Saltface

Hello, Did you try to examine if they had a valid reason to say so? Could they be right and you didn't perform well in that game? Do you think that playing T10 after less than 300 battles is correct? Do you think you know the mechanics of the game well enough to handle the T10 environment? Do you think your performance is at a level that will allow you to be productive for your team in a high tier environment? Answer these questions. Not to me. To yourself. And have a critical look at how you are playing. If you want my advise, dont waste your energy trying to think what should be made more easy for you. Work a bit on learning the game and the mechanics. You will enjoy the game much more. If you want my advise, drop to T5 and start learning the game. The forum is here, we will all help you with questions replays hints and tips. But learn the game, If you want to complain about something you dont know or ask the game to be dumbed down so that its easy for you...go on Your choice

Are you serious? There is ONLY one person at fault here. YOU No one else. If someone gets torped by you you should apologize and not try to shift responsibility. Don't torp from the second line Don't torp if you are going to endanger your teammates End of story.

If you had said that "playing against good players in division is very hard" we could have a discussion. I would even agree with you. Three good players make a division where the total is more than the sum of the parts. It is the direct opposite if the players aren't that good. Actually, average players in a division perform less. The total is less than the sum of the parts. However, you don't go down that way. You prefer to start accusing others around you. You try to take a moral superiority stance and virtue signal the forum. You use heavy loaded words like "rigging", "unfair", "statpadding". What annoys me is that you consider that players that play the game as it is intended to be played, in teams, are the ones "rigging the match". "Oh yey be damned statpadders". May I remind you that: the game has the "I am looking for Division function" built in? Divisioning is promoted by the game. Voice coms are a function of the game. Its even in the settings. Teamwork is a suggestion in each and every post in the forum. And you consider that what actually promotes teamwork (division) to be an unfair, rigging of the match? In your way of thinking, that in my opinion is perverted, playing the game as it was designed to be played is bad. Furthermore, playing with your friends is the best part of the game. Its fun. Its entertaining. Its human FFS. Next in the menu is the relativity of the WR. (totally off topic - not even one post before yours touched the subject - what a coincidence) It is not that people play well and have a big WR. No no no. God forbid. Its relative. You can have a low win rate and be a good player. And God forbid we listen to what the good players have to say. You know, for what its worth they could be divisioning unfair rigging statpadders. Wakeup call. Reality check. Einstein was talking about gravity, time and space in his theory of relativity not WR. My question is: who on earth finds your theory palpable and subscribes to it? I guess people who cant find someone to play with and don't play that well. Lacking any other way to enjoy the game they just want to feel morally superior. Like, duh...I m not a bad player, I am moral, they are cheaters (or exploit and abuse the game). Its not that no one wants to play with me. Divisions are bad. Its a moral stance. Have a nice day, mate. Enjoy the game the way you like it. .

No my friend, AA tracers are randomized all over the cloud. This the only fact I can say for this discussion. Gun tracers are far better for smoke shots. Agreed. The rest that you say, maybe you feel honestly like that, but maybe, just maybe, you are under confirmation bias.

Welcome back to the Forum. If I may correct you on the above. AA does NOT reveal your position in smoke. AA tracers are randomized when shooting from smoke. So, if you are in smoke you TURN ON your AA for that 1 or 2 aircraft you will drop. Depends on the DD, it would be a misplay if you waited so long to turn your AA on sailing the Halland et Co. Dont forget their biggest damage is at the Long Range. Oh, yes, turn it off at once afterwards so that you even reset faster your DefAA. Anyway, AA works on not good CV players. Welcome back and I hope you enjoy your DD adventure.

only if you name and shame, the OP is not shaming anyone. His post is 100% legit.

yes you are right and deal with Belarus Ruble instead of Euro and not have the protection of the European financial stability....yes this sounds like the dream of every company.

because they are an EU company. and lose the EU market?

are you using the calm waters mod?

