Read my stats

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • I agree that your eco and military balance is good, and your KD/province ratios are good; however, As many of your maps are "easy," these stats may be a bit skewed. You have 4 22-player, and 4 historic maps as your top-played maps. As we all know, 22's are filled with new players, and historic maps are imbalanced. Pick the right nation and historic maps are a cakewalk.

      With that said, I am well aware that my own stats have been bolstered by the fact that I test things out in 22's quite frequently, so I am guessing some of your own is the same.
      Eminem2891
      Game Operator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

      Click here to submit a bug report or support ticket
    • The stats seem fine but they don't say much. This player has been playing only easy maps that are loved by beginners being 22p, 10p and 25p. With high inactivity on those maps and more experience then the other players it's easy to solo those maps. The question I'm asking is how would the stats look like when the player starts playing 50p and 100p maps?Obviously this player hasn't met real contenders yet. His stats look promising and I'm cureous how they would evolve when the player challenges himself.

      The K/D ratio is good, province retainment ratio could be better but I've seen worse. There's a good balance between militairy and economy so there's little gold involved if you ask me.

      This player should apply for the Regulators alliance as we are curently recruiting, if he speaks English of course.
      BMfox
      Moderator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh
    • nemuritor98 wrote:

      Seems like a funny thread,

      How would you read this:
      As above said, no wins in 103 matches is not a good mark. Based on your KD, I would say you just don't finish your matches. Your province ratio is also concerning - seems to me you never really grow, just kinda maintain. I can understand being around a 2-3, especially if you play a lot of 100's without solid allies as it is often necessary to give up ground to maintain your troops, but I just can't get over that 0/103 stat count!
      Eminem2891
      Game Operator
      EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

      Click here to submit a bug report or support ticket
    • Eminem2891 wrote:

      nemuritor98 wrote:

      Seems like a funny thread,

      How would you read this:
      As above said, no wins in 103 matches is not a good mark. Based on your KD, I would say you just don't finish your matches. Your province ratio is also concerning - seems to me you never really grow, just kinda maintain. I can understand being around a 2-3, especially if you play a lot of 100's without solid allies as it is often necessary to give up ground to maintain your troops, but I just can't get over that 0/103 stat count!
      I easily joined more than 70/80 matches just for support related stuff back in the day. I only played like 10 or 15 maps seriously and yes, by the end, when a few countries remain I just get bored of bad players and I quit the round instead of finishing it. I also don't like coalitions and I tend to play alone, without allies, but I do enjoy good team-games.
      Estoy dispuesto a darlo todo, a luchar por lo que soy, a ser libre dentro de mi, a guerrear mientras viva.

      Manual: Básico y Machiavelli
    • Chimere wrote:

      There was a thread where people tried to analyze other people skill based on other people stats.

      That thread got closed, but I am curious to know how you would read this :

      imgur.com/a/I2OkM50


      I will give the solution without "secret" after this.
      To add to some that has not been said yet:

      Checked your ranking and got your stat numbers. They look like this.

      You killed a total of 3556 enemy players units.
      Your carpet bomber achievement says you killed 1046 enemy units with tactical bombers.
      Your tactician achievement says you killed 793 enemy units with infantry type units. Of those you killed 259 with regular artillery.
      Your armored fist achievement says you killed 852 units with armored units.
      Red baron achievement says you killed 98 with interceptors.
      Your engineer achievement says you killed 267 units with units from the secret tech tree, your green barret achievement says you killed 167 of those with commandos.

      In short, you killed most units with airplanes as far as I can tell. When adding your tactical bomber, interceptor and armor + infantry kills together I count 3056 units killed. Leaving around 500 units unacounted for.
      So when versing you on a map, I'd make sure to have plenty of interceptors, anti-air and Sp anti-air around among my units. That should make things hard for you judging from how you like to play.


