GehakteMolen

Popularity of heavies, aka `heavy domination...`

23 posts in this topic

Since this was kinda off-topic in the `best tier 8 tanks` topic, a repost, with the same numbers:
 
TL:DR: on EU server 60% of the tier 10 tanks are heavys
 
Some seem to think i made these numbers myself (since they are totally different from vbaddict / noobmeter)
This is however not true, they are just ripped from wot-news... and this is how i got them (its this simple...)
 
1: I copied the overall tank stats list from wot-news to excel, 
2: I removed all tiers below tier 8, 
3: I summarized all heavys, mediums and TDs, 
4: I took the % of all 3 classes and compared it the total amount of games played, 
5: this gives the following numbers:
 
Tier 8,9 & 10 combined:
58,30% - Heavy
24,88% - MT
16,82% - TD
 
If i only look at tier 10 numbers:
60,60% - heavy
22,26% - MT
17,15% - TD 
 
These numbers are from about 5 months ago.
 
Speculation start: Since the most popular TD line, the WTF line is not included in this, i guess / assume that the % of heavys has dropped a little (i guess) while TDs rose some, but thats speculation
Speculation end
 
These are real numbers, not some fantasy, you can do the very same calculation yourself, go to wotnews and past in excel...
 
I can understand that my post was off-topic, so it got removed for that reason, but saying my numbers are made up is simply not true, this are facts... If you cant stand the idea that there are 3x more heavys as meds, and that heavys thus dominate, its not my problem...
 
The problem behind this (and WN8) is that you put way, way too much faith in those silly vb-addict numbers**, they represent only a tiny fraction, a drop in the vast ocean of stupid, totaly irrelevant, and this gets only worse since its cherrypicked data... since only a special group of people uploads to vbaddict, not the average user...
 
Same noobmeter stats are useless for comparing tank stats... (noobmeter is `better` in the sense that baddies are also represented, i often look up idiots to see how idiot they really are, so these people are  represented, but not in the right proportion)
 
If you now all think these numbers are so wrong, please proof it to me, and not with vbaddict...
 
ps: an EU user, Snib, used to create monthly stats topics, containing ALL player data, these where extremly reliable, 
and were the best (up-to-date) data regarding popularity and many other things, Snib stopped with those topics though
 
These numbers however also showed how incredible massive wot is... (atm on EU with 200k users online at same time, the amount of weekly active users is over 1 million i guess...)
 
(ps, the numbers from end 2012 show the same distribution for heavy / meds / tds, quite amazing it changes so little overtime...)
tier 10          56.18%     Heavy     
tier 10          27.23%     MT                                  
tier 10          16.58%     TD
 
(so even during the arty madness, heavys still dominated numbers wise, go guess what happened when SPG`s got nerfed, and the TD madness started...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you cant stand the idea that there are 3x more heavys as meds, and that heavys thus dominate, its not my problem...

Here's where your logic breaks down.  The fact that there are 3x as many heavies doesn't mean that heavies dominate or are OP.  It means they are par, the typical fodder on both sides.  This is why the most played tanks on all servers tend to ~47%, even when those tanks are extremely good (KV-1, T-62A, etc).

 

I don't have a horse in this race and have no idea what you are trying to prove.  But if your goal is to prove heavies are OP, this isn't evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really know what you're trying to prove, but anecdotally I would assume your EU numbers would be quite similar to NA numbers of heavies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the image I made, using the stats from wot-news, before getting fed up with you crapping up that thread and just ending it:

 

X3YA1YK.jpg

 

Tier 8+.  Heavies win at much as SPG's.  Much dominant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's where your logic breaks down.  The fact that there are 3x as many heavies doesn't mean that heavies dominate or are OP.  It means they are par, the typical fodder on both sides.  This is why the most played tanks on all servers tend to ~47%, even when those tanks are extremely good (KV-1, T-62A, etc).

 

I don't have a horse in this race and have no idea what you are trying to prove.  But if your goal is to prove heavies are OP, this isn't evidence.

