Player Rating for World of Warships

[BiggieD61 364]

I am curious if there is any interest among the WNx veterans about developing a Player Rating for World of Warships.  The two main statistical websites have basically defaulted to using the simplistic %damage, %kills, %win rate as the three data sets they extract from the API. 

Warships Today rating system (WTR): https://na.warships.today/help/warships_today_rating

Wows Numbers rating (PR): https://na.wows-numbers.com/personal/rating

Recent work on the wows-numbers site shows their is more data available from the WG api than before - spotting damage, ship spots, kill/death ratio, survival rate, are all showing up in the more comprehensive wows-numbers site, but are not being used in the rating for being superfluous according to the site owner.  To a certain extent, I do agree, the best players are the best at PR and WTR based on just those 3  numbers, and while it is abusable by seal clubbing or overplaying ships with low expected values, it's easily detectable by a clan commander. I am more interested in seeing if there is any interest in driving Warships player traffic to this site by developing the preeminent rating system.  Maybe everyone is content to let the site fade out as World of Tanks slowly fades from the scene, but there is a very active and dedicated player group for warships, and it has not peeked yet, developing the best rating system would drive traffic here, if that is even something that Solono wants.

In any case, I wanted to put this thought out there.  I am a mathematical neophyte to be sure, but it is interesting to me to watch how the rating mechanisms come into existence, and it seems like this might be an opportunity to bring new enthusiasm back to wotlabs.

[Folterknecht 2,257]

What reason is there to develop a rating for WoWS???

 

Last I 've seen the killed CW before is even started. From a competitive viewpoint the game is a pure shit show and the devs are hell bent on selling premiums and balancing around the 48% crowd.

And as long as there are no dedicated SP random stats available it's pointless. 3 man platoons in a team of 12

[Jaegaer 180]

The problem with player stats in WoWS is that the main metric for WN8 (damage) is even more irrelevant than in WoT when the game allows you to heal damage and have such a hugely different hit point pool for the different classes.

All in all solo winrate in high tier ships is imho all you ever need.

1 hour ago, Folterknecht said:

Last I 've seen the killed CW before is even started.

From a competitive viewpoint the game is a pure shit show.

And as long as there are no dedicated SP random stats available it's pointless.

No, removal of CVs, 1 BB limit and new smoke mechanics actually made CW really fun and quite competitive.

No, why?

There are. Solo Player stats are separate from Division stats.

[Folterknecht 2,257]

40 minutes ago, Jaegaer said:

No, removal of CVs, 1 BB limit and new smoke mechanics actually made CW really fun and quite competitive.

So next soccer world cup Germany, Argentinia and Brasil are only allowed 8 field players ... quite competitive

[Jaegaer 180]

1 hour ago, Folterknecht said:

So next soccer world cup Germany, Argentinia and Brasil are only allowed 8 field players ... quite competitive

That example makes no sense as it would only fit isf some clans were restricted - which is ofc not the case. So, in your words, every team is only allowed 8 players, which would probably up the competitive level considerably.

So, well, we get it that you are a salty, WG hating individual, that burned out on WoT - but there is no need to bring that into the Warsheep threads as well.

[Folterknecht 2,257]

Are you really that dense?

 

Restricting the best players who put the most effort into it, just to please the dumb masses and make it easier for them. You call that competitive?

[SoliDeoGloria 417]

6 hours ago, Folterknecht said:

From a competitive viewpoint the game is a pure shit show and the devs are hell bent on selling premiums and balancing around the 48% 44% crowd.

That's better.

[cheereereerios 44]

It's very competitive at its core - a ship two tiers lower that is well played has just as much a chance to utterly devastate the higher tier ship as that one has to do the same.The higher tier ships are generally better, more hit points, maybe better consumables, slightly higher alpha, maybe reload buffed, etc, but there is no magic impenetrable armor nonsense.

[Jaegaer 180]

2 hours ago, Folterknecht said:

Restricting the best players who put the most effort into it,

CVs are unbalanced and break the game in any competitve environment. Imagine old WoT clanwars with planes...

