DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
wows forum
HTML https://wows.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Wiki
*****************************************************
#Post#: 393--------------------------------------------------
Term: stats
By: wows Date: September 20, 2022, 12:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Stats by example:
[quote]Win rate
Next level: Below Average (+2.3%)
44.68%
Bad
HTML https://wows-numbers.com/player/503598166,Fastmotion/[/quote]
In Wows players open the stats web page Wows-numbers, and see by
default the Section/Tab "Random battles" selected and not
"Ranked Battles" selevted and not "All battles" selected.
In section "Random battles" is a line "Win rate" with value 44%.
The number 44 is the stats. So, Stats=44 and this is what Wows
community means by the term stats.
It is a mathematical average of specific battle types called
Randoms. Even if one playes in other battle types like Rankeds
then people talk about his Stats that go for Randoms. That
average is calculated for all years a person has played Random
battles with different ship types. Also some ingame Mods show
that Randoms average for stats.
In racist terms Stats are like skin color, university grades,
breasts size, indian human caste level, etc. Mathematical nature
of the averages/stats is that they don't show the reality well
and specially the todays situation. For example, if a person had
3 years in the university bad grades/stats but good one at the
4th year then his stats are not good still and the stats would
lie about his todays skills. That's why mathematical
averages/stats are not an a smart tool for today. In stockmarket
trading nobody cares what a company/stock curve/value did 25
years before but care only what it will do tomorrow/now. Battle
end results don't calculate tactical impact well enough and
specially for DDs sometimes the battle results are not in TOP 3
but everyone agrees that the DD carried the battle.
#Post#: 1184--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: Moderator1 Date: April 1, 2023, 3:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
All team sport statistics are team dependent and describe mostly
teams performance and not players performance.
For example if in a sport a team contains 10+ players then the
win rate and other variables describe mostly the teams. If team
size is smaller like 2 then the data describe player little bit
more. Even if there are 1-1, tournaments then all available
competitors in the tournament at a season are actually all
together a teamlike group and seasons have different player base
so one can't compare results between seasons either. Few
teamless games have a score that is quite ideal to measure
skills. For example in Bowling you can measure how many points
individuals got and world record owners are best in the leaders
board.
So, there is no ideal way to invent a statistics to measure and
compare skills in teams port.
In Wows the best way is to take team stats in Rankeds Sprint 1
by playing advanced ship types in small teams. For example, the
stats for the 1st day completion of Bronze using American CV, DD
and/or a Sub, 40 battles at TeamsWR=60%, Average top=3.5/6. Such
data is not ideal because it describes teams and not a player so
much, but it is acceptable because there is no better ways to
perform exam type of skill measuring in the team based Wows.
Totally unacceptable is to use data where you replace latter
numbers by: 4000 in any game type, any ship type, any year,
AverageTop 3.5/6-15. Obviously the 40 battles exam data is more
accurate.
Q1. Why you think that Sprint 1 data is better than previous 3
years data?
A1. Because 3 years of data contains more likely misleading
data. For example, an athlete becomes more skillful during the
years and his peak form is always in July, so he can be the
world leader according to the previous year summer but has an
average performance if to count all previous years and seasons.
That's why you need a short exam like day to measure skills in
small teams against the most skillful competitors. And you can't
use data from last 3 years.
Therefore Wows community Stats are inadequate statistics.
Q2. If RandomsTeamsWR is not adequate then why racist community
still prefers it?
A2. TeamsWR does not neasure individual skills but can be used
to predict how a player's next casual battle may go. The same
way one's employment history in various companies can be used to
predict something about his future jobs but it doesn't measure
the candidates skills and potential.
In Wows teenagers just don't understand some English terms like
Skill, Knowladge, IQ , and they use those words in a wrong
meaning. There is nothing to do with Iq in Wows and in most
areas of life, but it is popular still to brag about Iq and
think that their Ego is better and smarter if they mention
foreign words.
So, it is just a brainwashed attitude to talk that TeamsWR means
skills and Iq and everything. It is the Stats Religion.
