spencer

NA Top 50 DPG tables for every tank. 150 battles and above only.

221 posts in this topic

I'm too much a novice and much too lazy to do all the CSS stuff from scratch. Twitter Bootstrap is a godsend in that department. However, I don't see any issues with your design. Searching and sorting features for the tables would be a great addition.

Are you storing all of this information in a database and dynamically generating the static HTML pages for the ZIP archive dynamically?

Thanks. Yeah I'll definitely put sorting in and maybe some sort of categorical grouping in the list of tanks (e.g. by nation and tank class). I'll look into that framework; I don't know much about making shit work on mobile phones/dumb browsers.

Everything is in a database. I have a script to generate all the pages that I'll probably set Cron(or whatever equivalent) to run once a day; I'm not sure if there's a significant speed difference but I didn't see any point in having a dynamic page for the dpg tables; I also don't know anything about caching dynamic pages. The player section that I'll add in later will be dynamic and hopefully have a button for people to manually force an update on their stats a certain number of times per day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E-50: #3, but best WR out of anyone in the top 10. \o/

Obj 907: #14, kind of surprising really. I would have expected a lot more people to have 3.5k dpg with it.

I need 21 more games in E-50M to get into top 10 ranking, definitely do want.

I need 50 more games in super P to get to #2 spot, might try and go for it.

 

Other than that, nothing too special. Most of my DPGs are shit because I got half of my T10s before I even got dark purple recent. Gotta compensate with them dank MoEs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing, I checked E8 Sherman because that's line I play on NA. 

AntonioHandsome is #3. Didn't he quit like 2 years ago? :O 2OP4me. EDIT: He's still #1 for D.Max.

Also, Kewei is 500 DPG above #2 in 113. Same goes for his JP2 DPG. And almost 700 more in 430v2. :wao: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooo. Some interesting shit happened here.

 

 

 

drIrMP2.png

That's an interesting amount of damage to average in a tier 3 arty. Surely there's no way that's correct. Must be a problem with Spencer's coding.

 

PnKyI4N.jpg

 

....wat.

jkkfAHl.jpg

Literally all of this guy's top tanks are like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this, Number 3 for Archer.... looks like no-one else ever played it. BUT any chance you could do this exact same thing but use 100 battles instead of 150 for purely selfish reasons? I've played every tank in the game 100 times up to tier 4 then 150 from tier 5 up... so....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

AntonioHandsome is #3. Didn't he quit like 2 years ago?

 

Having a "since x date" filter would be nice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the more scrubby players the solution is to have a restricted access tank.  M6 mutant #47 ftw 

Unpopular low-tier tanks are pretty easy to top with the 150 battle cap. I'd have #2 or 3 in the Pz IIIA if I'd played 60 more games in it, and I played that with a fresh 75% crew and ghetto equipment.

 

Any chance we get this for EU scrubs?

I wouldn't personally bother pulling the whole EU tanks/stats database, but an optimisation is to pre-filter using account metrics: You assume that only half-decent players will figure in the lists. Raw winrate should work well here because you want the sealclubbers. You might lose some of the poor bastards from the top of the G. Pz. IV list though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it make sense to slowly ramp up the game requirement each tier? 150 games is good for a workable sample size, but it's probably several orders of magnitude larger than most players will ever reach. You're probably losing out on like 99% of players by setting it that high in low tiers. You could, say, start at 90 and then ramp up to 150 by T6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya this really confirms how broken MOE are. I am #18 for Conqueror and have two marks with a 91% ratio. WG just hates you unless your #1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya this really confirms how broken MOE are. I am #18 for Conqueror and have two marks with a 91% ratio. WG just hates you unless your #1

Were all 150 matches played after the MoE system was implemented?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were all 150 matches played after the MoE system was implemented?

Most likely because we didnt start the 215b hype train til well after. Idk even where Im at I ended on 93% marks though. 

edit: If I played 6 more games in the conq I'd be right next to haglar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno'. It took me average 4k/match to get triple on the Maus, but because of the large amount of historical inertia I'm ~200 points short of showing up on the board for that. 4k would actually put me in absolute first by a comfortable 800 point/game margin.

So yeah, I guess MoE are broken (Shock! Surprise!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno'. It took me average 4k/match to get triple on the Maus, but because of the large amount of historical inertia I'm ~200 points short of showing up on the board for that. 4k would actually put me in absolute first by a comfortable 800 point/game margin.

So yeah, I guess MoE are broken (Shock! Surprise!)

I was at 94.9% on marks then I got Tked by a T92 who didn't approve of my IGN. guess thats a bit of karma. Other than that my marks have dropped due to me meatshielding for other people to get their t57 or 50B marks :^)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this, Number 3 for Archer.... looks like no-one else ever played it. BUT any chance you could do this exact same thing but use 100 battles instead of 150 for purely selfish reasons? I've played every tank in the game 100 times up to tier 4 then 150 from tier 5 up... so.... 

Would it make sense to slowly ramp up the game requirement each tier? 150 games is good for a workable sample size, but it's probably several orders of magnitude larger than most players will ever reach. You're probably losing out on like 99% of players by setting it that high in low tiers. You could, say, start at 90 and then ramp up to 150 by T6.

I think I'll do something akin to Rexxie's suggestion which should satisfy your selfish needs :D

 

Any chance we get this for EU scrubs?

Right now it takes about 3-5 days to process NA because the WoT API limits you to about 10 requests a second (10*3600*24*4=3.5 million; there are about 3.2 million accounts on NA with at least one battle on them). The vehicle data API only lets you query for 1 account per request (the main account data API lets you do 100 at a time) which is the real bottleneck. I have an idea to speed it up but I'll have to test it first. If I can get an order of magnitude speedup then I'd be willing to do EU.

When were these stats taken and do they update? Because I should be 7th for the Maus :P

They were run over the past 2-3 weeks, so depending on your account ID number, your data could be 2-3 weeks old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They were run over the past 2-3 weeks, so depending on your account ID number, your data could be 2-3 weeks old.

Makes sense since I only barely have broken 150 games in it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were all 150 matches played after the MoE system was implemented?

Mine certainly were :/ Even a great game I had last night (5k dmg, 1.5k spotting) didnt move my current MOE on the AMX 30p one bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.