So WT’s round is allegedly under-performing by 5mm at 60, and allegedly over-peroforming by 4mm at 30, and 40mm at 0.
I guess we will just ignore that it is over performing by more than 80mm…
Yeah, that is completely broken.
40mm isn’t “more than 80mm”.
What is 321 - 280?
Answer: 41. Not 80, not more than 80.
So, it’s been pointed out before, that “data” is obviously nonsense. You don’t have to look at any other planes or tanks, just look at that one.
I mean the math is pretty clear:
Kills (K)/Battles (B) = 5.6
K/Deaths (D) = 4.87
K = 5.6B
K = 4.87D
5.6B = 4.87D
D= 5.6B/4.87
D/B= 5.6/4.87
D/B= 1.15
So according to Thunderskills the Object 279 on average is dying 1.15 times per RB battle it plays in. Even granting the use of backups, surely that’s not plausible, given the maximum possible you can die in any one vehicle is twice.
It doesn’t take long in the Stats to find airplanes in RB that are dying more than once per battle on average, or tanks (such as the British Stuart III) that are reportedly dying more than twice per battle, which is totally impossible. No, those vehicle stats pages are broken, have been for a long while.
(Also, the site’s abandonware, and no one really knows who has access to the backdoor at the moment, or how patched its servers are. If you’re on it please, please put 2FA on your Gaijin account, and also change your registration email password if it’s anywhere close to your War Thunder one and you’re not using a burner email. A data breach really just seems a matter of time.)
PS: I’m sure people are right the 279 is broken, just OP’s evidence for that is not particularly good. All I’m saying.
1 Like
Britain was insane with volumetric, Caernarvon was the most played vehicle and they had like 80% winrates at 6.7, now these vehicles are 7.3 and 7.7
Why would an average of 1.15 not be possible?
With planes it’s at least possible to die twice in battle, technically more often I assume but that’d be very difficult and I have never seen it.
Stuart III according to their stats dies 2.3 times per battle played.
Also having a significantly higher chance of death per battle than most other vehicles over the last month doesn’t really jive with people saying it’s super survivable.
1 Like
I don’t know the logic behind the ground frags per battle, I never paid attention to it.
There’s no logic to understand, there’s just some significant errors in some of their math functions behind the percentages and graphs that were pointed out years ago but they never bothered to fix. Because, again, abandonware. It’s a zombie site that has been left to run until the server dies.
If you want more evidence, just look at the main page graph, statistics tab, for battle efficiency, which dropped 50% for all players from February to July before coming back to where it was. For five months the average player was “very poor” apparently. Even though no one actually saw any changes on their personal efficiency at the same time that matched that. (The efficiency stat is a complete black box too, btw, no one knows how it’s calculated, just that it always seems to go a little bit up each time you log in. Funny that.)
Look, I’ve given up trying to convince people the comparative stats on a dead site shouldn’t count for much, if “line goes up” makes someone happy why should I care? But please think about what personal data you’ve left with that site if you are a part of it, that’s a disaster waiting to happen.
1 Like
All people do is find the most niche vehicle with the smallest sample size and say it’s bad, yet if you you look up a player he has 1 to 1 stats to what is shown in game, and every vehicle you know is OP is shown as such on TS, just like every vehicle is shown to be bad.
Having used the site for many years, I’d cross reference Gaijin’s BR changes with the vehicles on TS and every time it showed it was a highly performing vehicle.
It’s not perfect, and without knowing the math behind everything, who knows… I don’t know how they calculate efficiency so I can’t troubleshoot why it would drop either, for all I know there was a ton of bots and cheaters just going ham on the game making everyone else look bad as it’s a relative stat, but I don’t care about it anyways.
Just use it to look up commonly played vehicle and it’s always seemed more than fine, the 70% winrate for the BVM that has stood for years now isn’t based on nothing iether.
And there is no alternative, I’d rather check out TS than rely on anecdotal evidence and bold claims.
ThunderSkill is the definition of anecdote.
I’m not sure if that’s what it means.
In game it is listed at 364mm. It should be 280mm. That is 84mm more performance or about 30%.
No, in-game it is 321 at 1000 meters, not 364.
Read your own source, there is no 10 meter test.
“Sample size” has nothing to do with the mathematical operation of division, ma dude. Lots of vehicles have a K/B > K/D, which is pretty much impossible unless they’re only ever used with a backup by everyone, all the time. Lot of backups being handed out in the game these days, but not that many.
“Bots and cheaters” can’t halve the efficiency, whatever that means, for the membership of a site that you have to sign up for yourself to be part of, either, at least not without everyone noticing they were suddenly “poor” players, that’s just a totally broken graph, that like everything else will never be fixed.
Site’s broken and was long ago abandoned by its creator, use at your own risk. All I’m saying.
1 Like
So no matter how you flip it.
- The gun is over performing.
- The armor is way over performing.
- The acceleration is over performing.
- The reload is over performing.
The list of problems with the 279 just continues to grow. And people like you are saying “well it shouldn’t go up in BR because then it has to face guns that kill it”… Completely makes sense.
Literally fits the definition or russian propaganda / bias. You guys sure do try really hard to defend something that shouldn’t be tolerated.
The armor is being lol-penned by HEATFS, I wouldn’t call that over-performing.
Acceleration is rather on-point, it’s more along the lines that every other cold war tank is underperforming a bit.
Reload over-performing I haven’t seen evidence of yet.
I accept the gun tho, but it’s only over-performing at 0 degrees.
Of course it is. And it’s not just about the military vehicles in the game. Events, stickers, moderation… You just have to get used to it…