AgarwaenME

Had the misfortune of meeting cherry2blost on my team (with some division mates). What he kept typing can't really be shown in screenshots due to forum rules, but suffice to say he and his clan made total asshats of themselves.

This is indeed true.

The funny thing is. WG does do things to the game to make it less punishing for worse players. RNG to make aiming less pure skill, removing manual attacks from low tier CVs (both to protect bad non CVs and to make the difference between good and bad CVs far less) and things of this sort which makes any unicum less able to guarantee a win, and a bad player like the OP unable to even lose more than 6 out of 10 battles. You literally don't have to invent "rigging" or whatever else nonsense conspiracy BS, it's how the game is designed. But just like those who endlessly bring out the old MM patent as evidence for whatever sort of claim about MM rigging (including claims that entirely contradict the way that patent works), it's just about the idea that WG does something hidden against them personally, but they're oh so clever and won't be fooled... well.. they're desperate for a view of the world that favours them that is.

You can easily have an argument with 4 different people who all agree the system is "rigged" against them. They just have entirely contradicting ideas of how it's supposed to be rigged.

Er, yes he did. He claimed that WG was rigging the game against him. If that's not an attack, then what is? And no, merely pointing out that his results are his own doing is not an attack, it's merely stating reality. And "tolerance" has nothing to do with it. You're no more "intolerant" for pointing out foolish unsubstantiated and self contradicting claims like these, than pointing out how stupid creationists, homeopathy, moon hoaxers or flat earthers are.

Attacks WG. Whines about getting attacked. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

As I already said, your initial post was nothing but an attack on WG, yet you whine when people tell you the truth about who's actually to blame for your results. Just like this whiny non-reply to my pointing out the lie you made that you "just asked a question", when you factually made a straight up claim that the game is rigged against you. Basicly, just like so many others, you never wanted to have a discussion, you just wanted an echo chamber for your own bias.

And your op has the line "I've come to the conclusion that this game is rigged." Somehow I doubt even you can claim you forgot to have a question mark there. No wonder you struggle to remember who's at fault for losing battles, you can't even remember what you write in your own posts.

No, you didn't "just as a question". You made a statement that WG for some reason is forcing you to lose. Something that not only is bonkers, but also far more offensive towards the creators of the game than us merely telling you that you're getting the results you deserve.

You're literally trashtalking the entire game and everyone playing other sorts of ships, and then you cry over other telling you what reality is.

tinfoilhat.jpg

You're just repeating the same nonsense strawman. We're not saying you'll win everything or lose everything (though it seems like this is what you expect to do yourself), just that your overall long time results will align with your performance. Just like it does for you, an average player who gets average results.

Have you ever seen anyone say that merely suiciding yourself would somehow get you to 0% WR? It's really just a very crap strawman you're attempting to use. You're not playing 1v1. Just like the example off this OP, beyond merely doing very little you just can't do anything more to ruin your results, unless you turn to intentionally trying to lose, by TKs, giving away positions, pushing friendly ships out of cover or whatever else. In fact, what you're claiming about your last month of play, goes exactly along what we're saying here. Just so many other here with inflated personal biases (including the OP) you're just desperately searching for excuses for your results not fitting that bias.

Aww.. you hurted mah feelings =( /I actually do miss a stat page that could generate bell curve graphs nicely. Say to compare different sets of player skill levels to different ships and the like.

Nice parody. You're not serious right? Right?

Wait what? What sort of reply is this? Merely whining that I pointed out that your failed understanding of statistics is just that, failed, while explaining HOW it is failed. While not even attempting to address a single argument. I'll merely take this as you saying "ok, I was entirely wrong, but please tell me very nicely or I'll have my feelings hurt".

And.. this would change anything how? Sure, you're less likely to face the real unicums or real potatoes, since they're rarer than someone in the 49-51% area. But a good->unicum player will still outweigh an average player, and an average player will still outweigh players like the OP (or just those below average). Which is why you see the spread of results you actually do see in this game. You don't see everyone at 50%, which some versions of the "omg MM rigged" claims would suggest, or your failed understanding of statistics. What you see is the expected bell curve, with a huge grouping around 50%, and a trailing off part lower and higher. With the higher part going up farther because while it's possible to outweigh multiple enemy ships, you can't really do much less than do nothing (or nearly nothing as the OP does). There were some dedicated TK troll platoons in early OBT who got themselves into the 20-30% range, while there are people who get solo WRs in the 65-70% range, and division/clan players with 80%+, which should tell you a lot about how low it's really possible to go even if you do your best to lose.

Also just for a point I forgot earlier. If he's getting 100k battles, it also means he's having several 10-20k battles for each of those (to make the math actually work). I'm not sure how "but I sometimes do sorta ok, I just have to be entirely useless in 3 other battles" is supposed to make him look any better.

That's just utter nonsense. First of all, there's no set "losing rate" where people will quit over it, hell there's plenty who says they want to quit over losses yet have over 60% WR. Secondly, that range is merely where it's incredibly hard to get any lower even if effectively being afk 90% of battles. There are still people below that, but the odds of being able to is just very low. No. It should on average be an AVERAGE player. Ie, some generic 50% WR player doing around server average damage. This is not remotely close to me, nor even remotely close to the OP. On average, the sum of each team should be an average player. On average, a player should meet an enemy player of his skill level. Er.. that makes no sense at all. Yes the sum of a large enough and ENTIRELY random selection of teams is going to give you a close to 50% win rate for those teams. However, YOU are NOT a random factor. If you only pick teams with you on them, then they are not a random selection of teams. They're a weighted selection. And on average, there's no reason whatsoever that you should meet a player close to your own skill level, unless your skill level is close to the average of a large random selection of players. I mean, if you were correct, then everyone in the game would be average, and everyone would have 50% WR.. which again, makes no sense and can be easily disproven.

Except there's 12 random enemies, and only 11 random friendlies.

Ask yourself what the point would be to rig the game against any random player. Nothing at all. There's your answer. Reality is that you're just incredibly bad, and you only win when your team carries you because you're not even close to carrying even half of your own weight. And as you seem to love sitting in tier 10 ships, where your contributions are even more important, you end up losing a lot. Ie, in lower tier your crappy skills aren't as large part of the team as a total, so you lose less battles for your team, but in tier 10 it's the opposite and YOU are making your own teams lose.

You seem confused about how this forum works. If you want a private conversation click on your account and you can do it there. And you refer to me having an "opinion" about something that WG has said is their actual policy on the matter. That is not what the word "opinion" means.

Again, the version number doesn't say if it's in beta or not. It's just a bloody number.

That this is just a number and have nothing to do with the state of the game.

As if you can't find any sort of such "study" that showed itself to be utter bogus under actual battle conditions. What we do have is ACTUAL results from battles.