Don’t try and make my statements for me, especially if you’re going to say I’m showing my arse, after this guy accused me of not doing maths or stats or some nonsense…
Well, have you done the math, do you understand statistics and do you think a player who does nothing, will have the same winrate as a player who tries, or even does well?
Have you done the math because XXX% of stats are made up on the spot…
This is absolute nonsense, and it doesn’t have any basis in stats.
Can you explain why it’s wrong because it makes perfect sense to me. I’m seeing that a player who has a higher 50% likelihood of winning a match has this statistic due to their contributions to the team, whether it’s caps, kills, assists, etc.
It seems to me like you’re of the opinion that a players effort has nothing to do with the winrate and it’s purely up to random chance as you can’t influence the particular team you get in each match.
Because it’s made up, that’s why… And whilst it makes sense to you, you’re ignoring the point that a player can have all the caps, all the kills, and still lose, and they can do nothing and still win…
It’s nothing about the averages or the stats, because they don’t have access to that, they’re merely speculating…
I feel you are projecting about the arse, because you’re trying to make out I have to be wrong, because you think the data supports his assumption.
1 Like
It’s not data that supports his assumptions, it’s the principles of statistical relationships.
Philosophical takes don’t cut it here, you’re exposing your arse…
Fine, there’s no pleasing you.
You’re the one saying my arse is out for no reason… You’ve got no basis to say that the stats are accurate and it’s nothing to do with being pleased…
If you’ll accept ‘Average Relative Position on Team’ as a fair indication of player contribution, I just did a simple linear regression where winrate was the dependent variable is %winrate and the independent variable being %Average Relative Position on Team
I took a sample of 137 players from the leaderboard in ground realistic battles in numerical order from position 1 to 156 sorted for PVP rating (highest PVP rating being 1 lowest being 156) To explain the difference between 156 and 137, some of the players in the leaderboard were missing stats for either ARP or winrate for what ever reason (Taken from the game client)
Average WR was 58.93% and Average ARP was 67.16%
Standard Dev for winrate was 8.45 and for ARP 13.19
r^2 was 0.746674 which in my estimation would indicate that approximately 75% of the variance in winrate is explained by Average Relative Position of the player in the Team. Which if you accept Average Relative Position in Team as an indication of individual contribution you might agree by my calculations that the player skill accounts for 75% of what contributes to their winrate.
Discussion:
I selected the sample from the highest performing players sorted for PVP rating which from what I understand ranks player by SL earnings (I could be wrong). By selecting from the top players ranked on this criteria there is every reason to question how representative my sample is compared to the rest of the war thunder player base. However, I would argue that these players are either consciously or subconsciously working hard to achieve the best results, and it would appear that in this sample it would indicate that individual player performance to the degree that it contributes to ‘average relative position’ is also determining their winrate. Below is a quick graph of the sample with an excel trend line attached to it. I have not calculated a line of best fit but the results suggest that higher ARP predicts higher Winrate.
1 Like
This suggestion would only work if there was no grinding or progression and SL was only used for cosmetic. Otherwise this would legitimately kill the game.
Bro is not cooking with this one
1 Like
No, stop trying to make a statement from their obtuse throwout.
It was nothing at all to do with stats what they drew from winrate…
If he drew the winrate to mean everything you put forth, then yes, he is wrong… Fundamentally wrong.
I’m not sure I follow Doc, I took FrogofWar as making the case that player skill whether good or bad has an impact on their respective winrate.
And that you’re of the opinion that winrate is not determined by player skill because you think that random battles and teammates outweighs the individual player’s contribution.
Regardless of what either of you think, I’ve determined that 75% of what determines a players winrate is explained by ARP, and I’m equating ARP to skill.
Cool story but the winrate is more leaning to your teams success than your relative performance, hence why him saying that if you get 10 kills, you’re going to have a higher winrate is just straight up ignorant, and for you to try make an argument where they’re right, whilst previously saying my arse was hanging out, is just you trying to make an argument.
Winrate doesn’t directly corelate to the players kills and caps, as you needed to bring that formula in to make a scattergraph, but still it’s not all encompassing nor is it directly related.
You brought that formula in to make the argument, but the positioning that was put forth is in error, and whilst you’ll get a nice proportion and you can paint it out as however you want, it’s misrepresented against their prior submission.
“Philosophical takes don’t cut it here”
Winrate doesn’t directly corelate to the players kills and caps, as you needed to bring that formula in to make a scattergraph, but still it’s not all encompassing nor is it directly related.
I never said that winrate was directly correlated to the players kills and caps. Instead, I compared winrates and the metric “Average Relative Position” and found that across my sample that Average Relative Position account for 75% of the variance in winrate.
As I am equating ARP to skill, I have therefor concluded that there is a strong relationship between player skill and winrate.
Your formula you made out proves him right, ignores that ARP wasn’t a factor in his statement, and it doesn’t carry over the kills or caps into your formula.
So I’d truely wonder if you are able to claim to be a stats wiz, or just a gate maker…
That’s what he actually said though, and you’re trying to validate that by making other things count… Stop trying desperatly to prove me wrong just because you’re that caught up on it…
Stop trying to validate his premise when his first true response was to be insulting…
You’re being pedantic. He is making the case that player skill across time/matches is what detemines winrate. You’re choosing to hang onto the fact that he used the 10 kill example.
I’m not trying to prove him right, I agree with the sentiment. I was curious for my own sake because it seems pretty depressing that there’s no link between skill and winrate.
When I looked at all the raw data, it was kind of depressing because in my own service record I have tanks with shit k/d but high winrates, tanks with very high k/d and high winrates and it all seemed a bit random. I’ve got all the screenshots of the leaderbaords I checked so I’m going to see what I get for Average mission score. I chose ARP because it also factors how well your team was going because the random teammates thing is still a factor. I think ARP helps balance out a player that only does well when everyone else is bad, vs a player that does well when everyone else on the team is really good.
1 Like