Karkong_the_Impaler

See, and that's [edited]. Yes, we're missing the moving average as an analyzing tool and I can't be arsed to write something in matlab about it, but I do know my way around filtering. You don't suddenly become unicum without it showing in the metrics. Yeah, one improves in steps, (for example when you learn not to always be first blood in a DD, that's a big improvement right there) and the data doesn't reflect that (no moving average, remember) And of course extrapolating is quite a hard thing to do, especially if you're trying to predict the future, but on average the performance shown by players is well within a gaussian distribution of the extrapolated result. Potatos usually roll their face on the keyboard, unicums usually carry, but of course not every time not the least because they're matched not against a team of perfectly mediocre players but against the same spread of individuals. And then it also makes a difference if the unicum deletes one flank because he found the potatos bunched up in a trash floatsam or if he meets the other unicum, countering him. Come on, all that should be obvious. Also peak performance isn't really...a factor, either you improve or you don't, that just means your stats - on average - are higher then your actual performance as opposed to lower, when you're yet to reach peak performance. But the total average is fuzzy, so... look at tier 10 ships with 50, 100 games solo, that's much better than the total win rate, which only works at a glance. You are apparently under the assumption that one day the potato caterpillar suddenly can turn into a unicum butterfly - but that is not the case, improvement is gradual, or rather, in small steps.

Can you please tell me why? And where they said it?

For the purpose of getting a compensation, yeah, my ping must have been quite bad that game I lost! Concerning anything else, I didn't notice any issues yesterday. Apart from supershits. And subs.

Trust me, even with hydro it ain't fun, because you still can't simply drive into the open without a standoff capability. The best you can usually hope for is to keep them spotted so the BBs send their planes and even that is near suicidal at times. Because when he simply surfaces you're caught pants down - shoot him and stay open, don't shoot and get spotted. Same for him, but he controls that encounter with simply changing depth. It's different in the endgame when there is no one around to shoot you, then they're basically free kills when hydroed as they are low on battery - unless they get a salvo of laser guided missiles in, which you can dodge in a moving dd - just like first person shooters, dodge betwen the shotgun pellets. Fact is, DDs aren't the counter to submarines, I still don't know weegees exact reasoning behind that. But accept it.

Why? If you usually run 50m in 30 seconds, why on earth would anyone assume you can beat someone who usually runs this in 10 secons? There is nothing you can do apart from training hard, and that would reflect on your stats. First, you do it in 25 seconds, then 20, then 15, then 12, 11, 10.5 seconds and THEN you might have a good day and he has a bad day and you win. So, yes, your future performance can be extrapolated by your past performance. It's f-ing statistics. Unless you get lucky and he trips, but that's something he does, nothing you have an influence on. Or, in the game, he detonates by a lucky hit, but that's RNG in action, not your skill. Unless you're a trollish quick moving guru, who not only denies the existence of statistics, but utterly annihilates it by the power of never losing an argument, this can't be so hard to grasp. And teams are always as good as their members (remember kids, you're only part of the team when you are winning!) and nobody is immune to it, or we would have 100% wr players. Yes, that data needs to be interpreted, I've seen 52% wr average players with abysmal performance at the relevant tier 10 - the reason was, they usually club seals at tier 5. Also, solo stats are usually more indicative than stats padding three man divisions and even 50 games are not enough to compensate for statistical noise and this all is not taking a moving average into account which one should, so, it's quite a bit fuzzy - but still a good indicator. I guess it hurts to be told this, but frankly, you're quite bad if you filter the data like that. Yes, you may feel that you only die because the team left you alone, but that's basically overextending, something you did. You lacked the awareness that the rest of the team is abandoning a cap - you died there and left your team short a player and they couldn't recover. That is what leads to 45% win rates at tier 10, even if you reliably manage to hit an enemy and have the righteous feeling of being a good player. But you ain't. I even posted you the link on how to git gud. Please read it. Edit - this is so basic, that I ommited it, but I guess it's incomplete without it: On average (Gauss distribution, remember), everyone gets dealt the same teammates. Unless you're not paying for premium, then you get trash teams. Or have zero karma. On the other hand you could be on a special weegee list, but then you also have better RNG.

Wouldn't you lose even more brain cells when you get matched with 40% players in the mornings? I mean, apparently wegee is protecting your sanity here... I didn't understand it untill now.... the relevant skill required to play ranked is to be able to compensate your potato teammates, playing good in a 1 on 1 scenario is not it. Potatos will always be a part of ranked, even if you're a super unicum in gold ranked you need to carry these 57% wr potatos. It's a matter of perspective.

Request "support for allied skip bombers" at some point.

Not all brits, mind you. The Druid shoots derp charges to the rear, just what you need running down a fleeing submarine that is nearly as fast as you are. I love "derp charges" btw.

