Jump to content
RichardNixon

WN9 candidate prototype

Recommended Posts

You may have already answered my question, but wanted to be sure.   Have you ever considered setting the sampling default to a set number?

 

Meaning reflecting the WINX rating of a player based upon their last XX battles (Thinking last 10K battles).     Attempting to see the skill of a player as it sits in the battlefield is more accurately represented that way, in lieu of a 20,000 battle player running a avg WIN8 of 1700 with an overall of 1400 due to the first 10K games of the learning curve.   Would also cut back on some of the re-roll nonsense.   And yeah, LT15 for T55a has consumed my last 3 weeks, and my numbers are taking a beating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am reading into this correctly the win9 introduction is to counter 're-rolls, give a lower top figure for the supers but with same colour match, to try and get a better figure of how a player is but cutting the learning curve battles' in snipped summary.

I presume it will not counter the low tier stat ladders in T67s for example who show purples but in upper tiers they don't/can't play T9/T10. There are many of these in our pixel world. For those rug rats like me who like high tier and cock up, we get punished by win8 due to the higher expected values. Not bothered too much as it is what it is, just feels ironic for getting pretty colours and get judged by them.

As a slight deviation, when watching streams I notice many of our top genuine gifted playerrs don't use xvm (nor do I), but instead they always check the wr to pr in a player's garage. Does this figure have a better truth of a player's skill?

Regards

Bood

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Boodaxe said:

As a slight deviation, when watching streams I notice many of our top genuine gifted playerrs don't use xvm (nor do I), but instead they always check the wr to pr in a player's garage. Does this figure have a better truth of a player's skill?

We check the garage just to validate suspicions of bad. An IMO, 95% of the time you're going to be right. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Boodaxe said:

I presume it will not counter the low tier stat ladders in T67s for example who show purples but in upper tiers they don't/can't play T9/T10. There are many of these in our pixel world. For those rug rats like me who like high tier and cock up, we get punished by win8 due to the higher expected values. Not bothered too much as it is what it is, just feels ironic for getting pretty colours and get judged by them.

Actually the main improvement in WN9 is the removal of tank-selection padding. The T67 is a mediocre WN8 padder though: It's somewhat easier to pad WN8 in the E50 or M46, but it's a lot easier to win games in the T67.

11 hours ago, Boodaxe said:

As a slight deviation, when watching streams I notice many of our top genuine gifted playerrs don't use xvm (nor do I), but instead they always check the wr to pr in a player's garage. Does this figure have a better truth of a player's skill?

Top players often don't use mods because they're banned in competition games, although there are plently of other reasons not to use XVM.

I don't know what you mean by "wr to pr". Winrate without average tier (at minimum) is cargo-cult territory. If you just want a rough idea of player ability then WG-PR is usually adequate.

 

On 08/06/2016 at 2:17 PM, TheMarine0341 said:

@RichardNixon going to mess around w/ the structure of the WN9 calculator, will post a SS of the changes I make if you're interested

Feel free. I'm busy sorting out the rest of the site at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By pr I mean the personal rating figure on a player's WG record. If I recall correctly these figures were mentioned before and someone placed the colour rating, as we know it, against figures. I know WG rating takes in assisted damage for instance. 

I suppose at the end of the day there are several ways to view a person's abilities, and it all depends on an individual which he/she favours, as a meter to the view and accept those figures. Some favour win rate, some win8, some the personal rating on WG and others a mix of wr and base figures, with others taking recent stats. Although it is good to have a measure of how one is doing, if one cares, I sometimes wonder if this is World of Stats and not World of Tanks, after all it is supposed to be a video game for enjoyment and escapism. 

Thanks for taking time to reply.

Bood

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8.6.2016 at 4:49 AM, FASTHatTrick said:

You may have already answered my question, but wanted to be sure.   Have you ever considered setting the sampling default to a set number?

