Jump to content


NoobMeter.com - WoT performance rating (player comparison tool)

noobmeter performance rating efficiency noobmeter.com performance rating efficiency rating

  • Please log in to reply
1461 replies to this topic

NoobMeter #41 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:40 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 534
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

View Postgumpbert, on 11 December 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Would you care to elaborate on exactly what was done here?
Made it harder to get unicum ratings with low battle counts and/or mostly low-tiers played.

Quote

What exactly does the penalty mechanism do and what does it affect? How much does the tier affect the result regarding damage done?
It does the aforementioned "harder to get unicum if low battle count and/or mostly low-tiers played".

It also does some special detection/processing of VK3601H w/ konisch in rare cases.

Damage dealt is evaluated based on tanks played (which also considers their tiers/types).

NoobMeter #42 Posted 11 December 2012 - 03:43 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 534
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

View Postpagandk, on 11 December 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

Do you have any plans to implement listing of performance ratings for all players in a clan?
I'm trying to add player viewing by clan right now; having some issues, it will be on whenever I resolve them.

ogremage #43 Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:30 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27812 battles
  • 1,215
  • [CRY-X] CRY-X
  • Member since:
    06-26-2011
Looks like clan viewing was added.

Cuddly_Spider #44 Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:20 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28150 battles
  • 2,672
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011
Would there be any chance of having the performance rating for the past X battles cut off after about maybe 800 so it rates the player for only the previous 800? I think that might be the best number for judging where a player is now.

Very nice job on this by the way, noobmeter.

NoobMeter #45 Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 534
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

View PostCuddly_Spider, on 12 December 2012 - 12:20 PM, said:

Would there be any chance of having the performance rating for the past X battles cut off after about maybe 800 so it rates the player for only the previous 800? I think that might be the best number for judging where a player is now.

Yes, that is possible and actually on my TODO list.

I'm just not sure what is the right number. 800? 1000?

I'm looking to hear for more feedback on this.

Quote

Very nice job on this by the way, noobmeter.
Thanks, I'm glad you appreciate it!

YukiEiriKun #46 Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:18 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9914 battles
  • 495
  • Member since:
    12-15-2011
I don't like you NoobMeter.. You make me look like the bad player I am even if I try to see myself as mediocre. ;-)
Naah, just makes me try harder. :P

Cuddly_Spider #47 Posted 12 December 2012 - 01:20 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 28150 battles
  • 2,672
  • Member since:
    08-13-2011

View PostNoobMeter, on 12 December 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Yes, that is possible and actually on my TODO list.

I'm just not sure what is the right number. 800? 1000?

I'm looking to hear for more feedback on this.

Perhaps do two?

700 and 1400? That, coupled with the overall performance, would give an instant picture of a player who is improving, declining, or remaining steady.

Mr_Sukebe #48 Posted 12 December 2012 - 02:17 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32117 battles
  • 2,623
  • [DRDB_] DRDB_
  • Member since:
    06-04-2011
Well that was a nice ego boost.  BTW, what does "unicum" really mean?

AlwaysBanned #49 Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:48 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 38077 battles
  • 164
  • [WKD] WKD
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011
The following errors occured:
Connection to WarGaming EU server failed, please try again later

is this a problem at my end or wargaming not sharing its data at present?

edit:it appears i can search for other players but not myself?

Edited by AlwaysBanned, 12 December 2012 - 08:52 PM.


Toddwjp #50 Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:25 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 8707 battles
  • 2,002
  • Member since:
    12-25-2011
Is it possible to have a rating that discounts first 1000 battles?? Thanks I like your rating for the last 150 games played rating, to show current performance

Ogroid #51 Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:59 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 30672 battles
  • 205
  • Member since:
    09-01-2010

View PostAlwaysBanned, on 12 December 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

The following errors occured:
Connection to WarGaming EU server failed, please try again later

is this a problem at my end or wargaming not sharing its data at present?

edit:it appears i can search for other players but not myself?

Same here...

tumppu75 #52 Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 17910 battles
  • 454
  • [RUNTU] RUNTU
  • Member since:
    08-01-2010
MOAR EPEEN! Seriously, all automated stat pages are ok by me, a lazy ass dude not bothering to count my own ratings.

ThaElf #53 Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 21767 battles
  • 581
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011

View PostToddwjp, on 12 December 2012 - 09:25 PM, said:

Is it possible to have a rating that discounts first 1000 battles?? Thanks I like your rating for the last 150 games played rating, to show current performance
No, unless you started when this project was started, as far as I know, there is no data available to show when where games played and what was in them. The amount of data stored is surprisingly big, but there are somethings that aren't just stored. Would make dossier file bloat quite much. ;)

View PostNoobMeter, on 12 December 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Yes, that is possible and actually on my TODO list.

I'm just not sure what is the right number. 800? 1000?
I'd say roughly 500 is enough for small number and 1k for larger sample, but I'd say it is better left even undone... The information you gather to small details is not that important. Even if I could go back in another sites history to collect every days stats and make connections for how I performed back then the info is irrelevant. The amount of data you have to store for each and everyone is to be consider for a server sided calculations as the data is always handled on that end. Also giving too much and wasting resources is undeniable when going into too much detail. Just as thinking about parsing information on the level of tank basis for weekly/montly evaluation. Too much information makes a good program complex and heavy, while giving just enough to be happy about it the goal.

