Jump to content


Unofficial EU Server Statistics

Data from 26. November 2012

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
1138 replies to this topic

Snib #1 Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:00 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 4,911
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010

Posted Image


Statistics time!

The data comes from player profiles made available by Wargaming, similar to the ones here. It is all the data I have, but I have all this data, so if you want any stat looked at that is on the profiles but that I did not write about feel free to request it. It is pointless to ask for anything that is not on those profiles.

Important: While the data comes from an official source, this analysis of it is strictly unoffical and Wargaming will refuse to comment on it as per their policy.

All numbers are rounded to the second decimal (battles per player are rounded to integers).

Tank specific stats are for the period from 7. November 2012 to 23.-26. November 2012 (game version 0.8.1).

Previous data can be found in the post below.


Account stats
Player numbers and more.

Spoiler                     

Performance stats
The average player in the spotlight.

Spoiler                     

Achievements
Are you special?

Spoiler                     

Most played tanks, tiers, nations
Popularity contest

Spoiler                     

Players by tanks played
The grind to the top

Spoiler                     

Best and worst 5 tanks by win ratio
What tank is really strong and what tank could use a boost?

Spoiler                     

Best 10 tanks by global win ratio
What tanks are driven by the best players?

Spoiler                     

Nation ranking
Russian bias or not?

Spoiler                     

Stats for each tank
Each tank in the spotlight on their own.

Spoiler                     

Stats for each tank II
Now we are only looking at how players playing several tanks of the same class and tier perform

Spoiler                     


Snib #2 Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:04 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 18888 battles
  • 4,911
  • Member since:
    07-16-2010
Archive:

Stats from 27. September 2012 to 7. November 2012 (game versions 0.8.0 and 0.8.1)

Spoiler                     

Stats from 23. August 2012 to 27. September 2012 (game version 0.7.5)

Spoiler                     

Stats from 31. July 2012 to 23. August 2012 (game version 0.7.5)

Spoiler                     


Due to post content length limitations, older stats can be found in

Other sources:



Merquise #3 Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:16 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 25109 battles
  • 4,613
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-25-2011
Hmm...
Win ratio really doesn't say anything to me.
Do you also have 'damage per battle' stats?


edit: didn't thank you for the effort you put into this so: thnx :)

edit2: remind me to never buy the Jagdtiger....

GameBanger #4 Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:32 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29851 battles
  • 324
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011
Best and worst 3 tanks by win ratio
>>>
Highest win ratio:
PzKpfw S35 739 (f): 54.18% - I have this tank on my "to get list", but it's after Valentine.
---
Highest win ratio (150+ battles):
MS-1: 56.28% - It's unstoppable :lol:
------------------------------------------------
Average win ratio for all tanks of a nation combined
>>>
  • USSR: 48.96%
  • USA: 48.91%
  • Germany: 48.91%
I would have guessed Germany duo to the introduction of the E-series Especially in the heavy and SPG department. But this might change to that in a few moths. Unless the new tanks of USSR.
------------------------------------------------
Stats for each tank
Heavy Tanks
KV
- :lol: I looked at player and battles and went oh s*** - 5551416953053 and then :facepalmic:
----
Medium Tanks
PzKpfw V-IV - :huh:
------------------------------------------------

Than-Q for the post


generalgrant #5 Posted 16 November 2011 - 04:43 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13077 battles
  • 680
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011
Thanks Snib, this is very interesting http://forum.worldof...le_Default.gif.

I take it by the fact that the four Tier 10 tanks all have win ratios of over 50% that clan battles are included in the stats?  Clan battles distort the stats, mostly in favour of top-tier tanks, as the battle match-ups aren't necessarily even.  Do you have similar stats that exclude clan battles?

Homer_J #6 Posted 16 November 2011 - 05:05 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 17791 battles
  • 13,645
  • [AXIOM] AXIOM
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010
You realise you will ruin your rep with this thread don't you? :P

Merquise #7 Posted 16 November 2011 - 05:06 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 25109 battles
  • 4,613
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-25-2011

View PostHomer_J, on 16 November 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

You realise you will ruin your rep with this thread don't you? :P


I gave him +1 just to make him angry.
And another +1.

GameBanger #8 Posted 16 November 2011 - 05:09 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29851 battles
  • 324
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostHomer_J, on 16 November 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

You realise you will ruin your rep with this thread don't you? :P

Nothing that a hate post wont fix. If i was him... either KV or type 59. THERE WILL BE HUNDREDS OF NEGATIVE REPS! :lol:

PadyEos #9 Posted 16 November 2011 - 06:47 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 14598 battles
  • 2,531
  • Member since:
    11-13-2010
Yeah he really hates getting +1, so let's annoy him, now about the win ratio stats, I used to be convinced that win ratio was fair and that the number made the stats relevant but that was back in my noob days, now I'm sure the matchmaker pairs good players with a team of noobs. Evidence any good players stats vs any bad players stats, after 200-300 battles most of the bad players have better win ratio even tough the good players do 2-3x damage/battles, have way more average xp, way more kills, way better hit ratio. Evidenced by the fact that the win ration doesn't change that much as you go up to players with 5000+ battles. It's just the truth that WG has been hiding from us for about 2-3 months...

