Jump to content

Recommended Posts

WN8 should have a special check:

 

If playername in (jsnazz, EJVH3) then WN7 = -9999

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im in the lab atm, will get back to you on that tommorrow Orrie. 

 

Guys don`t panic. Let Orrie and I iron out the problems with the formula. THEN you can complain to me about your low WN8 scores. :D :D :D

 

Garbad, don`t quite get what you mean, if you mean use only tier 10 tank stats, not possible ATM due to API problems.

 

Yeah, I was a sad panda when I noticed I had like.. a 150+ point penalty. I mean dropping 15-20 here and there because of defense points or something is one thing, but like woah..so looking forward to how things go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it sounds like everyone is being penalized by a alot.  I'm curious where I would fall with an average tier of 8.02

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it sounds like everyone is being penalized by a alot.  I'm curious where I would fall with an average tier of 8.02

 

You, Sir, are a winner!

 

1890 ---> 1947 (if the wotstats script is still up to date)

 

I´d go down to 1580...but it´s worth it, playing Pz 35t and occasionally FCM36 PaK 40 is huge fun...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, average tier of like 7.3 gets me penalized a lot ;;

Link to post
Share on other sites

You, Sir, are a winner!

 

1890 ---> 1947 (if the wotstats script is still up to date)

 

 

Hurray first person that hasn't lost 500 WN!

 

 

Winning!

 

 

 

 

 

As praetor picks up his calculator..let's see carry the 1minus 3 tanks yep= sorry new score is 850 ya baddie

Link to post
Share on other sites

WN7                    2344.57   
WN8pre              2387.48
WN8pre+norm    2372.96  

 

?????????????????

 

It seems my blatant statpadding isn't exposed by this new improved formula?

Link to post
Share on other sites

WN7                    2344.57   

WN8pre              2387.48

WN8pre+norm    2372.96  

 

?????????????????

 

It seems my blatant statpadding isn't exposed by this new improved formula?

 

Maybe it isn't blatant enough?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, average tier of like 7.3 gets me penalized a lot ;;

 

the current formula only penalises people with an *average* tier below 5 - thus making it possible to profitably seal-club to higher WN7 values so long as your average tier stays above the current cut-off. The point of WN8 is to do away with this form of stat-padding by directly penalising people with x number of games in y number of tanks in tiers 1-3 - for values of x and y that are yet to be finalised.

 

The argument against the WN8 proposal (apart from the argument over appropriate values of x and y) is the slippery slope argument: "why draw the line at Tier 3 when the T49 or the VK36 or the KV-1S or...?" which leads either to a WNX proposal (not possible, given the API) or a WN8-only-penalising-up-to-the-point-where-my-stats-don't get-hurt. And I think that everyone who has an interest in an accurate metric has to accept that an accurate metric is more important that their own position on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the current formula only penalises people with an *average* tier below 5 - thus making it possible to profitably seal-club to higher WN7 values so long as your average tier stays above the current cut-off. The point of WN8 is to do away with this form of stat-padding by directly penalising people with x number of games in y number of tanks in tiers 1-3 - for values of x and y that are yet to be finalised.

 

The argument against the WN8 proposal (apart from the argument over appropriate values of x and y) is the slippery slope argument: "why draw the line at Tier 3 when the T49 or the VK36 or the KV-1S or...?" which leads either to a WNX proposal (not possible, given the API) or a WN8-only-penalising-up-to-the-point-where-my-stats-don't get-hurt. And I think that everyone who has an interest in an accurate metric has to accept that an accurate metric is more important that their own position on it.

 

Not a slippery slope argument.  It heavily dings players like myself, ITDude, and others who like to play games across ALL tiers, and not just Tier 8+.  That is what we find unacceptable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can I possibly go backwards in my stats..I barely played any games below t5 that werent already hurting my stats lol

 

Wn8 pre 1947.58

Wn8pre+norm 1850.78 

 

78% of my matches are T8+ maybe the normalizer does need some tweaking.