      Then your lost stats. You lost a total of 1514 units to enemy players.
      Top % of units lost, mentioning the highest or ones that stand out

      Infantry: 245 = 16.2 %
      Light tank: 195 = 12.9 %
      Tactical bomber: 145 = 9.6 %
      Interceptor: 139 = 9.2 %
      Anti air: 114 = 7.5 %
      Moto infantry: 98 = 6.5 %
      Commandos: 88 = 5.8 %
      Medium tanks 86 = 5.7 %
      SP anti air 73 = 4.8 %
      Total = 78.2 %

      I could do the same for your versus stats versing the AI but it seems to paint a similar picture. Anything with a loss ratio over 10% is in my experience a unit you rely to much upon. Not a problem for some units like commandos because they are the best of their breed. But very much a potential problem for units like light tanks, there is no reason to have lost that many. They are a ''grab land sacrifice'' unit more often then others. But it being your second highest loss tells me you use them to much for other stuff to. At least at some point in your play style. The infantry can be that high just from losing your starting infantry here and there and perhaps when starting out building a lot of infantry. As I think most players do. All in all not bad, only 2 units that account for more than 10% of your total army losses. That means you keep your armies varried. Thats a lot better than most players do.

      Hardly any ranged units in your loss stats. This could mean that you never lose them but it more likely means that you tend not to build and use them enough.

      From your units lost I can tell that you need to protect your units better in order to be a real threat. As the others in this thread said you probably got away with it due to playing smaller maps. Since there is no anti-tank or tank destroyers among your high % lost units and anti-air and SP anti air losses are low I know you are used to attacking instead of defending. So when other players in this thread say you likely did not encounter very strong players I think they are probably right.

      Lastly from your maps played I know the following. You played 2 historic maps and won none (no war hero achievement) which is the hardest map of your often played ones. Of your europe road to war maps you won 50% aswel on the blitzkrieg map. You win around 50% of your maps but combined with your stats it does not mean a lot yet. Your K/D ratio is better than most, same as mine at the moment coincidentally, but combined with your stats, units lost and maps played it shows you need a challenge! I see you have been playing for more than 2 years already so you are by no means a beginner. And with 15 maps played in 2 years it shows you take breaks or commit to maps to the fullest (both is of course fine). So I'd say, challenge yourself! Play every map at least once!
    • atreas1 wrote:

      Especially the lost ranged units ratio shows the lack of strong competition. In general, when facing an able opponent, it is impossible to use the "fire from a distance unopposed" technique - I am saying this with certainty, as I am in the same category.
      Your stat has the highest k/d and victory ratio amongst all players I have checked so far... Even if you are saying that you lose range units, your arty k/d ratio is high. I am very frustrated by air combats, as I often lose artys to air units.
    • atreas1 wrote:

      Especially the lost ranged units ratio shows the lack of strong competition. In general, when facing an able opponent, it is impossible to use the "fire from a distance unopposed" technique - I am saying this with certainty, as I am in the same category.
      Skillful players are rare, because the total k/d ratio among all players must equal to 1 (counting those who deleted their accounts). Many players who have k/d ratio of 1.5 against human win 100 player games quiet frequently. Even though I achieve a higher k/d ratio, I ruin my victory stat with inactivity. Activity makes a difference in this game, as it is real-time rather than turn-based. Oftentimes a quarter of my army contributes almost nothing, such as AT and AA.
    • Edepedable wrote:

      Chimere wrote:

      There was a thread where people tried to analyze other people skill based on other people stats.

      That thread got closed, but I am curious to know how you would read this :

      imgur.com/a/I2OkM50


      I will give the solution without "secret" after this.
      To add to some that has not been said yet:
      Checked your ranking and got your stat numbers. They look like this.

      You killed a total of 3556 enemy players units.
      Your carpet bomber achievement says you killed 1046 enemy units with tactical bombers.
      Your tactician achievement says you killed 793 enemy units with infantry type units. Of those you killed 259 with regular artillery.
      Your armored fist achievement says you killed 852 units with armored units.
      Red baron achievement says you killed 98 with interceptors.
      Your engineer achievement says you killed 267 units with units from the secret tech tree, your green barret achievement says you killed 167 of those with commandos.

      In short, you killed most units with airplanes as far as I can tell. When adding your tactical bomber, interceptor and armor + infantry kills together I count 3056 units killed. Leaving around 500 units unacounted for.
      So when versing you on a map, I'd make sure to have plenty of interceptors, anti-air and Sp anti-air around among my units. That should make things hard for you judging from how you like to play.


