Jump to content


Quality Rating 2 - designed to favour non-pad gamestyles


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
170 replies to this topic

Platypusbill #61 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:34 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25545 battles
  • 3,548
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
Sorry, but your inclusion of avg XP in itself is enough to mess the formula up, and you're generalizing with the assumption that most people who use skill ratings are premium users (and those who are prem users might not have it on all the time).

Besides, Snib's many "secrets of the WoT reward system" threads show that XP gain is fairly illogical at times.

Kellomies #62 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:35 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 15159 battles
  • 4,289
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011
nerdyklaus sure is going out of his way to make himself look like a sad, sad human being. :/
(Not that there's anything wrong with that kind of thing!)

Xensation #63 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:41 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 18001 battles
  • 7,730
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012
Nerderklaus is my new favorite forum-siemapozzmoinmoin

Private_Miros #64 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25238 battles
  • 10,152
  • [EMU87] EMU87
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View PostXensation, on 08 February 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

Nerderklaus is my new favorite forum-siemapozzmoinmoin

Just 3k more battles Xen and you beat him in his own rating.

And with that nerderklaus will have proven that Xensation is the true embodiment of the freeby non-stat padder WoT-player.

Platypusbill #65 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:48 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25545 battles
  • 3,548
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
^^The fact that Nerderklaus doesn't believe in skill-WR correlation despite that elaborate graph I've posted repeatedly on the forums clearly shows that he doesn't have a good grasp on statistics.

Also, if he's so concerned about the issues with learning curve, why not just look at recent stats (say, monthly/ last 1000 battles)?

Edited by Platypusbill, 09 February 2013 - 08:57 PM.


Pretty_Pony_Princess #66 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:55 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 8037 battles
  • 685
  • Member since:
    11-30-2010
I've calculated my rating just for the comedy value. With my current 6 189 battles, my "Quality" rating is 188.02. I've made an Excel table that shows that if I suddenly decided to AFK for 2 661 battles, scoring no damage, no spotting, no cap points, no defense and no experience and keeping my average tier of 6.17, my rating would be increased 1.986 times. Yes, you read that right. My rating would get nearly doubled by doing less than nothing. If we assume that I would get at least some experience, oh boy...

Edit: It does get lower after that, but at 16 189 battles (ten frikking thousand battles with no damage, no experience...), I would still get 196 "Quality" rating, more than I have now.

Edited by Kvetoslav, 08 February 2013 - 11:00 PM.


Xensation #67 Posted 08 February 2013 - 10:59 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 18001 battles
  • 7,730
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012

View PostKvetoslav, on 08 February 2013 - 10:55 PM, said:

I've calculated my rating just for the comedy value. With my current 6 189 battles, my "Quality" rating is 188.02. I've made an Excel table that shows that if I suddenly decided to AFK for 2 661 battles, scoring no damage, no spotting, no cap points, no defense and no experience and keeping my average tier of 6.17, my rating would be increased 1.986 times. Yes, you read that right. My rating would get nearly doubled by doing less than nothing. If we assume that I would get at least some experience, oh boy...
Woking as intended™
Nerderklaus should apply for a job as a WG developer.

Falafel #68 Posted 08 February 2013 - 11:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 7955 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    12-04-2010
Private_Miros and d0va... thank you... I have never-ever-for-ever had so much fun reading WoT forum, just leave this guy alone now please? You have taken his thread, showed it right up to his ass and completly humiliated him by making him look like a "Horrible E-100 Driver" (wich he is not, denial is the 4th step in evolution to be a good player (okay in some cases it takes more than 40k battles (okay it might not never happen))).

EDIT
The formula is corrupted, as it makes you look like a better player than I am.

Edited by Falafel, 08 February 2013 - 11:53 PM.


Karwen #69 Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:34 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 148 battles
  • 242
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

View Postnerderklaus, on 08 February 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

The rating's main intention is to remove the people who easily gain 1000 addional ER/WN points for a new account. More or less all of the best players of the game are in the 5-digit area. So the important comparisons can still be done. Based on the system the game is made most people in these regions will have a premium anyway. Probably clearly over 90%. I still said some finetuning might be needed, f.e. maybe put the number in the game account to another value so that the difference between 15k and 25k battles is like 5%. Just a matter of fine tuning.

The thing is quite obvious that it would be effectful. This noob who had to make a new account for stats proofed it by how butthurt he was. A lot of people are like him, doing that, pretent to be good (even though every pato player can do what he did) and bang... This abuse can only be countere by making the game number influence the rating which is the point. Actually someone who wanted to bash with the lack of ability he obviously had provided good proof why this system perfectly archieves this goal.

