ColonelPete

Ich fand die Patch Notes ziemlich eindeutig zu dem Thema...

Das kommt auf den Auftrag an. Wenn man sich das Missionsziel mal durchliest, sieht man das sofort. Wenn man XP braucht, dann zählt Premium mit. Wenn man Base XP braucht, dann zählt Premium nicht mit, sind ja BASE XP und nicht multiplizierte XP. Und ja, das wurde schon dutzende Male diskutiert, erklärt, seziert und vorgetragen.

Und niemand braucht 3000 Camos in Reserve.... Ich packe teilweise Premiumtarnungen in CoOp Gefechten drauf...

Do you have numbers to back that up or is that just a feeling™?

Newsflash: You get one sided games even without divisions...

That is why I was asking... And am pretty sure the sole cruiser on a team enjoys playing punching ball for 5+ BB that can sink it from nearly anywhere on the map...

Hiding stats does not remove the data, especially not from third party sites. But you can tell WG to delete all their data about you and they will comply.

Sicher, ist ja nicht so das WG uns hunderte von Tarnungen regelmässig schenkt...

Patchnotes sind so überflüssig in diesem Spiel...

Just like in life, people insult other people for any reason...

That is not odd, that is normal.

They are talking about ships, not MM...

What is unbalanced in an all cruiser game or a match with 5 DD per side?

Das hilft nicht viel wenn sie auf der anderen Kartenseite Deine Teammitglieder schneller zusammenschiesst als Du es auf Deiner Kartenseite mit den Gegnern hinbekommst.

And still she performs well. You forgot to mention that she shoots Teflon coated Tungsten rounds, which makes her AP very strong. It would have been easy to balance her for Tier IV, but WG decided against that, because of economic reasons, same as Agincourt.

Damage depends on target. 40k damage on Tier X DD should be enough.

Almost ALL matches above Tier IV are decided by players. Only very few matches are decided by bots, lagg, errors or disconnects. The chances for winning are not fixed. They change from match to match. The stronger you are, the stronger is your team, just by having you on the team. The weaker you are... AFK is a level of contribution. It is still better than playing against your team. It is pitty that you are unable to understand that. I know not realising what you can influence in this game can be a bit of a downer and some players escape into self pitty and stay away from Randoms instead of using all the available sources to learn how to influence the outcome of the matches more.

Grozo is a hybrid. Her strength is adapting to the situation of the battle. She also profits greatly from a high point captain.

And when you are a worse player, you influence the game also. To be precise, every player of any skill influences the game. Just imagine playing with 11 vs 12 players compared to 12 vs 12 players. As I told you, players can influence ending up with 30 or 90% winrating. That is 60% of the matches that are decided by a players actions. And when someone claims that a players contribution does not matter, testing that out while being AFK is the logical conclusion. But you already contradicted your own theory and admitted that player actions matter.

Where do you see an insult? It often does. Counting your decisions before the match, players can determine the outcome of up to 60% of the matches. Which team has more better players is also influenced by you. Can you see how that works? (I am only spelling out the obvious because you seem to be ignoring it).

You said contribution does not matter --> afk does not matter. If AFK matters, then contribution matters. Next time think about what you claim. The same way weak players make a team weak. That is your contribution.

Überleben ist nicht das Ziel, nur ein Mittel zum Zweck. Du optimierst %-Schaden pro Gefecht und Versenkungen pro Gefecht. Je besser Du da wirst, desto mehr Gefechte gewinnst Du. Je näher Du den Gefechtszielen kommen kannst, ohne die obigen Werte zu senken, desto mehr Gefechte gewinnst Du. Je nach Klasse gibt es sekundäre Ziele.

WoT is not WoWs there is too much variation in player results if their contribution did not matter (if contribution did not matter, we would all get the same results) your theory would be easy to prove, but nobody managed that in over 6 years to the contrary, we have enough accounts that prove that non-contribution gives bad results do you really think that an unicum with 65% solo winrate would manage the same winrate by going afk?

Considering your theory, there is a good chance you did not understand how the gamemode works.

Then why make theories about something you do not know?