Because many/most or almost all do something does not prove that
the thing they do is adequate. For example, most try cigarettes
in life and more than half smoke everyday- that does not prove
that smoking is good. The same is with teenagers communities,
most like to talk about IQ but they cannot even define the word.
Same is with Wows community's belives and attidues.
You can debunk that topic/question by showing my Exam results
which show around 70% wr for Exams and contradict community's
RandomsTeamsWr.
Example where TOP 6 golden player "[KOTST] my_name_is_Nobo,
RankedsTeamsWR=56%" tells to TOP 2 player "Fastmotion,
RankedsTeamsWR=42%, RandomsTeams=45%" that the latetr one has
45% amount of skills. He is a perfect example of Wows commnuity
who takes RandomsTeamsWR as Skills and God. He performed worse
than the 45% player and palced TOP 6. Wows commnuity is not
capable to adequately explain such contradiction in their Stats
rewligion believes- for them Stats are God and no need to bother
why the God places 56% player as the last one and worst one in
performance while the Devil with 45% carries the battle and is
TOP 1 advanced ship.
HTML https://imgur.com/C4Dg2bz
HTML https://imgur.com/4IdG1uC
#Post#: 1202--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: wows Date: April 29, 2023, 6:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The word Science and related words like Data, Statistics are
popular in the community. Most of the time the scientifically
sounded words are used to make the belief in pork toxicity, Wows
stats holyness, or any game talk more belivable. A cosmetic
argument, almost equal to the "belief in authority" argument,
the authority is an illusional scientist.
An example:
[quote]
That is why actual Statistical Data is Importand.
Becasue Personal Observations of a few Battles by a Person will
just not Provide a Big enough Picture as that it would Provide
any actually usable conclusions.
Trying to base an Argument on a few Personal Experiences is
Generally useless and is effectively no different from flipping
a Coin and have that decide which side to stand on in an
Argument.
[/quote]
HTML https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/169418-so-popular/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-4383395
In the above example Wows community tries to support his
opinions by drawing a picture of an illusional scientist, by
using scientific words like Data, Actual Data, Statistical. He
repeats the popular opinion that big dataset is closer to truth.
Famoues equation: Stats=Science=UltimateTruth.
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and
statistics.”
Stats are msot of the times more or less abused in everyday
life. The graphs are fabricated so thatt hey would show a big
jump whereas the reality was that the data didn't change almsot
at all. Most popular is to make questionnaries/questions so that
one would get the stats that they want. Most times Stats are
interpreted wrong way, for example in Wows community Stats are
interpreted as the argument for all opinions. In Wows the
illusion starts by believeing that TeamsWR means PersonalWR, and
they use RandomsTeamsWR when talking about Rankeds personal
aspects. There is nothing scientific or adequate in teams data.
So, the above example is wrong if it thinks that bigger data
amount makes something more adequate. The counter question would
immediately be: what exactly gets more adequate from the big
amount of data? Your dreams get more adequate the bigger the
data is? No, yes? What gets more accurate, can you phrase it?
Wows community believes that Knowledge is showed more precisely
the bigger is the data over all years. That we have debunked
plenty of times. Stats don't show Knowledge/Skills, they show an
average and averages are not knowledges, never ever, and are not
skills, never ever.
An athlete's knowledge is measured once a year, in Wows at the
1st day of Rankeds.
The bigger the dataset the more false the current momentary
reality is. Let's say we take data from a person from age 3
until age 40, such 37 years of data are a false average, much
accurate is data from years 36-27, and even more precise is data
for 1 exam day that occured 2 weeks ago. So, everything that the
above exampel says is actually opposite. also, Stats are
opposite that the commnuity thinks, the same with dualistic
science and all wows commnutiy other opinions.