@Excavatus, @Wyrmw00d don't you think it is a bit over the top to compare a game with an abusive relation? @Wyrmw00d this is a false parallel you are presenting. I think the parallel is very unfortunate. There is no abuser here, there is no victim. Who is abusing whom and how? Furthermore, if you are so attached to the game that you consider it to be equivalent to a child as a fruit of a love relationship....please do yourself a favor and go get that thing looked at. Your argument has the following fallacies: 1. False Parallel 2. Appeal to empathy 3. Strawmaning @Excavatus is right. Its a game. You don't like it anymore? Take a break. And (I think) he was being a bit sarcastic on his first comment on abusive relations. And he is right. Everybody playing the victim card? Like, I m more victimized than you by WG so I can nag and whine more?

Good morning, I think you will find it a most futile task trying to catch me using foul language. Not my style. While it would be easier to dismiss you as a "nutjob" I have opted for debating with you. I present arguments that in my opinion discredit your arguments. I am trying to show that the idea you have subscribed to is fallacious. However, if you start being rude (which you are not) I ll just tell you you are rude and stop conversing with you. Furthermore, your argumentation (from a professional point of view) is faulty. What is also bothering me is that you insist that the onus of proof is not your concern but rather of the person that is arguing with you. So let me simplify things, @Margarineoffizier claims that: WG manipulates RNG results in a subtle way so they are not discovered doing so. Specifically (but not restricted to) WG manipulates RNG by determining where your shell will land so that the player will not score citadels or sink ships required to complete a directive or mission. The evidence he presents is : "his feelings on the matter" 1. He feels his aim is perfect but he isn't scoring citadels as he used to. 2. He feels that the low HP ship should have been sunk but it refuses to sink. I think the above beggers some scrutiny. I have treated item 2 in the list. Low HP ships. I showed you how this can be happening and it requires no external intervention. No need to expand. The only thing I will tell you is that correlation does not mean causality. Basic Logic and Mathematics. (btw look it up its basic science not so hard to check) I avoided point 1. I did not feel nice touching it because I would have brought up your performance indicators. You leave me no choice. You claim that you used to score 4 to 6 citadels per game. I quote from Post#72 "By that I mean it went from 4-6 cits per battle to about 0.6 per battle" The chart shown hereunder is your average damage chart. There is no drop to show a 4/6 cit scoring drop to 0.6 cit scoring. Citadels are high score hits. You do get a lot of damage for every cit scored. It would show if your damage output was artificially made low for a period of a month or so (duration of directive events). Furthermore, your average damage output is just above 18000 (28000 only for BBs). This average is not compatible with scoring 4 - 6 cits per game. A shell that scores a citadel will always score max damage. T5 and T6 ships that you play on average will have about 10K per shell if the shell cits. You cant be doing 4 to 6 citadels per game. Your averages would be higher. It is arithmetically impossible. Try calculating. So, now I have two options. First I call you a liar. Stat Shame you and get gone with you. (which I will not) Or I try to show to you that there are logical explanations, that do not require appeal to the metaphysical, explaining your observed phenomenae and point out that maybe, just maybe, you might be the victim of confirmation bias (as we all do at times). Furthermore, you want me to prove to you that you are wrong when you, from your side, show absolutely no evidence that you could be right. My friend, when you suggest something you better be able to back it up or else it is just your unfounded opinion. Don't expect others to accept it because you said so. You have been shown that there are legit ways to explain what you observe, also, it has been shown that you might have misperceived your results because of confirmation bias. You may continue believing what you want. You may not call out others for not subscribing to your theory, especially when you provide no evidence and you have to the contrary lots of indications that you might be wrong. Now, just for the fun of the matter I shall give you evidence that you might be right. In the spoiler you will find my stats on Ranked Sprint. I am sure you will notice that (when the battle number is statistically significant) I perform badly. And 35 to 45 percent is BAD. Well that was true until this last recent ranked sprint. After i have started speaking out about all these frigging conspiracy theories. Somewhat defending WG. Yey oh Yey I got rewarded for my backbending abilities. I ranked out in 36 battles. And I got 10K coal (damn I loved that) and I get to brag. Now you have proof that I am a WG shill. Choice is yours mate. Believe what you want. It is a free world afterall.