Reichsfackel #10 Posted 16 November 2011 - 07:32 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10550 battles
  • 2,157
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
Interesting stats, thanks for the info. At least we know now that the upcoming nerf of the E-Series has no balance/gameplay reasons, but only "historical" reasons. ;)

Goblin_5 #11 Posted 16 November 2011 - 07:46 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8226 battles
  • 255
  • Member since:
    05-04-2011
3001P, JgPz.IV, M7, M6, M3 Lee and A-20 still underperforming like always, some things never change. The poor win ratio on the KV-13 seems odd seeing how they always perform well when I encounter one. 3601 and Jumbo going strong on tier 6, wonder if it's the survivability helping there.

GameBanger #12 Posted 16 November 2011 - 07:52 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29851 battles
  • 324
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

View PostGoblin_5, on 16 November 2011 - 07:46 AM, said:

3001P, JgPz.IV, M7, M6, M3 Lee and A-20 still underperforming like always, some things never change. The poor win ratio on the KV-13 seems odd seeing how they always perform well when I encounter one. 3601 and Jumbo going strong on tier 6, wonder if it's the survivability helping there.

Lately the KV-13s I've seen are under-performing on battle. Maybe it's just the MM giving me poor players. But i think it's because many that get the KV-13 have mainly been playing as heavys, as some of them seen to been playing the KV-13 as a if it's a heavy tank.

Pro-Tip: KV-13 is a medium play it as a medium! :P

adilehanceanu #13 Posted 16 November 2011 - 07:58 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16678 battles
  • 710
  • [CDP] CDP
  • Member since:
    02-03-2011

Quote

...plus the PzKpfw V-IV Alpha vastily outperforms the identical PzKpfw V-IV (apparently the limited number of owners of the Alpha version are simply better players than the owners of the non-Alpha version)...

Either I'm blind or you based the above affirmation on not shown data in you post, but I see no significant difference between Alpha and non-Alpha :). It's true that a non-alpha user may have been less skilled than an alpha owner (to get an alpha you needed to play at least for 3 weeks before release, in case you receive it for translation services), but both versions are the same piece of crap (well, for few days after the release they were good enough, but after that no more).

Congratulations :)

Garegaupa #14 Posted 16 November 2011 - 08:24 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 6449 battles
  • 20
  • Member since:
    06-22-2011
An interesting read, Snib! Great work! :Smile_honoring:

(And your statistics show me what I basically already knew: That I fit quite comfortably within the realms of the average in this game! ;) )

Wriothesley #15 Posted 16 November 2011 - 08:24 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 50 battles
  • 1,652
  • [1BP] 1BP
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011
How long it took to collect and then process the data?
How much space they take?

Edit.
Yeh... poor JPnzr IV - clearly it needs buffs, but devs don't care... (maybe it killed someone's ancestor?)

PzGrenKdr #16 Posted 16 November 2011 - 08:36 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 21378 battles
  • 2,644
  • [ZER0] ZER0
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
E-50 performe worser than other T) mediums but will be nerved in v0.7, great.

_Zurk_ #17 Posted 16 November 2011 - 09:10 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 9392 battles
  • 33
  • [1ESC] 1ESC
  • Member since:
    12-02-2010
russian tanks still perform better overall than other nations. IRL it was not like this at all with the russians being considerably worse.
they should just use historically accurate tanks and forget the balance.

adilehanceanu #18 Posted 16 November 2011 - 09:19 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16678 battles
  • 710
  • [CDP] CDP
  • Member since:
    02-03-2011

View PostPzGrenKdr, on 16 November 2011 - 08:36 AM, said:

E-50 performe worser than other T) mediums but will be nerved in v0.7, great.

Please mind that statistics for E-50/Panther/Panther II are not so accurate because when they make the changes for E-50 insertion in game, E-50 got the existing statistics for Panther II, Panther II received the stats from Panther and Panther starts from zero; maybe in a year or so the effect of these changes will not significantly skew the stats.

JimmyBond #19 Posted 16 November 2011 - 09:25 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 26484 battles
  • 342
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostPzGrenKdr, on 16 November 2011 - 08:36 AM, said:

E-50 performe worser than other T) mediums but will be nerved in v0.7, great.

Not forgetting the E75 - which has consistently been stated to be the strongest tier 9 heavy tank... yet lo and behold its the IS4 that comes out on top!
So couple that with the nerf to make every other hit to the front of the E75 blow the engine, the IS4 will reign supreme by miles once again!

So now thats the E50 and E75 destroyed in one fell swoop... another tremendous move to balance tanks that need boosting not nerfing????????????

Ronin81 #20 Posted 16 November 2011 - 09:25 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20971 battles
  • 648
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011
Very good job.

I was very surprised to see that the KV-5 is amongst the 3 lowest win ratio tanks