principat121

My thoughts too...

Hast du dir das ganz alleine ausgedacht? Wow? Großartig! Toll! Oder hat dir doch eher noch die Mami mit geholfen? Sieht nämlic ganz so aus! Du musst dich aber nicht schämen, wenn du nur fleißig weiterübst wird schon noch ein ganz Großer aus dir!

Solange der Typ nur große Reden hier im Forum schwingt, kann WG nichts machen. Wenn es aber Replays mit den entsprechenden Aktionen gibt, dann wird auch WG aktiv. Replay an unsere CCTs oder den Support senden und diese Typen bekommen ihren kurzzeitigen Bann. Aber wie gesagt, solange er hier nur große Reden schwingt, ist es nur das: Das Gelabere eine Möchtegern-Trolls.

Naja, wer nach über 70 Gefechten gerade mal 11k Schaden mit einer Bismarck erreicht... Da ist alles verloren. Das ist ein Spieler der absichtlich Spiele sabotiert. So etwas sollte von Wargaming von Zeit zu Zeit mit temporären Bans quitiert werden.

Niemand braucht Loser, die nicht mal das Wort "Loser" richtig schreiben können!

hearsay and blind assumptions You do not know, whether this WG employee took steps towards you or not. You do not know, if there were more complainments against you from other games. This is just a mind-boggling conspiracy theory constructed by the player to blame some else them him for his ban. There is not a single indicator in the shared replay that the WG-employee was mad at you or something else. The mentioned employee didn't even used the chat! So, how do you know, that it was him? You cannot! Maybe that player should learn something about cause and effect. And try to avoid to head into wild (and stupid) assumptions.

Fire Prevention all the way! I would not even need a second thought on this one. Fire Prevention is quite a must have on a BB.

You can get 3x 16 Guineas = 48 in total. To get the Cossack you have to buy some additional Guineas in the premium shop (for example best offer: 0,89€ for ten Guineas - limited to one package per account - you have to be logged in to see the offer). The amount of additional Guineas depends on your efforts in the RN Arc. But in the best scenario you could get a new tier8 Premium ship for less then 1€. That is a huge bargain!

You ignored the answer all the time. Mathematics teached us that with a sufficient amount of games (a couple of thousands at least), all the possible team setups are balance out. That is the mentioned permutation of all the boundary conditions (good team mates, bad teammates, maps, personal condition, ships you like or not). After a couple of thousands of games all those conditions do not affect anymore the outcome of a match (win, loss, draw -> translated to winrate), because in those thousands of games you had all the conditions to your advantage and disadvantage. And what is left, is your personal influence on the outcome of a match! That what is left after a couple of thousands of games is displayed in your winrate. To the good or to the bad. Sorry, but this is pure mathematics. There is no base to discuss or even to deny this. You cannot change the truth by ignorance!

That is a nice contradiction to your own "hypothesis". How could you win 64% of your games, if not because you were lucky the last months with the (good) teammates you got? You wrote that you "understand how they best work"? But how does that matter? Your skill does not matter, as you said! That observed climbing in winrate is pure luck and just coincidence. How could your winrate rise, when individual skill does not matter? The point why some answers are a bit harsh is, that that utter BS you wrote about Winrate, could be read every now and then from bad players: If it is bad, it is always the team. But when it is good, then somehow magical it is the personal skill. Or in simple words: If my winrate rises then it was obvious my enhanced personal skill and nothing else! And if my winrate is falling, that can be only because of Wargaming giving me bad teammates! That, on the other hand, a rising winrate could also mean that you just had luck with your teammates and got carried to victories or that your personal performance may (temporary) be below your normal skill level and thus leading to more losses is always ignored. And that is a cognitive bias as well.

Yes, it helped in a way, as it shows that there is at least a second field where you have problems to understand the basics. The word "individual" in the sentence above is related to an individual person and not for example to a (peer)group. This means that the mentioned cognitive bias is found in a single person and only in a single person. There is no need of a group or something else to establish (or to observe) this cognitive bias. And this also means that you can see this bias in an individual person when he/she is actually part of a group; as being in a group does not interfere with the definition of the Dunning-Kruger-Effect. And could you please answer the open questions? Like those ones:

Please point out where the quote relates only to an individual? The Dunning-Kruger-Effect is a general cognitive effect regardless of the topic. And you just got "unlucky" with your team most of the 6,800 times you played, that your winrate is below average? Right?

Sorry, I guess I am not able to teach you the basics of probability. Please, do us all a favour and try to learn something about this. It is all about permutation of the team setups. The more battles you played the more evenly distributed are all possible variations of team setups. Can you at least understand this, or not? Otherwise I repeat my advice from above or leave you with this quote from J.Dunning (regarding the Dunning-Kruger-Effect): "If you're incompetent, you can't know you're incompetent ... The skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is."

No need to. Mathematics did this already. On the long run, looking on a database of almost 7k matches the only constant factor is you, as I already said. Your lack of acceptance is called Dunning-Kruger-Effect by the way.