Reworked Personal Rating formula

Hello everyone,

this personal rating formula was reworked in 8.10, but somehow, it eluded players’ attention. Since patch 8.10, the Wargaming Personal Rating formula looks like this:


win – winrate (from 0 to 1)
surv – survival rate (from 0 to 1)
dmg – average damage per battle
bc – total amount of battles played
bc8.8 – amount of battles played from the point of patch 8.8 release
xp8.8 – average XP per battle (without premium account, from the point of patch 8.8 release)
radio8.8 – average damage done after your spotting (from the point of patch 8.8 release)
track8.8 – average damage done after you detracking the opponent (from the point of patch 8.8 release)

31 thoughts on “Reworked Personal Rating formula

  1. Next to nobody cares about it, as everyone, who thinks about stats thinks about WNx or simply Win Ratio.

      • Well if they would have some kind of ranking page where you could see your rank, I think that people would care more about it, but they dont.

        • First of all, still worse than WN*.
          Secondly, it’s pretty meaningless, WG just doesn’t understand the basic thing about player rating, like about most stuff in their own game. All that PR gives a player is some number. He isn’t informed if it’s bad, good or just average. PR does basicly nothing.

              • I am mutch better after 10k battle then after 1k, I call it “experiance” – and not this silly numbers on wot, but beter adaptating to situation on battlefield. So this logic is mathematicaly correct.

                • Sorry but this is based on false assumption.

                  1. Logic is a method and not an answer.
                  2. That you are much better after 10k games is an assumption and unproven, hence not mathematical in the slightest.
                  3. There are many players with far more games than I who seem to play just to die. Perhaps this is their version of “better” but I wouldn’t value it much myself.

                  A rating system is needed to form competition which is where this game survives.

                  Also a rating system and stats can show you where you could improve. Also necessary in a game based on competition.

    • But only from 8.8 and up.
      Players that played a lot of scouts before 8.8 are still handicaped.

      And for example, WN8, althought it doesn’t take assist damage in account, uses some adjusted stats for the scouts from their tank stats table.

  2. I do not know which ranking is best, but this one does seem to be fairly reliable. The only way to pad this is to actually play well and it does not get fooled by rerolls.

        • Every rating can be padded in a way or another.I was talking about the padding with OP tanks which is much harder than it was before due to the tank stats table that it takes into account.

  3. Epen contest!
    (It’s about WG sitting there with their fat asses enjoying watching players putting more money into their pocket to get more advantage in achieving higher ratings… Oh I just though of so many horrible historical figures)

  4. I’m surprised that most here don’t realize that it’s intentionally useless for measuring a player’s skill in the way that WNx does; if the gold-spamming, Tier 8 premium-buying tomatoes were told by the game itself that they were bad, they would deny it as usual and leave for another game, saying that it sucks and doesn’t rely on skill.

    The reason that WG wants it to scale with battles played is so that those players buy more and think that they’re good, and frankly, with them being a business out to make profit, I can’t blame them for that. No need to QQ over it, just use WNx and try not to be a douche while using it.

    • Before spouting off like that: patch 8.8 is where they started actually tracking spotting damage etc, hence they cannot apply those data from before.8.8. Bit of a no-brainer really, but some people just need something to nag about hey?

  5. Has anyone noticed wild changes in their PR after playing a team battle?
    It regularly happens to me that my PR drops like 40 points after playing my first team battle of the day (regardless of loss or win). Afterwards it stabilizes and it goes back to more or less where I started.

  6. As usual every time this is mentioned people completely misread the formula and just to their usual conclusions.

    The battle count effect tails off pretty fast e.g on some avg stats 100 battle to 1000 ups your rating by 84%, but 1000 to 5000 only increase it by 20% and 5000 to 10000 is just 4% (assuming I typed it right).

    They’ve got rid of the silly accuracy stuff so I I’m happy enough with it but since they hide it from the website I really don’t know what mine is!

  7. The problem I have with all the current ratings is they are all not time relevant at the moment. I could care less about the overall as it is mostly meaningless. What I want to know is how I or someone else is currently doing.
    So I would much prefer a rating that only used something like the last 1000 battles for the players overall and for each tank you would have a rating based on last 50 or so.

    Same goes for winrate, I want to see it scoped within the same time period, last 1000 for overall and about last 50 for each tank