mtm78

How about some Schnitzel and apel strudel Or some Schwarzwalder Kirschtorte

Yeah ur a clan leader, it's not hard to get positive karma ( just like I used to be boosted every time I met someone from the forums.. well most people from the forums.. ) ;) The whole system is just utterly stupid, since it's the exact same implementation as we had on the forums with the profile reputation where they removed it because it was 'toxic'. If you have options for 'plays well' and 'plays poorly' you should never attach a manual system to that, it should be automated based on position in the team. And what is left is a report option which shouldn't influence karma because WG should handle those behaviors themselves with sanctions ( chat misbehavior and botting ). Really, WG implemented a half assed system without actually thinking about it, certainly if you tie it with the removal of the forum reputation system... I miss my forum reputation, it was higher then I would ever get with Karma in game because of the problems mentioned a thousand times already. But yeah, WG found it toxic if people had a high reputation because they called a spade a spade, and yet they find it perfectly normal if people who play well don't get their +1's even while 'PLAYS WELL' has no mention of 'is nice to plebs who do stupid things in game'

+1

Here's the answer then...

It might be that only chat misbehavior doesn't stack, you got me doubting myself

Afaik only the first report counts, and that subsequent reports from one player against another player don't stack? I can give you seven reports, and you will only get one ( eg I wasted six of my reports on you which don't count for anything ). edit: this might have happened in the absolute beginning of the report system being in place, but I am 200% confident this should no longer be possible. And for the exact same reason, the scenario you're describing is just utter nonsense ( if true, don't get me involved man ).

Sorry man but 21 reports is just not possible to be handed out without some legit reason. Your own team would not report you for whatever damage or kills you inflict on whatever enemy division or team. For that many reports, you have to been 'active' in chat and not in a good way.

That's what I said That's a good point. Idk either I never said it was created or used by WG right?

Ich spreche keine Deutsch... or well not much anyway so I didn't even bother to read But yeah, if support linked him here...

Don't make me ffin laugh, 'if you're decent you shouldn't care' I am a better player then you and you're telling me it's fine as long as you 'play it safe'? Ahhh yes, lolpen bow or stern citadels are not a thing right.... You SHOULD give them a flat broadside, chances for overpen are higher then.... You mean; if you try to do your job? So, 'playing it safe' means staying with the sniping BBabies on your own team and letting your DD's die because they don't have support at the ranges they need? Yeah...

ENGLISH speaking forum

FTFY.

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/64073-offer-to-sell-me-xp-and-account-on-wows-ingame-chat/page__fromsearch__1 Seems they are being bussy ;)

I don't care what you think, you broke the rules, you should be sanctioned accordingly ( and you probably turned pink for 5 matches, so you served your time ). Next time,if you see a name you think is breaking the rules, report it to support. By team killing, you're ruining the game for your entire team. If I was in that game I would spend my reports on you as I don't care what you think is political or not and what constitutes a 'warranted' team kill. I just care you removed one of my allies, and I wouldn't like you for it.

Does this constitute naming and shaming though? I don't think so, this isn't a 'player' but a scammer, you can't name and shame a scammer. I had the same offer two days back, same guy. edit: I thought a made a screenshot 'just in case' but I didn't. I am pretty sure it was the same guy but it might not. I am 200% sure it was the same exact offer though.

XP is not possible to get raw data on, but it should be possible to correlate something from all the other metrics without having to focus so heavily on damage. I think because it's easier to farm, so it appeals to more people. ps. surprised no one mentioned yet that WR can be farmed in division... because it can.. but it's also clearly visible so it's a mute point indeed

1. Don't mix the teams, I like this 'rivalry'. 2. Make sure there is an EU and an NA stream. 3. Make sure the moderation teams for both streams deal the same with over the top chat. 4. Profit.

edit: ow and btw, I would be fine with 2 CV's as well, as long as they take a spot from one of the BB's

I would Would be ok as long as there is a nice distribution of gunboat vs torpedo DD's. But yeah, ok say 3-4 BB's 4-5 CA/CL's 0-1 CV's and the rest DD's then

Well, damage is easier to farm then win rate, and while damage is a part in winning games, there are other ways ( capping ). I agree though that both should be taken into account, but not in the order as indicated were doing damage is holier than winning games. It's the same issue I have with WTR and other such ratings: they promote damage farming. I don't care about damage much, I just want to win. If I can stealth cap 3 zone's and never fire a single shell and still win a match with my team I will consider it a good game ( extreme example ). Just as, being in the right spot to defend your base, not doing much damage but resetting enough times for your team to cap the enemy base.

I agree with your post Daki, but it's partly due to their own fault. You can't put the blame just on the EU community, the question is: will the EU community accept that WG is making an effort and will they agree with a 'fresh' start? And the part that doesn't want to, how will they be handled? A few bad apples should not be allowed to ruin the whole basket, it's not fun for the guy who wants to sell the apples later on and it's no fun for the 'good' apples if they become tainted by the bad one's.

Nah that would mean I called him a bad player and idk if he is, not interested in his stats as he already admitted he is a BB main, who uses 'history' as a means to excuse the abundance of BB's in game. Guess he forgot the actual relative numbers of battleships vs cruisers and destroyers... or maybe he would argue that 'history' should dictate a cap on the amount of BB's per match ;)

No, you got to put in some overtime actually. Payments will be withheld of course, I can't be seen actually paying you when the rest of the staff is still due at least six months of wages

You're a typical BBaby if your argument is 'historical facts', no point in arguing with you without calling a spade a spade. Just as editing posts after they been replied to, it's just so telling...

Omg you really are a BBaby And that means diddly squad ( again.. ) because this is a game, you know, which should be balanced. edit: just before this BBaby wants to turn this into me demanding nerfs for BBabies or buffs to other classes -> I don't. Do you think I care about the queue time of BBabies? Hint: I do not. edit: and yes, that means that if needed to ensure a fun game for EVERYONE ELSE, that BBabies might have to sit in queue longer. edit2: This isn't a class issue ffs, shows how much you know. This is an issue due to premium ammo allowing mediums to frontally challenge heavy tanks