If you want to be scientific and adequate then express more or
less closer to the truth: long data statistics can show
stability etc which can be used for predictions for non-exam
days. But that is not a Accurate Knowledge Amount etc. If one
had 5 years in a row data between 60-70 then you can predict
that his next random team makes likely again 60-70, but not
surely, just likely. In case the 5 years data showed values
40-70 then one can't predict anything because everybody has such
range. There are no illusional Skills or knowledge in Stats and
in Longer Stats. How is it so difficult to understand, why you
need inadequate Lol-phrases and ignorance and can't prove
adequately any opinion about Stats or Science etc. Even money is
offered beside Wikipedia arguments and example debates, come and
prove any opinion to be true.
#Post#: 1455--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: Hanuman Date: October 6, 2023, 11:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A typical Wows commnutiy person believes in "my stats":
HTML https://imgur.com/pHb6qqb
#Post#: 2156--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: ency Date: December 15, 2024, 4:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An example of Wows commnuity Stats argument usage:
1. Giving a braibwashed opinion with now explanation/proof. This
time saying that a certain captain build is bad. Can be any Wows
commnuity brainwashed opinion, like also that Lemmingtrain is
bad etc.
HTML https://imgur.com/mrgfNjN
2. After tweeting an opinion usually Wows ocmmnutiy proceed
immediately to final step saying you are wrong i neverything
because of soup rating.
This time at least step 1 opinion got an explanation: good
concealment DDs don't need Radio. Well, that reason is totally
brainbwashed, radio is needed always, otherwise your scouting is
gambling, and otherwise you can't do any reasonable tactics.
HTML https://imgur.com/PbTVR1t
3. The conversation ends with_: you have bad stats. That
demonstrates Wows ocmmnuity, even those who are silent and don't
say it out temporarily or silently watch others saying it and
agreeing, are actually beleiving in such stats argument.
Obviously in such 3 steps argumentation my arguments won because
nothing was provided in step 2 against my argument of scouting.
HTML https://imgur.com/CdZ4jmx
4. Here is my 20 point captain setup. It has 3 main mandatory
skills.
HTML https://imgur.com/ycGsGZN
My 21 points 2 captains compared to that 20 point captain have
torpedo speed skill but it is useless generally, because 73km/h
torps don't differ from 70k/h torps.
So the whole blindless of such dialogue is:
1. TeamStats have nothing to do ever to anything, they don't
make anybody's arguments better or worse.
2. Radio skill is mandatory to DDs and gives more than +3km
torpedo speed or any other irrelevant skill. How would you scout
without best concealment and radio? This debate seems to suggest
that have even 6.0 km concealment and no radio and upgrade
Pampa's guns.
3. specially for Pampa the best optimal competitive skill is
alweays: speed, concealment, radio, always. Come and debate the
opoosite, and i offer 90 eur. He refused that offer i nchat
typically.
4. This is 20 point captain, which skil lsetup was made at 18
points with gold. It is totally fine setup already, maybe i even
will not change it to torpedo speed.
What he suggests is to remove concealment and radio and upgrade
torps from 70 to 73 km/h, i would outplay him any day if he
himselff used such setup. Come and let's contest.
5. In chat seems a saying that my setup misses +20% torpedo
reload etc. Where that 20 comes from? From captain setup you can
only get +5% torpedo speed, not 20. And as explained, already
70km/h torpedo speed is fine, and my other 2 captains with
73km/h torps doesn't make any difference, if you omit Radio and
Concealment skills ,then that makes a huge negative difference.
6. In the game chat later the debunked opponent responded that
my arguments are bad/siht. Such saying means he lsot the debate,
because you must provide counter arguments not such tweeting in
style "you are bad, your opininos are bad".
HTML https://imgur.com/BY0Ltek
HTML https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XfsIIbyORQAxgOE-ao_nVSP8_fpa1igg0t48pXZFIu0/edit?tab=t.0
HTML https://imgur.com/utrGOuy
His brainwashed document suggest for Pampa no speed and no
concealment. That is totally unsuitable for slow ships, they
jsut get outspotted and can't even swim away because slow speed.
come and prove the oposite.