Yes, along with a alpha damage nerf and no laser guided cruise missiles, I can actually see that this would work. Just not at the current iteration. I mean, one could even have a sub spawn behind the enemy row with the goal to spot and or kill the, ever at the same place, camping CV or force him to move into the arms of your teammates. Pressure on the CV, a counter to it, if you will. That would lead to vastly different strategies, do you comb the ocean for the sub or do you go for the cap? Stick with the CV or actively go out and search? But then, this is too difficult to grasp for the average player and would require not only a sub rework but also a spotting mechanic rework which in turn would require a light cruiser rework, so probably... not going to happen.

Ooooh. Laugh all you want, the next thing that happens is that the visual mods become illegal....

And yet, and yet they released Supershits. What does that tell us? Who knows what's going on in WGs mind?

After several matches today just watching submarines in the game I can now tell you what their experience is: On average, at the start of the round, they fall face first on the keyboard. Then they proceed to roll it around, to the left and to the right. Afterwards, they lift their head a bit to lick their touchscreen to aim and then mash it down again. This they repeat it untill they die. If they were any faster, they would help someone archieve first blood every round.

And therefore it ain't sealclubbing? Just like when driving the old time favourite the "Comrade Balans" Imperator Nikolai as your most played ship? I mean, the ships are so dirty, even you manage to win in them. So, yes, you are the proverbial sealclubber. Not one of much consequence because you're not very good at the game and therefore also not at clubbing seals - but in my opinion you tick all the boxes on what sealclubbing is about: abusing broken ships against clueless opponents... what for? Is it to compensate lack of skill? And also - why you claim that you ain't a sealclubber when not one but two bloody clubs are easy for everyone to see is beyond me. This is insulting to my intellectual feelings.

I don't even mind. The only reason to play mushi now is ranked and at least there I'm not molested by subs. And tier 8 CVs are not nearly as annoying as tier 10 or, gods beware, supershitcarriers.

I dislike lower tiers as potatos with superior ships can stomp you. But since this is also true on tier 10 now, I see the appeal. On the other hand, I see players clubbing seals at tier 5, proudly displaying their stats while at the same time all they do on tier 10 is roll their face on the keyboard.

I really don't care if anyone would waste their money on that - the really important question is rather: Can I turn the eye cancer off so I only see standard camo?

I think I grasp the underlying problem now. If you can only be motivated to read the first sentence in any post, it explains your incoherent answers.

Yes and No, and that is essentially the issue with ranked - Everyone complains about not being able to compensate the 45% teammate in gold who suicides with his Ägir right away, archieving nothing apart from being a speedbump in the enemies roflstomp. Because he cannot comprehend that his understanding of strategy is faulty, even if you spoon feed him the knowledge. But this is in line with the Peter principle, you rise through the ranks untill you can't anymore and luck isn't going to cut it. But you're still there, as an obstacle for your teammates to overcome, until you get the message and quit. Probably the mistake I make is not understanding that to be a good gold rank player you must be able to work around that, anyway.

It's you mate. I could agree with you - but then both of us would be wrong. Did you read the thread I posted for you? If you did and understood what is written there, I have nothing to add.

Can you please stop molesting me to participate in your unpaid QA? Please make these popup windows go away, they're annoying. Edit: Apparently I am already participating in the public test. Seriously who let supershits through your QA?

This is where you err. Read up on the rest of the answers and, most importantly, read the text in the link I posted for you.

I can imagine how the political officer drew the gun on the captain, forcing him to a suicide mission for the motherland. What you said is exactly what is wrong: Yes, the team failed when no one else went along, but making such a fail worse by suiciding is plain stupid. And nobody forced him. You can win with a bum rush, you cannot by going one vs two/three and a CV Please read this: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/108493-how-to-get-good-at-world-of-warships-the-unicum-guide-for-everything/

Ok, let's talk plain then. At 45% at tier 10 shouldn't be anywhere but the bronze league. (Edit: This is my opinion. WGs may differ) Anywhere else you are is due to being carried along by the team and yet you complain about it. Don't get me wrong, yes CVs are annoying, but at least it's not tier 10cvs where you meet a chain of Nakhimov and FDR on a tiny map, only interrupted by that german one who specializes in killing nakhimovs. Fun, really. So while I would rather play tier 10 ranked, I really don't see this as broken as the last season where I actively left the waiting queue when there were two CVs in it.

The team failed at teamwork and the individual failed at correctly estimating his survival chance going alone for a cap.

So you don't mind staying in bronze? That's actually a commendable mindset to know ones limit. We just had a guru here, enlightning us with wisdoms on how 45% winrate players not only deserve to play in gold ranked but are actually better at it than... well.. better players, for a lack of words. On the other hand, everyone on his way to gold has to pass by bronze and carry you, wether you want it or not. It's not like players get selected based on their skills for the different leagues to play with and against their peers. But - maybe that would be a solution for the dilemma with the bad players who accidentally made it to gold ranked?