      Then your lost stats. You lost a total of 1514 units to enemy players.
      Top % of units lost, mentioning the highest or ones that stand out

      Infantry: 245 = 16.2 %
      Light tank: 195 = 12.9 %
      Tactical bomber: 145 = 9.6 %
      Interceptor: 139 = 9.2 %
      Anti air: 114 = 7.5 %
      Moto infantry: 98 = 6.5 %
      Commandos: 88 = 5.8 %
      Medium tanks 86 = 5.7 %
      SP anti air 73 = 4.8 %
      Total = 78.2 %

      I could do the same for your versus stats versing the AI but it seems to paint a similar picture. Anything with a loss ratio over 10% is in my experience a unit you rely to much upon. Not a problem for some units like commandos because they are the best of their breed. But very much a potential problem for units like light tanks, there is no reason to have lost that many. They are a ''grab land sacrifice'' unit more often then others. But it being your second highest loss tells me you use them to much for other stuff to. At least at some point in your play style. The infantry can be that high just from losing your starting infantry here and there and perhaps when starting out building a lot of infantry. As I think most players do. All in all not bad, only 2 units that account for more than 10% of your total army losses. That means you keep your armies varried. Thats a lot better than most players do.

      Hardly any ranged units in your loss stats. This could mean that you never lose them but it more likely means that you tend not to build and use them enough.

      From your units lost I can tell that you need to protect your units better in order to be a real threat. As the others in this thread said you probably got away with it due to playing smaller maps. Since there is no anti-tank or tank destroyers among your high % lost units and anti-air and SP anti air losses are low I know you are used to attacking instead of defending. So when other players in this thread say you likely did not encounter very strong players I think they are probably right.

      Lastly from your maps played I know the following. You played 2 historic maps and won none (no war hero achievement) which is the hardest map of your often played ones. Of your europe road to war maps you won 50% aswel on the blitzkrieg map. You win around 50% of your maps but combined with your stats it does not mean a lot yet. Your K/D ratio is better than most, same as mine at the moment coincidentally, but combined with your stats, units lost and maps played it shows you need a challenge! I see you have been playing for more than 2 years already so you are by no means a beginner. And with 15 maps played in 2 years it shows you take breaks or commit to maps to the fullest (both is of course fine). So I'd say, challenge yourself! Play every map at least once!
      Since August last year, tac bombers become weaker and more expensive to maintain. Infantry is kind of cannon fodder due to its poor combat strength. I rarely find commandos to be helpful. If you want to grab land, AC is much more effective than LT.
    • Stats alone are meaningless. Unless I am in a match with you so I can see how you use your troops, only then I can understand the stats and exactly what they mean based on your habits, your short and long term objectives, your priorities and your understanding of game mechanics.

      Otherwise reading stats is as useful as tarot cards reading, makes you fun at parties but will not earn you that promotion at work...
    • Kanaris wrote:

      Stats alone are meaningless. Unless I am in a match with you so I can see how you use your troops, only then I can understand the stats and exactly what they mean based on your habits, your short and long term objectives, your priorities and your understanding of game mechanics.

      Otherwise reading stats is as useful as tarot cards reading, makes you fun at parties but will not earn you that promotion at work...
      I agree with this up to a certain degree. I 100% agree that stats can not tell how good someone is. But the opposite does in fact seem to hold true to me. I can spot a bad player because of his stats.

      When I check stats to see what kind of players I am dealing with in a map, I see who poses a threat and who does not. Thats it. So that I can estimate who I will have to fight with at the end of the map in order to win.

      Since it is in not possible to see what someone will do exactly based on stats, as its a total of multiple played games it gives very little certainty. But horrible stats all over with very few maps won, that tells me I will keep a less sharp eye one a certain player. Then of course there is the possibility that someone played 20 maps and won only 1 of them and is now finally ''getting the game'' but I find those instances rare. From stats reading I can usually identify the 5 players that are most likely to stick around to the end with me. Which means I can plan accordingly. I'd say 9 out of 10 times my early predictions are indeed acurate.
    • hakijaa wrote:

      Good K/D ratio, nice economic/military balance and won over 50% of games joined. Fairly good stats

      Eminem2891 wrote:

      I agree that your eco and military balance is good, and your KD/province ratios are good; however, As many of your maps are "easy," these stats may be a bit skewed. You have 4 22-player, and 4 historic maps as your top-played maps. As we all know, 22's are filled with new players, and historic maps are imbalanced. Pick the right nation and historic maps are a cakewalk.

