AgarwaenME

Then stop pretending that this actual fact can be ignored. That patent does NOT describe making players hit targets more easily, or take less damage when hit or any other nonsense idea put forwards here. Also, it's PUBLIC, which goes 100% against your idea that WG would implement a hidden system to rig the game. Nor again the simple fact that no such rigging is needed to place people somewhere around 50% WR. Nor the fact that there's loads and loads of people in the low 40s, or high 50s or even higher (which for many who have quite a lot of draws could mean close to 70% winrates or more), and not to talk about a very select few with even higher. Also if you'd ever looked at people stats, you'd see how they actually perform compared to their WR. Those guys down towards 40% have k/d ratios of around 0.5, while those in the 55+ range have 2-3 or more. And similar can been seen in other specific stats.

Which basicly means you've made up an idea that is not falsifiable. And as such, is worthless.

If you have "evidence" for all three those when some are mutually exclusive, then some of that evidence is FALSE. Much like how the conspiratards in this thread will vehemently agree that there's rigging, but when you ask them how and why then they have equally mutually exclusive ideas. It's like having every religious person in the world agreeing that an atheist is wrong.

"LOOK!! do these fraud liar fanboys paid shills personally attack me! As if I'd ever call these fraud fanboy shills anything at all!!" Endless hypocrisy.

Or maybe the same people are very critical in threads where the subject makes sense and isn't some retarded fruitcake conspiracy. It's like you've gone to school.. the school or every faulty argument ever.

He was lying or clueless. Actually read it for yourself instead of picking who you want to believe is right about it.

Then READ IT. It says NOTHING OF THE SORT YOU'RE CLAIMING. Secondly, you're making a claim that WG is somehow at the same time secretely manipulating games for some nefarious ends just to get a result that normal statistics would give, and ALSO at the same time telling us that they do it. This makes.. NO sense for anyone with an IQ above 70.

derp brigade echo chamber... What's always amusing about the derp brigade, is that they somehow manage agree on a conclusion based on mutually exclusive ideas.

But your "observations" and "opinion" is worth as little as the fluff in my armpit unless you can show some actual numbers. Nor are people here "fanbois" who attacks people randomly, what you get told is stupid, is your stupid moronic tinfoil hat conspiracy level bullcrap where you imply that WG is "manipulating" winrates in the most obtuse ways. Really, you're gonna go with "they put people in positions on the map so they know they'll do something that will cause a loss"? And we're mostly annoyed because this stupidity drowns out actual constructive critique. We want to have discussions on game economy, real ship balance (ie. not l2p reasons), proper events, less ships bundled with stuff we do not need and more, not this sort of drivel. p.s If you want to call other adolescent, try to actually rise to the level of a thoughtful adult first.

Curious here.. Are you being honest and complaining how you're winning too much for the meager effort you do in games? Or delusionaly thinking it's the lack of the game being skill based enough that's causing you to perform worse than average?

It's more like someone calling the fire brigade because they noticed someone had lit a candle.

Doublepluss this. As it is, I'm tempted 0% to spend gold to convert xp as I simply have no credits to buy the things I'd spend the xp on, and as such I get endless amounts of convertible sitting on ships. Nor would it really be "imbalanced" to make it trainable, as even all that xp would be 1-2 skillpoints at best for a high level captain.

Or maybe because your WR at your low amount of battles will swing heavily and only balance closer to your actual skill level when you get more battles, and that you're not some super unicum as you want to make yourself believe you are.

That's what they should do, still they don't..

That always was the case with the Omaha's. It's just rare to meet too many that knows to use AP against them.

You're confusing the word "politics" for the word "business".

1) for CV torpedo planes yes, as I already noted, for ships if you're close enough to reliably hit they're easier to hit, if they're far away it's as much a gamble as any other situation 2) You've been able to hit parts of the ship outside the borders for several patches now. That fix was introduced before the latest fix.

It's amazingly easy to hit people sitting at the border now. If someone can outmanouver your shots while sitting at the border with next to no engine power, then they'd outmanouver them with full engine power in open water too. The only relevant problem with it still is the inability for torpedo bombers to effectively attack even close to the border.

Which is what I'm saying, their database only gets new players added (and updated) when people look them up though it. Otherwise they'd need to hammer the server several times a day to get data from what.. 50-100k players? Each requiring one or more requests. Sure you could make it only autoupdate only players with more than X amount of games, but that just skews the average winrate even more. The whole point was of course that going "omg the average number of wins is close to 50% OMG RIGGED!!" is absolutely absurd as it would not only be a mathematical certainty but also tells you nothing as you have no idea who's doing better or worse. What's interesting is relative values for ships (and for more than simply WR). Sure that data might also be a bit skewed, as again people who care so much about stats that they give a toss about that website is more likely to play in a fashion that boosts stats, ie skipping bad grinds by using a good premium ship and converting xp (for those willing to spend cash) or grinding through stock or bad ships in co-op mode (for those willing to throw endless hours away). However this should only work to somewhat inflate differences.

Again, it's average win rates only for those players that is in their database, which are players that have been looked up through the site. Nor are losses or draws even shown in the public stats anymore, only wins, so it cannot know loss or drawrates.

"What's 100 divided by 2" Also, that's average stats only for players that website tracks. Oh.. and since one can expect a fair amount of draws from those players, then both servers report a heavy leaning toward winning more than losing. Which is unsurprising given the sort of player that would be checking their stats there.

Well, no it won't. Because that poor player is always playing with himself, thus there's one non-random property of his stats, ie. himself. And sticking him into battles as a player with a larger impact on the battle isn't going to aid him in that regard.

No, noobs being put in as high tiers will affect the battle more, and thus a bad player will INCREASE the chance of a loss. Also, merely saying "I have X and Y" and then not actually provide the numbers and facts, makes that just a stupid "argument from authority", nor do you have any idea what me and others here have studied, so that's a doubly useless argument. And no, the patent isn't written proof of anything, especially not WG using other mechanics as claimed in this thread. The only evidence it is off, is that #1 WG has thought about it (which they've said many times and even gathered player data on) #2 they actually made a system #3 having spent the resources on it, they want to try to monetize it by making it PUBLIC as a patent. I mean, if they were so worried about monetizing that idea, why wouldn't they also do it if they'd developed another system? In this case the lack of a patent is as good or better evidence that nothing of that sort is used as it could be that it actually is in use. And if they were planning to hidden mechanics in the MM, why on earth would they apply for a patent? And it really doesn't say anything about your supposed claim that you "know" what it should or shouldn't be, that you merely throw out links to wikipedia. If you actually want to provide evidence, then provide the data you base this claim on.

Spurious claims about what is "normal" and concern trolling. How original.

This post and the one immediately preceding it is a perfect example of what is a major problem, that players would rather whine than actually learning what's going on, and learning how to handle it. DDs are the worst performing ships for most tiers, while BBs are top of the heap, yet people invent excuses that they're "op" and cannot be defended against, when that is in fact very easy.