 

It was from other topic, they said that there where way less heavys and more meds (and that thus the game is med-meta centered)

 

its not, its heavy centered, huge amount of heavy and tds make meds useless, if there 2 meds in 1 team, how usefull are they?

 

(imo its sad, med domination would be the best for the game...)

 

I don't really know what you're trying to prove, but anecdotally I would assume your EU numbers would be quite similar to NA numbers of heavies.

 

dunno, EU server is campy, either because of more cowards, or due to less med / more heavy-td

Here's the image I made, using the stats from wot-news, before getting fed up with you crapping up that thread and just ending it:

 

X3YA1YK.jpg

 

Tier 8+.  Heavies win at much as SPG's.  Much dominant.

 

if idiots in IS7`s keep facing idiots in E100`s none will win

 

trow in that most EU unicums consider the average t10 heavy to be shit (they play meds) and i guess that the average medium driver is better.

 

this all doesnt change the fact that the battle flow is dominated by heavys, same 5 reds can screw up more as 1 purple can fix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it.  Why does 'more tanks of a type' equal 'that type of tank current meta'? 

 

It's not like when a meta changes everyone sells their tanks and move to the next.  Historically heavies were kings of WoT the longest.  Arguably still are T8 and below.  Anecdotally at TX I see more bad IS7/Maus/E100 drivers with 20k+ battles than I do 62a/140/batchat drivers.  I imagine that's in part due to the push for mediums in CW which is a game mode most good players enter at some point.  But it's also due to the mindset quite a few reds have that once they got their TX they were done with the game.  THey got their IS7/Maus in 2012 and they are content to just play it.  They haven't shifted with the Meta the way higher caliber players do.

 

You would have to watch was good players are playing to plot the meta. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the image I made, using the stats from wot-news, before getting fed up with you crapping up that thread and just ending it:

 

X3YA1YK.jpg

 

Tier 8+.  Heavies win at much as SPG's.  Much dominant.

#LT_BEST_TONX_NA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it.  Why does 'more tanks of a type' equal 'that type of tank current meta'? 

 

It's not like when a meta changes everyone sells their tanks and move to the next.  Historically heavies were kings of WoT the longest.  Arguably still are T8 and below.  Anecdotally at TX I see more bad IS7/Maus/E100 drivers with 20k+ battles than I do 62a/140/batchat drivers.  I imagine that's in part due to the push for mediums in CW which is a game mode most good players enter at some point.  But it's also due to the mindset quite a few reds have that once they got their TX they were done with the game.  THey got their IS7/Maus in 2012 and they are content to just play it.  They haven't shifted with the Meta the way higher caliber players do.

 

You would have to watch was good players are playing to plot the meta. 

 

what i understand under ``meta`` is the dominant class, the class which dictates the flow of battle, of it would be medium meta, medium tanks would dominate the game, they would pull the win, more mediums would equal to more wins

 

on EU server atleast, the team with most mediums usually loses, the gameplay is heavy / TD centered, they dictate the gameflow.

 

this means tanks which excel at fighting heavys are good (King Tiger, T30, E100) while tanks which suck against heavy`s are not so good...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OP is forgetting that tier ten heavies were the ONLY tier 10s in the game for quiet a long time. If you wanted to play in CWs or simply have a tier ten back then you needed, coincidentally, a tier ten heavy. I don't see why there being more tier ten heavies around is so shocking when you see that they have been around way longer than the other classes of vehicles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

on EU server atleast, the team with most mediums usually loses, the gameplay is heavy / TD centered, they dictate the gameflow.

 

*Insert citation needed comic here

I highly doubt there is solid data supporting this claim and would like to see some proof if you want to make broad statements like this. Just because most play heavies doesn't mean they are the better class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that OP is forgetting that tier ten heavies were the ONLY tier 10s in the game for quiet a long time. If you wanted to play in CWs or simply have a tier ten back then you needed, coincidentally, a tier ten heavy. I don't see why there being more tier ten heavies around is so shocking when you see that they have been around way longer than the other classes of vehicles. 