      With that said, I am well aware that my own stats have been bolstered by the fact that I test things out in 22's quite frequently, so I am guessing some of your own is the same.

      Edepedable wrote:

      Chimere wrote:

      There was a thread where people tried to analyze other people skill based on other people stats.

      That thread got closed, but I am curious to know how you would read this :

      imgur.com/a/I2OkM50


      I will give the solution without "secret" after this.
      To add to some that has not been said yet:
      Checked your ranking and got your stat numbers. They look like this.

      You killed a total of 3556 enemy players units.
      Your carpet bomber achievement says you killed 1046 enemy units with tactical bombers.
      Your tactician achievement says you killed 793 enemy units with infantry type units. Of those you killed 259 with regular artillery.
      Your armored fist achievement says you killed 852 units with armored units.
      Red baron achievement says you killed 98 with interceptors.
      Your engineer achievement says you killed 267 units with units from the secret tech tree, your green barret achievement says you killed 167 of those with commandos.

      In short, you killed most units with airplanes as far as I can tell. When adding your tactical bomber, interceptor and armor + infantry kills together I count 3056 units killed. Leaving around 500 units unacounted for.
      So when versing you on a map, I'd make sure to have plenty of interceptors, anti-air and Sp anti-air around among my units. That should make things hard for you judging from how you like to play.


      Then your lost stats. You lost a total of 1514 units to enemy players.
      Top % of units lost, mentioning the highest or ones that stand out

      Infantry: 245 = 16.2 %
      Light tank: 195 = 12.9 %
      Tactical bomber: 145 = 9.6 %
      Interceptor: 139 = 9.2 %
      Anti air: 114 = 7.5 %
      Moto infantry: 98 = 6.5 %
      Commandos: 88 = 5.8 %
      Medium tanks 86 = 5.7 %
      SP anti air 73 = 4.8 %
      Total = 78.2 %

      I could do the same for your versus stats versing the AI but it seems to paint a similar picture. Anything with a loss ratio over 10% is in my experience a unit you rely to much upon. Not a problem for some units like commandos because they are the best of their breed. But very much a potential problem for units like light tanks, there is no reason to have lost that many. They are a ''grab land sacrifice'' unit more often then others. But it being your second highest loss tells me you use them to much for other stuff to. At least at some point in your play style. The infantry can be that high just from losing your starting infantry here and there and perhaps when starting out building a lot of infantry. As I think most players do. All in all not bad, only 2 units that account for more than 10% of your total army losses. That means you keep your armies varried. Thats a lot better than most players do.

      Hardly any ranged units in your loss stats. This could mean that you never lose them but it more likely means that you tend not to build and use them enough.

      From your units lost I can tell that you need to protect your units better in order to be a real threat. As the others in this thread said you probably got away with it due to playing smaller maps. Since there is no anti-tank or tank destroyers among your high % lost units and anti-air and SP anti air losses are low I know you are used to attacking instead of defending. So when other players in this thread say you likely did not encounter very strong players I think they are probably right.

      Lastly from your maps played I know the following. You played 2 historic maps and won none (no war hero achievement) which is the hardest map of your often played ones. Of your europe road to war maps you won 50% aswel on the blitzkrieg map. You win around 50% of your maps but combined with your stats it does not mean a lot yet. Your K/D ratio is better than most, same as mine at the moment coincidentally, but combined with your stats, units lost and maps played it shows you need a challenge! I see you have been playing for more than 2 years already so you are by no means a beginner. And with 15 maps played in 2 years it shows you take breaks or commit to maps to the fullest (both is of course fine). So I'd say, challenge yourself! Play every map at least once!

      BMfox wrote:

      The stats seem fine but they don't say much. This player has been playing only easy maps that are loved by beginners being 22p, 10p and 25p. With high inactivity on those maps and more experience then the other players it's easy to solo those maps. The question I'm asking is how would the stats look like when the player starts playing 50p and 100p maps?Obviously this player hasn't met real contenders yet. His stats look promising and I'm cureous how they would evolve when the player challenges himself.