Meaning reflecting the WINX rating of a player based upon their last XX battles (Thinking last 10K battles).     Attempting to see the skill of a player as it sits in the battlefield is more accurately represented that way, in lieu of a 20,000 battle player running a avg WIN8 of 1700 with an overall of 1400 due to the first 10K games of the learning curve.   Would also cut back on some of the re-roll nonsense.   And yeah, LT15 for T55a has consumed my last 3 weeks, and my numbers are taking a beating.

This has nothing to do with the WN9 calculation itself. It is possible for any rating to be calculated for a subset of battles, it just depends on what parameters to be put into the formula.

Wargaming has no API that returns stats for latest n games, they only return players total stats per tank per battle mode. It is possible to create a solution that retrieves players stats on a regular basis, like every month, and then calculate the rating for that period by subtracting previous stats to current stats. It will be hard to create a solution that calculate the rating for a fixed number of battles though.

The software Wot Numbers has this possibility though, as it reads every battle into a local database.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I understand, but as I see it, there are two basic uses for WINX.  To mark your own progress on the learning curve and to enhance situational awareness of the quality and expected behavior of the tanks in your battle.

 

In this scope, when you see my WIN8 #'s, you are not getting a true representation of my overall skill since it considers my first 10K battles as well as my current 10K battles.  I am a lot better the past 5-8K battles in comparison to my first 10K battles.   Recent at best shows 30 days or 1K, but when you take into consideration missions etc... that can be skewed as well.

There is no perfect system, but only snapshotting the last 10K battles of a tankers career is far more accurate than grabbing their entire career when you are attempting to gauge ones ability before you.

 

LT15 Priceless.jpg

As an example, my signature shows a recent WN and WR that is highly skewed due to about 200+ battles running amok in Light Tanks.  Soon as I got that last mission, right back to averaging about 1800-2200 WIN8

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for fixing the stats site.

It now no longer says "no player 'Baldrickk' found, closest match: 'Baldrickk'"

 

Any news on adoption of WN9?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Baldrickk said:

Thanks for fixing the stats site.

It now no longer says "no player 'Baldrickk' found, closest match: 'Baldrickk'"

The related code hasn't been touched for months, although my host has a bad attitude to caching so you may see very old versions. Shift/Ctrl refresh if in doubt. There may be six more pages of barely readable scribblings since you last saw it.

3 hours ago, Baldrickk said:

Any news on adoption of WN9?

I have one site owner doing some testing. Otherwise I wouldn't know. I could do with a bit more input given that it's in beta, but I don't like soliciting.

Also I didn't get around to announcing that it's in beta.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Account WN9 is a replacement for overall WN8 that throws away each player's worst tanks. The goal is to reduce reroll incentive, work around problems with historical nerfs & buffs, and make it work better as a skill metric for applications where you can't use recent WN9.

The discard level is currently set at 65% of battles (selected by tank), which was chosen by polling.

I read through this on your WN9 wiki, and its neat - well done. I also liked the 'cap' at 300 battles per tank which stops players adding more and more weight to their WN9 score by playing a tank they excel on. Very nicely done.

To get WN9 out there, the key sites are XVM (Seriych), here, and vbaddict (Phalynx).

As I am now within 5 points of making account level Blue on WN8, I have no doubt that the change to WN9 will occur at that time, putting me back into the Green...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I rather dislike a cap, at least on tier X tanks. There are quite a few people with huge number of battles, which would force them to play UP tanks, because thats all thats left to play to increase wn9, if I understood it correctly.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lowlife555 said:

I rather dislike a cap, at least on tier X tanks. There are quite a few people with huge number of battles, which would force them to play UP tanks, because thats all thats left to play to increase wn9, if I understood it correctly.

 

If you are able to increase your WN9 for any tank by playing it more then you will increase your overall if you do that, but it will only have a limited effect. Its a reasonable price to pay when you consider that some people out there have thousands of battles in specific low tier tanks to pad big time.