 

wn8_zps0f445277.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

WN8 confirmed for successful

Yj44rfR.png

Exposing seal clubbers and showing how truly bad they are

 

:D :D :D

 

Chill guys, don´t get your socks in a knot. Gimme some time to check the formula and give Orrie some examples to work with. Most people will get 0 normalizer term, and some who play lots of tier 1-3 will get 0-250 normalizer terms. Dont freak out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:D :D :D

 

Chill guys, don´t get your socks in a knot. Gimme some time to check the formula and give Orrie some examples to work with. Most people will get 0 normalizer term, and some who play lots of tier 1-3 will get 0-250 normalizer terms. Dont freak out.

 

I provided an example in a post here:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornsby I meant some manual WN8 calculations to compare to the script.

 

Orrie, check this out:

 

-Math.abs(Math.max(0.22*(battlesNormTop-battlesNorm*83/(1+Math.pow(((0.15-0.000072)*battles),10))),0)),

 

There are some errors in here, the parenthesis after 0.000072 should not be there, it should be:

 

-Math.abs(Math.max(0.22*(battlesNormTop-battlesNorm*83/(1+Math.pow((0.15-0.000072*battles),10))),0)),

 

Secondly, the 0.22 should be replaced with 2200/battles, so:

 

-Math.abs(Math.max(2200/battles*(battlesNormTop-battlesNorm*83/(1+Math.pow((0.15-0.000072*battles),10))),0)),

 

Lastly, battlesNormTop I guess is the number of battles in the top 3 tier 1-3s, which is correct, but what is battlesNorm? That should be sum3tiers which is a sum of the tiers of the top3 played tanks (so sum3tiers = 3 if loltractor T1 and MS1 are the top3 played tiers 1-3; or sum3tiers= 8 if Marder, T-127 and T26 are the most played tier 1-3s).

 

 

Let me get Hibachi`s script working, and I will use that to give you some examples that I can manually check.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hibachi is wotstatgrabber 64 bit? I get an error when trying to execute it on a 32bit win XP PC in the lab... I have w7 at home, so ill try it there later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

battlesNormTop = Top 3 in Tier 1 - 3

battlesNorm = All battles from Tier 1 - 3

 

I knew that parenthesis was wrong.. changing asap.

 

EDIT:

Fixed in 0.8.6.19:

http://userscripts.org/scripts/source/170277.user.js

 

 

Also, with the dev function, the part where the formula reads the formula stored on your computer, it fucks up and stops working. So I don't know of soon that function is available.

Well, this is how it looks right now.... and everything visible works, except the output for "Custom". ( Those 0.00 numbers ).

3HuSK.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, battlesnorm needs to be replaced with sum3tiers:

 

sum3tiers is a sum of the tiers of the top3 played tanks (so sum3tiers = 3 if loltractor, T1, and MS1 are the top3 played tiers 1-3; or sum3tiers= 8 if Marder, T-127, and T26 are the most played tier 1-3s).

 

 

-Math.abs(Math.max(2200/battles*(battlesNormTop-sum3tiers*83/(1+Math.pow((0.15-0.000072*battles),10))),0)),

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to be on the money now... awesome job Orrie!

 

Would appreciate feedback guys. Anyone who uses Orrie´s script and thinks the normalizer is "unfair" to them, either with too high or too low scores, pls let me know, post back the results, and I will add you to the test sample, since the normalizer might need recalibration.

 

Also, we should think about the possibility of using top 5 tier 1-3 tanks instead of top 3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, average tier of like 7.3 gets me penalized a lot ;;

 

Don't think the penalization depends on average tier, as my normalizer term is 0 despite an average tier just shy of 7

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine

gn9larl.png

 

-275 still pretty unfair but better than before

 

Jsnazz - MUCH better!

JP6kJiT.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

ITDUDE I will add you and Pucara to the testing sample. Let me get back to you on that one.

 

Orrie, check this guy out:

 

http://worldoftanks.com/community/accounts/1000279500-WarStore/

 

He has only 150 games or so on his top 3 tier 1-3 tanks, but he gets a penalizer for some reason... something is still wrong with the formula. What´s his sum3tiers and battlesnormTop?

 

Can I get the developers version so I can see these values for different players? That would really help me a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12497046/wot/script/170277-dev.user.js

 

Just remember that you need to turn off the other one.

I'll keep it updated when I do small changes.

(Maybe I should make a git repository?)

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...