If a stronger country is formed, if it does not enter the dogfight, the weaker country will be left. This is unfair to solo players. For example, the top American team has such a low winning rate, which is largely due to the fact that it is paired with the Soviet Union and Germany
Video game
4 Likes
The reason for US win rates being poor is a lack of functional support vehicles and of general player skill. Britain and Israel both suffer similarly.
The real outlier is Italy which also features similarly poor lineup potential at top tier.
1 Like
<2% of the active playerbase is used for that chart.
Not a meaningful source for player skill let alone anything else.
7 Likes
3 Likes
@CinnamonToePunch @PyroAddict the playerbase which connects this data is of “skilled players”
Given this is over 20,000 games a day it is more than enough sample size to make opinions from. Gaijin does not release full player data so there is equally no other choice but than to rely on this information.
The sample being collected from “skilled players” rather than unskilled players also lends credence to the win rates since it’s not bogged down by premium buyers who are level 9.
1 Like
K.
The conservative estimate for matches per day is 864,000 based on an active playercount of 100,000 / average match size of 20, * 6 matches per hour.
In reality, the number is likely closer to 18 average match size, and 8 matches per hour, with a significantly higher player count making the daily matches over 1 million.
There were 127,000 nukes dropped in a singular month.
Even with a low estimate of 26,000,000 matches per month… that’s 1 in 204 matches, which is about correct.
So 2% as agreed
I won’t consider a niche data abandonware used mostly by veterans as a reliable portrait of how the game’s doing throughout the ranks.
You just gave an excellent argument of why that chart is inherently gimped towards a positive standard deviation. WT data project is an honest initiative with a significant flaw that is not considering players of any level of performance (just the veterans that joined the project).
Don’t fall in the illusion of justifying everything with some green or orange boxes made by 3rd party users.
Do we know that for a fact? if what you say is true then on what do you blame the terrible showing of German at WW2 BR where it has one of the strongest and most complete line ups in the game?
Actually I could have extended that up to at least 6BR which would be the Tiger/Panther BR
1 Like
It makes sense in places maybe but not others.
What do you use?
If you balance around the lowest common denominator you will very quickly ruin your game.
Yes you can see what vehicles are available to the US ingame.
I am not seeing vehicle or even line up quality reflected in the chart as I would expect.
Japan has next to nothing at top tier and as I say Germany is terrible.
Maybe this would be more relevant if the teams fought alone but they don’t do they?
Win rate does not reflect a good player having a good game in a good vehicle. The stats even if they are correct are open to interpretation.
Top tier is very different from low tier I would not compare the two.
Germany has the highest player base for low tiers to my understanding, hence the poor performance. There is also an argument to be made that their vehicles aren’t great. The Tiger and Panther are okay, but the Panzer IVs are slow with middling armor. The gun is good but you need knowledge to get to a position to use it effectively not to mention where to aim.
It takes the data from Thunderskill and compiles it.
They have 3 capable MBTs the best F-15 in the game and the Type 81C which is effective against low flying targets.
Yes I am stating how I interpret them.
I think for the chart you have to compare them as it means the same thing irrelevant of BR.
I don’t see how having a huge choice of players makes it poorer ,it would be the opposite surely.
Again that is a matter for debate and in GRB you have CAS to consider.
The other areas of the chart really pour water on your conclusions.Actually they pour water on my conclusions as well.
The OP is muddled but I see mostly mixed nations in games and rarely single nation vs nation.I also dont see the chart play out when I play .I mean who does apart from those who say they play the USA?
I am not seeing Germany at low tiers losing every time ,far from it.Unless you can make a convincing argument for Germany at mid BR then you can’t make one for the USA at top tier.
US CAS is dominant throughout all tiers. It’s a very convenient control group.
The question for nations is whether their CAS is equal to or better than US CAS and whether their ground lineup is better.
For low tier Germany there isn’t a clear dominance. For high tier their ground lineup now after the addition of spall liners is clearly better. The Leopard 2A6 / 7 is better than the current Abrams modeling ingame. The Flakrakrad although the worst of top tier NATO SPAAs armed with the VT-1 missile is capable of engaging targets out to 11KM, the ADATs struggles against targets at 8KM.
German air is much less potent. But Russian air outranges available SPAA options for all nations. Combine the best ground lineup ingame (ignoring Sweden) with the best CAS options and voila you have the dominance OP’s opening statement is complaining about.
There is much to support the USA having trouble at top tier even if you don’t play it that much.
I have seen many videos from content creators struggling with the USA due to how the vehicles are implemented. They simply dont work as they should like Odbawls failure to gain lock with the A10 and general surprise when using the M1 and getting killed so easily.
It’s all kind of off topic,not that I am even sure what the OP means.I just can’t get my head around that chart,I could if Germany were not so poor all the way up.
Are the conclusions just assumptions? Anybody can show a chart but it is open to debate what it means and if the info was collected correctly.I’m not convinced that anybody has explored what the chart means in any detail.
Simply put ,anybody could say it’s player skill issue and or player reliance on vehicles ,could be player IQ per nation or poor internet,player base age or the amount of consoles used or anything and what evidence would we have to say it is not?
1 Like