Just some thoughts about for your high ambition, you say yes to all, but consider them before starting to implement, it might be more bothersome than intended and leads to unexpected frustration.

View PostNoobMeter, on 11 December 2012 - 03:40 PM, said:

Made it harder to get unicum ratings with low battle counts and/or mostly low-tiers played.

It does the aforementioned "harder to get unicum if low battle count and/or mostly low-tiers played".

It also does some special detection/processing of VK3601H w/ konisch in rare cases.

Damage dealt is evaluated based on tanks played (which also considers their tiers/types).
I would say it not players fault for farming with the konisch, it was back then plain pure statrunner for willing to pay for it, now it is quite different from what it was back then. Also detecting statistical infuencing is quite meaningless... Instead one should make more use of handpicking candidates from a list of updates because with couple of eyes, pair of brains and functional calculator one can do much more than the computer can estimate with long calculations and still be wrong.

How about implement list of 'candidates' for the top, which you can influence with your own hand writing. This would not require you to handstitch everything. They would still have their high performance ( they do fare well even if they use methods which are considered whoring the stats ).

Another thing could be for those single tank players ( some 70-80% ) that you add somewhat 'thinking' stat to them before adding them to the top lists. Maybe put very simple rules on how to get accounted there or make a separete list, absolute and relative.

- Absolute: Everything is counted, would rule out the need for scaling for tanks for performance boosting, they do perform well afterall.
- Relative: Player needs to achieve performance in several tanks instead of almost single stat tanking.

One extra idea, came from statpadding. You could make tank stats impact less if the amount of games is absurd to others. As you might be god with others, but does it count in other tanks that much... it is very harsh idea, and better be dealt with toxic resistant gloves, but something might come from it.


Yes, this is wall of text as I like stats, and talking about them... and I am bitter for Efficiency rating not evolving in the most simple manner people demand... just cut in half spot/cap/def and readjust to that. :P

BlackPawLynx #54 Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:10 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16889 battles
  • 255
  • Member since:
    05-08-2012
@ noobmeter

Several questions - that might have been asked - but are important...

1. Do you plan to introduce a feature where you can see PR by tank - individually instead of overall?

2. Will this tool be implemented for clan recruiting instead of the present - certain high ER number requirment?

3. What happened to the other thread.

Harlequin #55 Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:16 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 5174 battles
  • 112
  • Member since:
    09-06-2010
Doesn't work for me just says that it cant connect to the WOT servers Eu

Ek1981 #56 Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:22 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 1486 battles
  • 4
  • [FRD] FRD
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostNoobMeter, on 11 December 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

More than 2000 - "Unicum"
Woha. I know I might some times take bit too much for the night but crazy that a efficiency calculator tells me what to drink!
Posted Image
Why not use the English word unique or at least the original Latin one, ūnicum?

Edited by Ek1981, 13 December 2012 - 12:23 AM.


psysiphos #57 Posted 13 December 2012 - 07:57 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 17526 battles
  • 174
  • [DBBL] DBBL
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012
i think its cheesy to rough up newbies with a pimped up tier1/2 tank. why dont you account only 50/100 battles in tier1/2?

Edited by psysiphos, 13 December 2012 - 07:58 AM.


Adwaenyth #58 Posted 13 December 2012 - 08:05 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18292 battles
  • 2,759
  • [F_D] F_D
  • Member since:
    05-19-2011

View PostEk1981, on 13 December 2012 - 12:22 AM, said:

Why not use the English word unique or at least the original Latin one, ūnicum?

Because the last three letters of the word have also a meaning in english.  :tongue:

NoobMeter #59 Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:28 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 534
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

View PostAlwaysBanned, on 12 December 2012 - 08:48 PM, said:

The following errors occured:
Connection to WarGaming EU server failed, please try again later

is this a problem at my end or wargaming not sharing its data at present?

edit:it appears i can search for other players but not myself?

http://www.noobmeter...eu/AlwaysBanned

AlwaysBanned
Performance rating (overall):  1,520 (Good)

Works now for me.

What happens is that:
a) WG site is sometimes overloaded and/or down
b) The proxy that my hosting provider uses grabs that "server is down page" and caches it
c) So for a short while any requests for the players that have been searched while WG site was down will fail, even if WG site is up now

That is an unfortunate technical limitation; if I had known this thing will end up so popular, I would have designed it a bit differently from the start, but for now moving to a different approach is a bit difficult.

Sorry about that.

NoobMeter #60 Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:29 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1 battle
  • 534
  • Member since:
    11-14-2012

View PostBlackPawLynx, on 13 December 2012 - 12:10 AM, said:

@ noobmeter

Several questions - that might have been asked - but are important...

1. Do you plan to introduce a feature where you can see PR by tank - individually instead of overall?
No, that is not really possible - not enough data from WG.

Quote

2. Will this tool be implemented for clan recruiting instead of the present - certain high ER number requirment?
Clans are free to choose to do it. I think it would make sense, as a high ER is not very meaningful.

Quote

3. What happened to the other thread.
It disappeared. I don't know why, I didn't ask for it to be deleted. It puzzled me, but then I just recreated it again.





Also tagged with noobmeter, performance, rating, efficiency, noobmeter.com, performance rating, efficiency rating

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users