Andrewbassg

Yep.

nvm....... Still perhaps listening a bit to the players would go a looong way....

2. In the wider context of applicability. And I pointed out that in that/this context, it is perfectly possible to have both :) 4. Neither do I. But you brought up the subject linking personal experience with giving testimony and I pointed out the wider context. Actually, I pointed out that in my experience, Mm isn't necessarily neutral. And implementing performance based conditions in the MM is just a matter of simply implementing different conditions. You advocated that MM is some kind of holy grail ( i.e untouchable) and I pointed out that in my experience that's not the case. Not to mention Weegee's own wording. Yes, but not always. And again not always. In my example 30-50 battles( !!) without those ships, no matter the tier is.....a bit interesting. Erm....this is getting out a hand a bit, but....perhaps the motives and intentions are not "nefarious" so to speak. They could be even related to the wider context of playability.:) So.....your arguments are kinda rendered... moot.:) Remember, I told you to not do this.

Actually the first is kinda related to the latter. If Raptor gets torped and starts flooding, it will slow down. If teammates good/s, and Raptor torped twice then ...yep. I had a close call in the 00.30 ballpark. Edit: Btw the NA forum has a dedicated subsection for PvE. Check it out https://forum.worldofwarships.com/forum/327-pve-content/

Ahh... my bad :)

Yes sadly there were bans lately..... The arguments can turn to be quite heated and...... the other side's tactics are kinda known.... I'm one of the vocal ones, no bans yet. Btw hi Bear :).Gibb Yorkie?

Someone on NA suggested this instead:

1.I think you got my point. 2.We don't discuss your wording. We discuss arguments on merits. 3. 4. And I wasn't disputing. Yet what I said was complementary. It has with MM. Because it is about conditions aka "gates". Not necessarily. Mm not always mirrors and even then not 100%. Also If I recall correctly, there was no tier limitation. And yes, I tried dat too, to no avail..

Comrade, comrade you forgot the monitors. And the tank turreted gunboats....

Still... coz you insist...I will share my personal experience. During sub testing on PTS there was a mission which required a certain amount of dmg or hits (I can't remember) on japanese and/or french (?) Bb's. Obviously everybody tried to do that In coop. But.....the MM insisted on not "giving" those pesky BB's. When I complained in chat about that people immediately responded saying the same. Then I asked about that in every subsequent battle. And people kept confirming the same occurrence. Does that "prove" that Wg manipulates the MM?. No. However, to me it does confirm that they are absolutely capable of doing so. Meaning that the MM is not necessarily neutral. Which is what I actually said, setting aside all the other jazz.

1. Yes I do:) My (whole) point is that discussing personal experience is and should be a free choice. I'm not saying that it should not challenged, yet it is not subject to.... 'debate". Much less "intimidation" tactics. 2.Oh yes it can be. I suggest rereading my post. But just in case :the first condition could be general the second could be limited making them actually complementary :) 3.There is no need. 4. Yet the courts also take into account context as means of validating said testimonies. Not to mention the witnesses track record, as asserting their honesty and also as means to reveal hidden motivation/intent/bias :).

1. Oh I'm doing quite well. 2. They are not mutually exclusive. Actually it is markedly the other way around. And I didn't say "based" which implies strong emphasis. In fact I suggested a pluralistic approach i.e more than one condition based on different metrics. 3. Like i said it is personal experience. Besides I'm not running the required apps/mods. I play for fun and those tend to remove said fun. 4. Like I said it is personal experience and as such doesn't need..."evidence". Neither way:).

I fear that you are not wrong....

Hmm, you are tireless aren't you? And about the '"strong" arguments....., you can feel that way, but it doesn't make it so. All I have to do is counter your arguments. ?!? Quote? If you refer to me denying you to use "wording" argumentation as opposed to argumentation on merit...its just tit for tat. I mean i can't possibly fathom how could you refer to me talking about companies pursuing profit and linking that to non profit companies. Just...wut?!? Erm...no. Its not a theory, its personal experience. Across two servers ( three if we count PTS).The problem debating such experiences is revealed in their name. I.e being personal. No one can contest personal experience. It can be attempted to explain the "why's". But debating them.....zero chance of success. Especially when the driving motivation behind is to.... "win". And that approach is very counterproductive. I strongly suggest to not. Look, I have the same interest debating this subject as at the beginning. Which is zero. Discussing a subject and debating it...are not the same. Tbh I just didn't liked how you and the other fella responded to him. Deriding and being dismissive towards him, especially when he has a low post count.....its not very nice., no matter the subject. Furthermore, I like this game and I have zero interest in debating subjects, which further weakens it. Unfortunately Weegee does a very good job on its own. That's being said, I suggest you to let it go, like I will. While I'm good at this game, there will be no winners, I can guarantee that to you.

