Everyone’s Stats Obsessed
Statistics are becoming an ever more popular feature in online games, especially those with a competitive element. Whether it’s because players like to brag, improve their skills, or need good stats to get entry into a clan, they’ve now become an indispensable element to any online game worth its salt.
Yet these are not without fault for two reasons. The first is obvious: Player-made systems tend to favour what the player who made them thinks is important. The second is a core problem with Wargaming – they either do not record statistics on a number of key things, or they include them within their dossier cache or API. Areas such as damage done upon spotting, damage done to vehicles you’ve tracked, or damage taken are seemingly done away with for no known reason. In addition to this, no system apart from Wargaming’s own rating system takes into account normalised Experience, because that data is not published by Wargaming.
WHAT DO THESE SYSTEMS MEAN TO ME? SHOULD I CARE?

This is the default view of the latest XVM – showing total number of battles, WN7 score, overall win ratio, number of battles in tank currently being used, and your win ratio in it. Had World of Tanks been around in Darwin’s time, he may well have given his theory of evolution a second thought…it takes effort to be that bad after 13,000 battles.
Rating systems
Efficiency
DAMAGE * (10 / (TIER + 2)) * (0.21 + 3*TIER / 100)
FRAGS * 250 +
SPOT * 150 +
log(CAP + 1,1.732) +
DEF * 150
- Bad – 0 to 649
- Below Average – 650 to 859
- Average – 860 to 1139
- Good – 1140 to 1459
- Great – 1460 to 1734
- Unicum – 1735+
The idea here is that an average player would fall into the 48-49% win ratio category – which is the current win rate average across World of Tanks.
WN7
(1240-1040/(MIN(TIER,6))^0.164)*FRAGS
+DAMAGE*530/(184*e^(0.24*TIER)+130)
+SPOT*125*MIN(TIER, 3)/3
+MIN(DEF,2.2)*100
+((185/(0.17+e^((WINRATE-35)*-0.134)))-500)*0.45
-[(5 – MIN(TIER,5))*125] / [1 + e^( ( TIER – (GAMESPLAYED/220)^(3/TIER) )*1.5 )]
What this shows is a sliding scale of penalisation. If your average Tier is under V you’ll be penalised with maximum deduction at Tier 1. It also scales with number of battles played, so a new player who’s working up through the Tiers sees a reduced penalty
- Very Bad – Under 500
- Bad – 500 to 699
- Below Average – 700 to 899
- Average – 900 to 1099
- Good – 1100 to 1349
- Very Good – 1350 to 1499
- Great – 1500 to 1699
- Unicum – 1700 to 1999
- Super Unicum – 2000+
Performance Rating
- Bad Player – 0 to 1150
- Below Average Player – 1150 to 1250
- Average Player – 1250 to 1450
- Good Player – 1450 to 1750
- Great Player – 1750 to 1950
- Excellent Player1950 to 2000
- Unicum – 2000+
So what are the pros and cons of PR? It’s hard to say, because they do not publish the exact algorithm. This reason alone is a negative, leading to accusations from some members of the community that the score is engineered to make some players look better than others, i.e. the creators and their friends. It is, however, worth noting that a players PR score often tallies with their WN7 score – if one goes up or down, so does the other. In addition to this, the creators of Performance Rating do explain – often at length – some of the elements that go into making up PR, including what tanks are considered overpowered and Tier pentalies.
So while there are arguments about PR’s validity, it is a consistent method of rating players. If the owners considered publication of the full algorithm, WN would get a serious contender. The other downside of PR is it’s only available on noobmeter.com, whereas WN and Efficiency are available on a number of sites and in-game mods.
Wargaming’s Player Rating
Understanding stat padding
First penalty threshold:
clearedFromPenalties1 = 1500
expectedMinBattles1 = 500
expectedMinAvgTier1 = 6Second penalty threshold:
clearedFromPenalties2 = 1900
expectedMinBattles2 = 2000
expectedMinAvgTier2 = 7
Statistics sites and tools
noobmeter
Wotlabs
vBaddict – Performance Analyzer
Exactly how did someone get that far into the lake?!