 

but tier 10 meds and tds have been in game for ages by now, it was patch 7.5 (summer 2012) thats almost 2 years...

 

the numbers from end 2012 are almost exact copies of end 2013 (shows how much noobs go for big guns and big armor...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i understand under ``meta`` is the dominant class, the class which dictates the flow of battle, of it would be medium meta, medium tanks would dominate the game, they would pull the win, more mediums would equal to more wins

 

I think most people aren't finding "there are more of these tanks, therefore they dictate the flow of battle" very convincing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what i understand under ``meta`` is the dominant class, the class which dictates the flow of battle, of it would be medium meta, medium tanks would dominate the game, they would pull the win, more mediums would equal to more wins

 

I would argue that you're not defining it correctly.

IMHO the tank type metagame is which class is the best at generating desired outcomes.  It's based on current game mechanics and map rotations.  Most, at least on this forum, agree that win rate and wn8 are the two measurable outcomes to judge which tanks are the best in the current meta.  I have seen very few arguments that at TX anyone would choose a heavy to generate either the best win rate or the highest wn8 based on the current mechanics and map rotations. 

 

TX Heavies currently have the lowest ceiling and highest floor.  The latter is why they're popular with the masses.  The former is why they are not as popular with the unicums. 

 

When you drop down to T8 you see a shift where it's much harder to discern the differences in classes so it does matter if you're talking end-game meta or overall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other than city maps I think vision dictates the flow of battle more than anything else. Therefore mediums and lights tend do have a disproportionate impact on non city maps compared to heavies. 

 

(biased medium driver;) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most people aren't finding "there are more of these tanks, therefore they dictate the flow of battle" very convincing.  

 

As a heavy driver I totally agree with this. I can hold a flank usually and even flex (slowly) if required but it is the mediums and mobile tds which break through.

 

Also because pubbies do think that heavies are better than mediums you do end up with  (sometimes) a lot of heavies. But driven by idiots who don't have a clue and think they are invulnerable. 

 

I am not sure what you think your stats are showing? Statistics is all about outliers and I don't see any in your data. In fact it is remarkably balanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the amount of TDs have skyrocketed since the arty nerf. There could be several reasons for that, the most popular one is that people believe that arty somehow kept the size of the TD population in check. I dont think they did, but that's a different topic. Another reason could be that lots of arty players moved on to other classes, and as TD role is often considered to be camping in the back, providing fire support, this role was kinda similar to arty, so arty players migrated. I'm too lazy to actually do the work and compare data from wot-news, so perhaps I'm way off the mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I feel heavies are kind of just the random battle standard not the meta. This is due to, as stated above, heavies are probably the most forgiving type in the game and give a good starting place to learn from. Anyways, meta is generally to counter the current standard. Best way to fight anything is to take away its strengths and exploit its weaknesses. For heavies that would be shoot gold to limit armor effectiveness, which seems to happen a lot, and abuse the lack of mobility and view range. Mediums and TDs do this really well. This all being said I'd find it hard to say that heavies are the current meta, even though in the standard random battle heavies can pull a lot of weight (mostly due to the skill level of the general random battle players, myself included).

 

Also I will speculate that the arty nerf positively impacted heavies, forcing average players to move towards TDs that can fill the gap of nerfed artillery as a counter. Why not mediums? Because most mediums are a bit harder to use than TDs I'd say. But that is just me speculating, I wasn't in game at the time to really see.

 

Also, apologies if I'm not thinking straight. I'm committing the dangerous act of posting while very tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find heavy potatoes are also easier to carry. Potatoe medium has less armor and hpts and often "flanks" by wander around for a third of the map far from any fighting. Meanwhile the heavy potatoe yolo's into the enemy giving me lights, a meatshield and prolonged distraction. Just my thoughts.

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.