That is far from "restricting the best players", it is a remedy to a problem they can't fix fast (total rework of CVs). And last time I looked all the best clans were on top, exactly as expected - so not much restricting and dumbing down going on. On top of that all players of CW (even from OM/OMNI/whatnot) aknowledged that the mode is pretty fun.

So Folterknecht, show us on this doll where the evil WG touched you. Maybe we can help you to get over it one day.

[SoliDeoGloria 417]

3 hours ago, cheereereerios said:

 but there is no magic impenetrable armor nonsense.

32mm bows being immune to all but Yamato. Oh wait, HE exists, because we didn't need aiming or angling skill.

[BiggieD61 364]

Some very strong opinions here, and I respect that.  The real bugaboo I think, is that WG does not separate base xp from premium xp.  If they ever decide to unlock that, it would simplify the process of creating a more nuanced metric that is fair to people who do quality  damage versus "bulk" damage, and those that are resetting caps and actually capping for the team.

To be more honest though, the number and quality of posts and topics here has stalled since the game is so mature and many of the early enthusiasts have left and moved on to other things.  It would be nice if wotlabs got a second wind through WoWs or even WoWP. 

[Sgt. Pepper 55]

Honestly, I don't feel like developing a formula for WoWs would be worth the while. The game has a fraction of the playerbase that WoT has and the WoWs scene is much more casual than WoT. I simply don't see a need for developing such a metric when the game's playerbase simply doesn't want it. I also don't feel like the game is competitive either, with its closest counterpart being CS:GO. Too many random outcomes like shell dispersion and stray citadel hits and overpens when it should be pens however the consumables are awesome and serve as a great way to change the game flow which I would like to see in more games.

[Jaegaer 180]

On ‎27‎.‎10‎.‎2017 at 8:24 PM, SoliDeoGloria said:

Oh wait, HE exists, because we didn't need aiming or angling skill.

HE is actually what works great in WoWS because it lets weaker ships (like tier VIII ones) affect stromger ones - but only slowly and over time. AP is always better when it can penetrate but HE is viable when not.

Without that stale max range bow tanking meta would be the norm and the game would be boring.

[SoliDeoGloria 417]

10 hours ago, Jaegaer said:

HE is actually what works great in WoWS because it lets weaker ships (like tier VIII ones) affect stromger ones - but only slowly and over time. AP is always better when it can penetrate but HE is viable when not.

Without that stale max range bow tanking meta would be the norm and the game would be boring.

Or, instead of giving everyone a no-aiming necessary round, we could just put the bows back to original state, bowtanking dies, but angling and aiming is still important.

[cheereereerios 44]

On 10/27/2017 at 2:24 PM, SoliDeoGloria said:

32mm bows being immune to all but Yamato. Oh wait, HE exists, because we didn't need aiming or angling skill.

Before I found Wows I remember running into some of the fun matchups in Wot, like a Stuart versus...well, just about any sort of higher tier heavy (hell, medium sometimes). Best bet was probably to drive off something above them and land on them, because the shells were useless.

At least with the various levels of overmatch in Wows, there are usually options available - whether HE, shoot higher for superstructure/break guns, maneuver around since ships can't just rotate in place. Anyway, point being that stick me in a T8 cruiser for example, and I can do some real damage to a Yamato, even from somewhat unfavorable angles.

On 10/30/2017 at 9:15 PM, SoliDeoGloria said:

Or, instead of giving everyone a no-aiming necessary round, we could just put the bows back to original state, bowtanking dies, but angling and aiming is still important.

This I would actually like, I would like to see bands of overmatch and percentages of pens. Okay, destroyer AP won't punch through the bow of a BB, but some 8" heavy AP going through 32mm hull plating? Sometimes, sure. 16" AP? Let's make it more likely that a flying Volkswagen actually *crump* punches right through and does some damage, instead of magical autobounce-everything angles. It would add a layer of complexity and a bit of chance (hmm, go for sustained HE damage or try your luck with dice roll RNG chances of AP pens?!) which good players would pick up on, and the potatoes would still have no clue about.

 

edit: though WG seems to keep slowly going more simple and arcadey over time, so doubt any of that will happen *shrug*