No more than b's ing around about..... "non profit companies" . Which is what, "strong"? Lolz.....If anything tactics like that denote fundamental weaknesses. In many areas......Because truth exists by itself. Is a fact. Not necessarily. The fundamental problem with your assertion is that assumes that MM is an universal constant. Like gravity( meaning no human intervention is possible). Which is.....not.....to say at least. Oh, I'm objective I give credit where credit is due.

No. it was stated, that's true :) There is no such thing in da nitpicking game:) If we play that, I don't :) Unless we talk about more than 70% of all battles ever played, no its not. An even than it would only indicate a high(er) probability. Nevertheless you can accept that, but it makes that a "you" thing not a fact. Certainly not validates your right to be rude. Not today, not tomorrow.

Lolz. A forum thread does not prove anything. What indicates is that people can have different experiences.

Oh you are not very good at this......:) Again a possibility is a not a fact. Is a possibility. Someone stating a possibility is not a fact. However it is a fact that he stated said possibility. A possibility can be either be proven true or false. If it is true then it becomes a fact. If not, then is false and it becomes an impossibility. Lolz. If you want to play the nitpicking game I didn't formulate any claim about companies. I posed a question. Do you know the difference?:)

Objective possibility is always >0, otherwise is an impossibility. But that doesn't make it a fact. Subjective possibilities,.... that is a whole different discussion.. Oh i don't have a problem with Weegee making money. In fact the more they do, the merrier. I'm talking about all the...other 'genius' level stuff they are doing. But weegee is not dat kind of company, so... its a bit tangential, isn't it?

Don't be. Weegee has quite a track record for that. You mean, your truth. If you want to "educate" people than you could do it in a.... much more positive manner. And ...this forum exists so anyone can share its experience. Acting out like you did demonstrates the exact opposite what you tried to convey. I.e. you being... "smart" Lol .Like I said..... No, its basic human stuff. Because...you know... you actually communicate with a human being. I know that using and interface (i.e computer) to do that could be confusing, but....you are still communicate with a human being. Try to remember that even if its happening over da netz.

Yes it is a possibility. Although there is no need for that, Weegee is doing such a "wonderful" job in that direction, I don't think that they need any help. Sadly. If there was a reasonable suspicion, then I might.:) But you are mistaken, its not a fact. Its a possibility. Possibilities become facts when there is enough evidence to support them. You mean like.... not every company is pursuing profit? Erm .... But I agree not every company likes and makes a sport out of alienating its "customer" base. Usually they try to make them.... stay. Yeah..... With the added caveat that not every customer can be made a happy customer Oh, don't worry about that :)You are very safe from that. I mean an all female boarding school could be interesting, but with a fat headmistress walking around with a whip and yelling at everybody...not so much. Because that's how you act. More than sometimes. In case it evaded you, my point was about a certain gent, who lived for some years in an ecuadorian embassy.

So....damacon defeat pings, right? Buut..... guess what class has 60 sec auto damacon :)?Yeah......  Which also means that during that period they are also immune to...... flooding. They want subs in the game, just......khhm ...not everyone should be..... enjoying them....equally.... I can't believe the sheer amount of B* Weegee is capable to pull in order to defend its pet class... Btw..

Hmm.....to conclude a little before it gets out of hand....i don't think that the game is "rigged"( that's a waay too hard word). Is there... "something"? Yes. Is it game breaking? Not at all. Is affecting everybody? Yes. i would say that is akin to a... cycle.

Here's a gem

+1. On a side note, i think the reason for the failure of Wowp is partly attributable to the fact that there is no "terrain" or "obstacles" around which the game should be played. So there is no difference Vs any other flying arcade game. But if there would be some different "wind" conditions ( like terrain obstacles i.e 'islands")... it could make it much more.... interesting.....