      The K/D ratio is good, province retainment ratio could be better but I've seen worse. There's a good balance between militairy and economy so there's little gold involved if you ask me.

      This player should apply for the Regulators alliance as we are curently recruiting, if he speaks English of course.

      Thanks all, especially Epedable who nailed it pretty well, with a few misses that could easily be missed.

      A small notes :
      - I joined, as Epedable noted, a long time ago. Back then, coalition victories (3 last players) were not considered "victories". I won twice like this (once on the 100 player map, once on a smaller map)
      - Frontline Pioneers map are, I think, not accounted. I played 3 "max sized", lost all.

      Now, about my stats.
      - I used GOLD so great catch BMFOX, but in specific circumstances. I bought the largest pack to win against a golder in one of those Frontline Pioneers map, eventually I lost but I quite a stock... around 30 000K.

      Since then, I have been very slowly using my stock to mostly accelerate units / buildings before I go to sleep, or spy missions eg I used around 5K for that Victory below for instance :

      reddit.com/r/CallOfWar/comments/bnhm6a/victory_for_latvia/

      One exception : I used a lot (40K) to win a "Control the 13 centers out of 25" event (reward : 50K gold), among other because I was facing other golders soooooo… That's the only Victory where I feel gold was decisive, interestingly enough the victory was diplomatic in that 3 other players gave me their control centers (allowing me to reach 13 and even 14) rather than let another player win ; that other player was an ultra golder.

      I now sit at 60K+.

      - In the early days, from my say 4th to 8th match, I had not understood that some "maps" were for newbies and some map were not (the first map I played was the 100 players map, I am not sure there were even "newbie" maps back then) so I loved to jump day 7 in a match with fixed factions, join the weaker factions and try to steer that faction back to Victory,
      - I love to choose the smaller nations in unbalanced maps. In historical, I tried to win with Mongolia (failure), then Tibet (a close failure, as I reached and held for a couple hours Berlin before being beaten back to Lhassa), and finally Latvia (see above).
      - I used to build a lot of light tanks and a lot of tactical bombers… before the patches to these units. Now I use a lot more medium tanks. I still usually combine Light Tanks with medium tanks to, well, "tank", or tested the 5xSPAA//5xLT raids. I don't Believe my stats show overuse of LT, if you compare with Medium (I lost 1 medium for every 2 Light). I even tried to use AC (fully teched) rather than LT in a map, with limited success
      - I actually use artillery and lost a few, though another great catch Epededable it is fairly recent (let's say match 10 onward. I often mix artillery with infantery (I build a lot of infantry in general) to make it more tanky, which may explain why I did not lose much
      - I build Commando as soon as possible, and buld them non-stop until Mechanical Infantry is available, and even then, only if I decide to build Mechanical Infantry. Early game they are the best unit except none, later they are still useful,

      Not sure what else there is to say, except again - congrats Epededable.
    • warplas wrote:

      Skillful players are rare, because the total k/d ratio among all players must equal to 1 (counting those who deleted their accounts).

      Sorry it is wrong. Winner of every single battle have unkilled units.

      Also by equal skilled players k/d ratio could be around 1.5, nobody fight only vs equal or more dangerous players (with more online time, more friends, more gold, or what ever). Also overall k/d should be even greater then 1.5 for good players. And over 2.0 for really good and not unlucky players.

      Kd between 1.2 and 1.0 mean player makes errors and cant fight 1vs3 wars solo.
      Kd 0.99 till 0.80 means player is not really helpfull in war 2 vs more then 2.

      Kd 0.79 til .50 mean player definitly does not matter about kd, and may be a game, take attention to have those in own coalition.

      Kd under 0.50 means player does not understand game, can not read and ought to change a game. Dont have any deals with them, kill them immediatly.

      And yeah, kd over 3.0 can and i repeat it CAN be a sign of gold usage, it have not to be it.

      Every one active player can easily have kd 4.0, not easy like that, join atomwar event, and kill 4 of your neghbours immediatly after end of peace....

      P.S. good kd does not mean anything, bad kd does...