petchnotes recently published on FTR:

 

"- Each of values for obtaining Marks of Excellence reduced by 7 points (58% instead of 65% for obtaining one Mark of Excellence, etc.)."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that makes the first mark almost meaningless. I mean seriously, on every tank that I have the first mark on or are on the way to getting it, it basically already only reflects "Did slightly more damage on average, than he has health".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that makes the first mark almost meaningless. I mean seriously, on every tank that I have the first mark on or are on the way to getting it, it basically already only reflects "Did slightly more damage on average, than he has health".

I've long since given up on hoping for lone Marks of Excellence to be actual indicators of skill. (Those with two or three marks are probably pretty decent in their tanks, though.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that makes the first mark almost meaningless. I mean seriously, on every tank that I have the first mark on or are on the way to getting it, it basically already only reflects "Did slightly more damage on average, than he has health".

 

Well, bots and players who play like bots won't get them... as long as they keep the minimum above 50% you need to be at least average for the first mark. Good players get two, unicums three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the first mark was at about the right spot, maybe drop it to 60% at most. The reduction to 78% and 88% for the second and third mark is a good thing.

 

Meh, if it actually worked. 78% of what? 88% of what? It's not like the top 5% of players are actually all running around with 3 MoE. In fact I've only heard of a couple incredibly good players having it on even a single tank. Realistically, a large chunk of the WoTLabs populations should have any tank they've played a lot recently with 2-3 MoE.

 

Seems to me the fundamental implementation is deeply flawed. Messing with the percentiles doesn't change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, if it actually worked. 78% of what? 88% of what? It's not like the top 5% of players are actually all running around with 3 MoE. In fact I've only heard of a couple incredibly good players having it on even a single tank. Realistically, a large chunk of the WoTLabs populations should have any tank they've played a lot recently with 2-3 MoE.

 

Seems to me the fundamental implementation is deeply flawed. Messing with the percentiles doesn't change that.

 

I totally agree. The percentage change is just a way to make the current formula align closer to the top 5%, 15%, and 35% of the player base without WG actually saying that they fucked up the formula. If they changed the formula then it would be admitting they did something wrong. By changing just the percentages they in essence are saying that they formula is valid, but they just wanted to allow more players to get the MOE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right from the Supertest-Petchnotes recently published on FTR:

 

"- Each of values for obtaining Marks of Excellence reduced by 7 points (58% instead of 65% for obtaining one Mark of Excellence, etc.)."

 

 

Well if you had your 2nd Mark by now on any Tank, it would be quite easy to get to the 3rd Mark after the Patch, i guess.

 

I got 86% on my Type 64 and would only need 88% to make it to the 3rd Mark, or did i understand something wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you had your 2nd Mark by now on any Tank, it would be quite easy to get to the 3rd Mark after the Patch, i guess.

 

I got 86% on my Type 64 and would only need 88% to make it to the 3rd Mark, or did i understand something wrong?

 

Well, whether it's easier or not is sort of beside the point.

 

I think it's clear by now that the benchmarks are an extrapolation, prossibly from server (total damage/number of battles) rather than (total average damage/number of players). When you're going for those high tier marks, you're probably not being ranked against joe yellow that does his doubles and goes to a new tank, you're being ranked against figures extrapolated from average values inflated by other players that are pushing for those marks and chain grinding a single tank- though that might change with time.

 

Currently, by the numbers there are probably at the very most only 30-40 people capable of getting the third mark on a tier 10 tank. Lowering that value to 88% probably increases that number to 100-150 or so, but still requires damage farming skills far beyond anyone that is just unicum. I mean reference for a moment the fact that both Yato and Dodoma have dropped back to 85% since getting their marks.

 

The entire system of extrapolation and ranking is basically stupid and the tooltip itself is lying to the player. What there should have been is an actual ladder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, whether it's easier or not is sort of beside the point.

 

I think it's clear by now that the benchmarks are an extrapolation, prossibly from server (total damage/number of battles) rather than (total average damage/number of players). When you're going for those high tier marks, you're probably not being ranked against joe yellow that does his doubles and goes to a new tank, you're being ranked against figures extrapolated from average values inflated by other players that are pushing for those marks and chain grinding a single tank- though that might change with time.

 

Currently, by the numbers there are probably at the very most only 30-40 people capable of getting the third mark on a tier 10 tank. Lowering that value to 88% probably increases that number to 100-150 or so, but still requires damage farming skills far beyond anyone that is just unicum. I mean reference for a moment the fact that both Yato and Dodoma have dropped back to 85% since getting their marks.

 

The entire system of extrapolation and ranking is basically stupid and the tooltip itself is lying to the player. What there should have been is an actual ladder.

TL:DR

Marks in current form are totally idiotic and the formula is full of shit

 

ps: and this is as usual, good idea -> terrible implementation....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, whether it's easier or not is sort of beside the point.

 

I think it's clear by now that the benchmarks are an extrapolation, prossibly from server (total damage/number of battles) rather than (total average damage/number of players). When you're going for those high tier marks, you're probably not being ranked against joe yellow that does his doubles and goes to a new tank, you're being ranked against figures extrapolated from average values inflated by other players that are pushing for those marks and chain grinding a single tank- though that might change with time.

 

Currently, by the numbers there are probably at the very most only 30-40 people capable of getting the third mark on a tier 10 tank. Lowering that value to 88% probably increases that number to 100-150 or so, but still requires damage farming skills far beyond anyone that is just unicum. I mean reference for a moment the fact that both Yato and Dodoma have dropped back to 85% since getting their marks.

 

The entire system of extrapolation and ranking is basically stupid and the tooltip itself is lying to the player. What there should have been is an actual ladder.

 

 

Only 100-150?

 

I am by no means any kind of an _excellent_ player. I would consider myself as above average. 

 

And still i hope i will be capable of grinding the last 2 % to the new 3rd Mark at 88% in my Type 64.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. The percentage change is just a way to make the current formula align closer to the top 5%, 15%, and 35% of the player base without WG actually saying that they fucked up the formula. If they changed the formula then it would be admitting they did something wrong. By changing just the percentages they in essence are saying that they formula is valid, but they just wanted to allow more players to get the MOE. 

 

This is how I feel about it. I feel that dropping the %s makes them less prestigious simply because the numbers are lower. I wish they could actually create a formula that actually supported the original cutoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has already been said a few times, the %ge shift seems like covering for some WG stuff up.

 

That being said, i would have been fine with the existing implementation if they'd simply publish the list of players with each mark somewhere. I suspect people would be fine if they saw the 5% of players with better stats than them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...