The other interesting thing about the 65% is that if you play a new tank then - assuming you play it much better than  you played the tank at your 35% cutoff - then it will replace that tank in your WN9 score entirely. That's highly significant for those with only a few thousand battles, less so in my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gryphon_ said:

If you are able to increase your WN9 for any tank by playing it more then you will increase your overall if you do that, but it will only have a limited effect. Its a reasonable price to pay when you consider that some people out there have thousands of battles in specific low tier tanks to pad big time.

The other interesting thing about the 65% is that if you play a new tank then - assuming you play it much better than  you played the tank at your 35% cutoff - then it will replace that tank in your WN9 score entirely. That's highly significant for those with only a few thousand battles, less so in my case.

The retention level at 65% was not chosen by polling, it was chosen by a push pole that could only give the result desired. A pole that had started at %50 and ended at 100% would have returned a

result of %75 for instance.

 

Wn9, in its current implementation, will give a clear road map on which tanks to play in order to improve  rating.

People will be mandated to "fix" their old often hated tanks (within the threshold) or new tanks and discouraged from playing their favorite tanks they wish to be virtuosos of.

Jack of all trades will win for what seems like a purely arbitrary view.

Could we get a real overall without throwing out data along with this hybrid system? That way people could choose for themselves which to use.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Buckyball said:

Jack of all trades will win for what seems like a purely arbitrary view.

I think you're missing a fundamental point. A "real overall" isn't anywhere near incentive-neutral. It gives a strong incentive to play the tanks you've already elited and have good crews in, and also to reroll once you've got through your early noob games. Playing a capped tank might give you relatively slow progress on account WN9, but playing a new tank will typically drag your overall down, especially if you haven't saved up a huge pile of credits and free XP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But do you stil want to cap how much some players play their tier 10s? 

"Capping" tier 10 play seems silly when ppl mention tanks like t67.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The intention behind Account WN9 is clear and it is doing what you want it to do.

If you play to increase your ratings (which is usually the case for most of the peeps here):

WN8 forces you to play your same old "best" tanks over and over and over and punishes you hard for playing new tanks (unless you are a true unicorn at home in any tank)..

WN9 forces you to play new tanks but doesn't punish you for playing old tanks - it just does not reward you for it.

So my ratings suffer a lot under WN9 (a whole band down in overall and recent) because I have my best games in just a few tanks and in many tanks with few games I really suck BUT I no longer have the feeling that I should turn down any tank I am bad in currently bc learning it will wrekc my WN8 in the short run and do nothing for it in the long run.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

WN8 forces you to play your same old "best" tanks over and over and over and punishes you hard for playing new tanks (unless you are a true unicorn at home in any tank)..

WN9 forces you to play new tanks but doesn't punish you for playing old tanks - it just does not reward you for it.

I see it differently.

WN8 allows you play whatever tank you want. It does not force you to play anything. If you improved, your rating will go up with any tank you play. Don't get me wrong... I don't find statpadding in lower tiers a good thing and for sure capping tanks would fix that. But capping tier X tanks (most of which are already elite to begin with) is too much considering tier X means endgame.

WN9 forces you to play new tanks or rebuy old tanks. It doesn't matter if I improved or not. Take for example my E50M: It doesn't matter that I can play my E50M for 4k WN8 now, because on my first 600 battles I had 2.8k WN8 on it and there is no possible way to improve that or show that I have improved. I need to re-buy tier IX E50 (on which I only have 150 battles), move my crew from E50M on it and play that.

If I am sick of grinding and my tier Xs are capped, my statistics will just stagnate even though in reality I improved a lot. Maybe I have capped all these tanks 1-2 years ago. If I don't wanna grind any other line and improve my WN9, I just have to rebuy old tanks and move crews. For rerolls this is even better.

