Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
LordTyphoon

Lets debate: Stats matter

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

507
[REPOI]
Super Tester_
1,095 posts
20,361 battles

Forums are getting a bit quiet. 

Let start a debate shall we. 

Do you agree with iChase's comments here? 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester_
7,897 posts
9,173 battles

iChase ran out of video materials again... Not the first time this happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
122
[AUSNZ]
Member
431 posts
22,607 battles

Is this a new video of his ??? I can remember watching one about stats over a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
123
[POI]
Member
222 posts
13,362 battles

Very subjective matter.

One thing for sure, being too bad or too good doesn't make the whole community any better.
Even in PvE "Co-op" games players still manage to start a war for no good reason most of the time its start by someone wanted to "mess around" on another person.

As long as both parties doesn't get on each other's neck everything should be a-okay. I doubt that though since we're all humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[FISH]
Member
415 posts
32,999 battles

Stats that matter: 1) Clan Battles position, 2) ranks in Ranked Season, 3) Solo winrate in Random

No other stats matter.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4
[FISH]
Member
11 posts
10,173 battles
1 hour ago, Pervis117 said:

Stats that matter: 1) Clan Battles position, 2) ranks in Ranked Season, 3) Solo winrate in Random

No other stats matter.

Even no. 2 is a bit dubious since I've seen many a people say you can fail your way to rank 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[SALT]
Member
2,015 posts
10,542 battles

8137b343c7.png

ofc stat matter, but neither developer nor comunity of this game have good define/description of what stats that matter

 

ESports and Traditional sports use them. for example you have Ball possesion, Discipline, Red card, Yellow card, Shoot at goal, Assist, Succesfull pass and so on on Football.

If you understand the subject just by gleening it already can tell story on their own

 

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,895
[TDA]
ST Coordinator
5,593 posts
7,352 battles
10 hours ago, Pervis117 said:

Stats that matter: 1) Clan Battles position, 2) ranks in Ranked Season, 3) Solo winrate in Random

No other stats matter.

Agree that stats matter but WG  can't define which ones count.

CW measures a set of players in a set format.   Those battles generally use the same ship sand tactics on the same maps so can measure only a subset of players in a closed environment and do not measure the community as a whole 

Ranked.  Well definitely good players move up the ranks but it was proven last season by some that if you spam it enough to you can climb    So really only rank 1 counts. Same issue as CW as it uses a set format and set maps and a small proportion of players

Solo WR. Sure it measures you individually but you are held to ransom by the team so again its a poor metric when taken by itself with no context.  Is a sealclubber who running a 19pt captain in a t1 with a 60% WR a better player than a T9 player who is 55%????  It's probably the closest we have but far from perfect.  It will never be the right combination.  Just look at how many metrics XVM has changed over the years. 

Edited by RalphTheTheatreCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,895
[TDA]
ST Coordinator
5,593 posts
7,352 battles
18 minutes ago, Pocket_Fox said:

The only stat I concern myself with is Karma.

 

119 :cap_cool:

 

EaSwsQR - Imgur.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
975
[LBAS]
Super Tester_
1,925 posts
1 hour ago, Pocket_Fox said:

The only stat I concern myself with is Karma.

 

119 :cap_cool:

tenor.gif?itemid=3433518

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
4,998 battles

Honestly, back when I played WoT, I was very much overconcerned with my stats. Win ratio, WN8, Battle Rating, and all that. It did get me all the way into a green player with above 52% WR and a good WN8, but it gave me a heck of a lot of stress which even affected how I perform IRL. Everyday, losing streaks bad players, gold spam, and all that bad stuff I experienced, to the point that I finally quit (not completely) WoT and transfered to WoWS and ever since, I've been taking this game a whole lot less serious. I mean, by no means am I a great player (I'm below 50% WR) but I still try to play as good as I can. But the best thing is that I don't have to worry about losing streaks and dropping stats.

 

Tl;dr:   Worrying about stats= stress and tryharding  ;  Not worrying about stats= you actually have fun playing the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
875 posts
5,777 battles

Stats is a metric that measure your usual performance in a game.

You can analyze it, and think/evaluates what you can do to improve per game.

Just don't take it emotionally and kill yourself.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
177
[FISH]
Member
415 posts
32,999 battles
9 hours ago, RalphTheTheatreCat said:

Agree that stats matter but WG  can't define which ones count.

CW measures a set of players in a set format.   Those battles generally use the same ship sand tactics on the same maps so can measure only a subset of players in a closed environment and do not measure the community as a whole 

Ranked.  Well definitely good players move up the ranks but it was proven last season by some that if you spam it enough to you can climb    So really only rank 1 counts. Same issue as CW as it uses a set format and set maps and a small proportion of players

Solo WR. Sure it measures you individually but you are held to ransom by the team so again its a poor metric when taken by itself with no context.  Is a sealclubber who running a 19pt captain in a t1 with a 60% WR a better player than a T9 player who is 55%????  It's probably the closest we have but far from perfect.  It will never be the right combination.  Just look at how many metrics XVM has changed over the years. 

So any metric of comparison is going to have flaws that range from collection, to environment, mitigating factors, etc. The picture we get will always be assymetric to some degrees. 

So yes, those three criteria have some imperfections. 

But they are objectively far and away, the -most- robust metrics to compare players against out of the range of stats we can collect. The others are even more flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×