The game difference makes the 40k battle player familiar with more vehicles. I think it is fair to say that ability to drive more vehicles and knowledge of more tier areas (nwer player still can be stuck in mid tiers if playing multiple trees) and such stuff justified something as the 40k battle player easily can have experience in more than 5times as much vehicles. So when it is about "overall" I think that is worth influencing. The rating still is very damage heavy which allows a gap reduction. Addionally once the criticals are in the stats (rumored to come with profile remake) there will be crits and kills taking influence too. So meaning firing in a way that every shot does damage and crit something will grant increased points again. So the difference I estimate is like comparing a 1000 ER player and a 1100 ER player without capwhoring or things like this.



Take 5 gramm at once and it is gone, mr. junkie. You can do it and make the thread dissapear.

In your case 24.000 games of experience amounts to 1000 games of experience repeated 24 times!

Of course, this is true for all other high game count players who refuse to get better.

You are a very average player and no flawed self-designed rating-system will ever hide that simple fact.

LDLT #70 Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:48 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 17899 battles
  • 30
  • Member since:
    06-01-2012

View Postnerderklaus, on 08 February 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

Advantages compared to other ratings:
-no tank choice restriction
-no abuse of cap, def and spot possible
-learning curve granted
-new accounts for stats are punished (highly effective padding method)
-more values/actions are incoporated
-things like 600 damage topgun ISU won't profit that much


-boost to self-confidence of delusional noobs

AIM_120_AMRAAM #71 Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:54 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 9641 battles
  • 730
  • [D0LAN] D0LAN
  • Member since:
    01-10-2011
This, good Sirs, is the first thread where I actually read from the OP until the last post, though I forgot what it actually was about, except some very flawed rating stuff.

I'm still laughing hard.

@TE, I hope you're familiar with Mass Effect.

Posted Image

@Everyone else: Keep this thread going, this is better than any comedy on TV. We need more laughs on this forum! Keep up the good work!

Hornet331 #72 Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:58 AM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 16285 battles
  • 3,922
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010
Oh comone guys by know everyone should know him and what his agenda is. Even with his own system there always will be players that will be a lot better then him aka beating him at his own inability to play the game better then average.

Xensation #73 Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:57 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 18001 battles
  • 7,730
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012
I found the perfect rating:

Quote

if(name==Nerderklaus) QR=9001;
else QR=0;


Kellomies #74 Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:58 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 15159 battles
  • 4,289
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011
Seems legit. :|

Junkie29 #75 Posted 09 February 2013 - 01:56 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 53717 battles
  • 270
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012
i think nerderklaus should be the unit of measure for QR...
0,3 nerderklaus for unicum....

Edited by Junkie29, 09 February 2013 - 01:57 PM.


HubertGruber #76 Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:03 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 25765 battles
  • 2,176
  • Member since:
    01-15-2011

View PostJunkie29, on 09 February 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

i think nerderklaus should be the unit of measure for QR...
0,3 nerderklaus for unicum....

I would kill myself if i reached 0.5 or higher nerderklaus rating.

Edited by HubertGruber, 09 February 2013 - 02:04 PM.


radd666 #77 Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:08 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19284 battles
  • 2,498
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostXensation, on 08 February 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

Woking as intended™
Nerderklaus should apply for a job as a WG developer.

This is just mean.  :arta:

Platypusbill #78 Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:35 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 25545 battles
  • 3,548
  • [WOOF] WOOF
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostAIM_120_AMRAAM, on 09 February 2013 - 03:54 AM, said:

This, good Sirs, is the first thread where I actually read from the OP until the last post, though I forgot what it actually was about, except some very flawed rating stuff.

I'm still laughing hard.

@TE, I hope you're familiar with Mass Effect.

Posted Image

@Everyone else: Keep this thread going, this is better than any comedy on TV. We need more laughs on this forum! Keep up the good work!
Isn't it "I'm tired of your disingenous assertions"?

I wonder how Nerderklaus is going to respond to Kvetoslav's hypothetical example  :Smile_trollface-3:

Edited by Platypusbill, 14 February 2013 - 11:36 AM.


Chillius #79 Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15714 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    02-13-2012
Oh dude, please tell me more about economics and politics.
Keep calm and dont be late with your mortgage payment. Incompetent internet storyteller.

Hippopotamus_Rex #80 Posted 14 February 2013 - 04:38 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20607 battles
  • 1,377
  • [ETOH] ETOH
  • Member since:
    04-10-2011

View Postnerderklaus, on 08 February 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:

(...) or worstnonsese6. No brain and no heart :)

Could you please explain at what exactly WN6 sucks so much? I honestly don't understand, why it is nonsense.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users