I don't want to be forced to play anything. I don't want to be forced to grind lines again and again. I just want to play my hard earned tanks and see improvement as if I would play any tank. "Statpadding" a certain tank should be fixed by expected values, not by capping. Everybody should have good crews in their tier X and these tanks usually come elite anyhow.

Oh, and another problem with capped tanks... You'll buy a super unicum ebay account and be able to play capped tanks without ruining that account. No one will know. Quite a nice perk for the real wallet warrior. :) Oh, and... if you have a capped tank you can now act like a total idiot in a battle because your stats cannot be ruined anymore. You can "have fun" pushing people, blocking them and use random battles as training rooms because your WN won't get punished for it anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, micKee said:

...Oh, and another problem with capped tanks... if you have a capped tank you can now act like a total idiot in a battle because your stats cannot be ruined anymore....

Not entirely true, if your tank has 600 battles at 3k WN9 and you suddenly play it at 1k WN9 for 100 games you will have lowered the tank WN9 to 2,7k. Now that will lower your overall depending on the amount of battles only slightly but still.

But whats more important is that stats sites WILL have interval WN9 just as they have intervall WN8 today and so your "recent" WN9 will be 1k for everyone to see...

Lastly, as Gryphon said, you can't have it all and it was decided that bringing single tank stats padders and rerollers in line with "true" players is worth the cost that some few players may cap out on several tanks and need to play others if they really want to raise their stats fast.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaegaer said:

Not entirely true, if your tank has 600 battles at 3k WN9 and you suddenly play it at 1k WN9 for 100 games you will have lowered the tank WN9 to 2,7k. Now that will lower your overall depending on the amount of battles only slightly but still.

Wait, that cap takes into account the "recent" battles on that tank? So, if my tank is capped at 600 battles and I have 1200 battles on that tank, the battles which will count will be the ones from 600 to 1200 or the ones from 1 to 600?

I was thinking that once you cap a tank, there is no way to change how that tank will influence your overall. I was thinking it will take only your first battles and that's it. If it takes the recent, then I guess everything should be alright.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, micKee said:

Wait, that cap takes into account the "recent" battles on that tank? So, if my tank is capped at 600 battles and I have 1200 battles on that tank, the battles which will count will be the ones from 600 to 1200 or the ones from 1 to 600?

All of them. There's no information on battle order, so the cap only affects the weight of each battle. In your example, a new battle in a 1200-battle tank will effectively have half the weight of a battle in <=600 battle tank.

However, new battles in capped tanks also reduce the weight of previous battles in that tank, so you won't get much progress in a capped tank unless you're playing it better than you did before (or worse, in the other direction).

The correct cap level comes down to a question of how many tanks players would choose to play if there were no stats (or "perfect" stats, if you prefer), no stock grinds, and tanks didn't cost credits. Set the level too low and players who like playing new tanks will feel pressured not to. Set the level too high and players who already unlocked all the tanks they want can't make much progress.

The cap's probably on the low side at the moment. I'm going to do some statistical checks but I need to fix a bunch of databases first.

 

Note that per-tank caps have a secondary purpose. Because account WN9 is generated from overall data, the expected values cannot be correct for everyone: If I use current values, players have a strong incentive to play OP tanks and pad their future account WN9. If I use max historical values (the current choice), players who play post-nerf tanks are punished. In either case, people who played pre-buff tanks are punished. The caps put a limiter on these distortions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's among your worst 35% of tanks yes.

But it's overall influence on your rating will go down slightly under the current iteration bc it will be handled as if you "only" played only 200+(35k/50) = 900 games instead of the 1100.

And, of course, if it just slightly above the 35% of your worst tanks, you can eleminate it's influence on your rating by bringing other tanks above it till it falls under the 35% rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

Unless it's among your worst 35% of tanks yes.

I tought WN9 was supposed to be about recent stats, not tanks we played years ago....

How is that calculated?

Is 10 games in a tier 2 tank counted for instance?

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...