On the Google docs picture it has 2 points Smoke consumable
reload bosoter for +10%. Dds don't need smoke quicker, and Pampa
can get 2 smokes and 2 torpedos almost instantly. Also the
Google docs suggest additional HP points, that is never needed,
it is the typical brainwashed 19.9K HP Shima argument.
The Google suggestion also sugegst 3 points Adrenaline toirpedo
reload boost, you don't need it either because you have already
fast torps and additionally torpedo reload button. What you need
is cocnealment, radio, and speed.
And the main point of this post here about Stats. Do you think
really that my TeamsWR would change if i change my captain
setup? I don't and i beleive you don't believe it either. So,
admit that Stats argument is always wrong, and hence the whole
debate is a loss for Wows commnuity.
#Post#: 2163--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: wows Date: December 16, 2024, 7:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Look at the Google Document La Pampa captain skill picture again
and see it has the 2-points "longer lasting smoke/radar", it is
defined like that:
[quote]
Consumables Enhancements
2
Smoke Generator
Hydroacoustic Search
Engine Boost
Surveillance Radar
[/quote]
I understand you put such skill for Cossack, Black, Gdansk,
which benefits from longer radas duration, but you never put
that skill to DDs that only have a smoke. What would Pampa and
Shima do with longer smoke? If you don't have an answer then
admit how misleading is that document., and admit how
brainwashed is the Wows community.
#Post#: 2275--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: ency Date: January 19, 2025, 2:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A blue Stats player performed worse than a TeamsWR=40% player,
and still argues and uses Stats as as argument.
If Stats matter then why not to be Top 1 himself?
HTML https://imgur.com/nYPtis9
HTML https://imgur.com/Sqzovh5
#Post#: 2301--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: ency Date: February 5, 2025, 12:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://replayswows.com/replay/214559#stats
1. enemy DD Marc has a ship speed advantage on a map and
dominates a cap and kills one our DD getting for his team a
score 5-6 and a cap advantages, and brags that our team is bad:
HTML https://imgur.com/kgVVSYJ
2. The bragger is replied that his highspeed DD Marc ship choice
is good only for the current one map, and not for other maps.
The enemy DD Marc replies that he has stats at 73% using the
famoues "Stats argument":
HTML https://imgur.com/0GDPT8g
3. A 40% WR person at a loosing score 5-6 replies that players
don't have ratings in team games:
HTML https://imgur.com/0GDPT8g
4. Enemy Dd Marc dies as the first ship by DD Pampa's torps,
making the score from 5-6 to 5-5:
HTML https://imgur.com/NJqB9vo
HTML https://imgur.com/m34kcVy
5. Marc's team loses the battle by kills, mainly alley DD Pampa
torps half of the enemy team. The team asks ironivcally from
silenced dead bragger DD Marc: what is your Win rate now?
HTML https://imgur.com/McSNsIm
6. The battle was lost for the 73% WR Marc on an advantageus map
and score, mainly because 40% Wr Pampa outplayed 73% player.
HTML https://imgur.com/jLIjYAw
HTML https://imgur.com/2Qjlrkr
HTML https://imgur.com/nFf6rIG
#Post#: 2305--------------------------------------------------
Re: Term: stats
By: ency Date: February 6, 2025, 3:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://replayswows.com/replay/214593#teams
1. a "Red" DD Pampa player outspotted enemy "non-Red" Salem
player, torped it, and made it obviously into a dying position,
the Wows commnuity Stats Religious player Salem said racistly
that the DD "does not deserve it":
HTML https://imgur.com/DxcKpA1
2.
HTML https://imgur.com/8XgStOk
3.
HTML https://imgur.com/fJflQMj
HTML https://imgur.com/RuMuRi9
HTML https://imgur.com/ngsm2Pq
HTML https://imgur.com/u0qXpHc
HTML https://imgur.com/D70Xodk
HTML https://imgur.com/D70Xodk
HTML https://imgur.com/MdZdhey
4.
HTML https://imgur.com/YFzcLLp
HTML https://imgur.com/b7sY6SB
*****************************************************