lights cigar with 100 Euro bill and pops open a Dom Perignon limited designed by Lenny Kravidz. (courtesy of WG) Looks at my Jacuzzi (bought with WG money....) Something is missing..... ah yes....the gold little ships I get to play with in the Jacuzzi THX WG, at your service anytime

Haven't visited for a long time 36 games and yes I switched to BB

So, if I am stronger than you I can call you what I want. Because this is exactly what you are saying here. "If you wanna try and take a swing at me, go ahead." Your words not mine. Now try to imagine a heavy weight talking to you. With a broken nose and a couple of scars to add some flavor. How do you feel? You really want size and force to define our discourse and debate?

You are right on this one, I shouldn't have said that. And I can take it further, I should not even raise a question about it. Like "is the Pol biased on purpose?" This is tabloid methodology. And I am happy we agree with that as I can deduce from your "Salt works for WG" example. I am not judging your intentions. Hope I made it clear.

falls on knees .... I m sorryyyyyyyy LOL good call

Here is where we disagree. You are insulting him you are not calling him out. I do share the exact same feelings with you. That's why I think I have more clan games than randoms. I really get frustrated in randoms. I m no snowflake but I don't like going around calling people "stupid a...holes". Call him out don't insult him. In RL if you would call someone names like that (rightly or wrongly) most probably you would end up with your head up your posterior. That's why you watch your mouth in RL. What is saving your head from taking this unfortunate route up your anal cavity is your anonymity on the Internet. Nahhhh....the only person that can release their own chat logs is the player. (gray out all other names) WG can say, "we reviewed your logs and you are at fault - here take your logs and read them" Careful, player MAY NOT release the conversation between player and WG. That's private I agree with the deserve part but Evil? hmmm I don't know if it is evil....to make someone own what they say. But...I could go to the extreme and accept an appeal system where you can appeal your bans and if proven that you deserved it...it gets doubled. So I get a 1 day ban and I appeal. WG looks through the issue and I was on the wrong. 2 days ban.

exactly

and if I make sure through RNG that your T VII gets sunk by a Tirpitz so that I can send you the promo what is it? It is fraud

It is the definition of Fraud. You claim something being advertised to work in a specific way (RNG based skill game) is actually "rigged" and the results are manipulated to increase the publishers sales and profit. It is fraud. But hey, you can make up your own definitions. Just to be helpful: (source Wikipedia) In law, fraud is intentional deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain, .... In common law jurisdictions, as a civil wrong, fraud is a tort. While the precise definitions and requirements of proof vary among jurisdictions, the requisite elements of fraud as a tort generally are the intentional misrepresentation or concealment of an important fact upon which the victim is meant to rely, and in fact does rely, to the harm of the victim. Furthermore, adaptive marketing is not the same thing as manipulating the game results. Also, please quit making strawmen. My opinion was stated in BOLD letters in my post. Care to answer to what I said? You see I find it a lot more plausible that the game mechanics produce silly outcomes (because of faulty coding) rather than that "excellent manipulative coding" is in place to manipulate the game experience so that through very complex calculations the system will determine which shot will score a cit and which one will score an overpen. Furthermore, the system has to be able to time the rigged shots in such a way that the players brain will produce certain amounts of serotonin and endorphin that will make the player feel satisfied and happy and increase his game spending. This is my statement. You conflate possibility with probability and plausibility. So for the last time I will ask you this: "All observations can be explained by game mechanics. Why should I entertain the possibility that the game is a hoax and a fraud? Why should I consider it possible that the game is being manipulated for some sinister reasons?" I showed one or two examples of how the game mechanics can reproduce the suspicious observations. I also presented in an earlier post the mathematics that make Randomness almost impossible to verify. I presented a paper about how RNG works in Video games. and all I get back in return is "It is possible so it could be happening" Well it could but I aint buying it.

@Aifrit I know that RNG can be wonky at times. But I d check my confirmation bias if I was you. Just go critically over your performance indexes and you will see that maybe you are not on the right side of the argument. Maybe the reason of defeat lays elsewhere. Maybe. Do I understand correctly that your victory should be determined somehow with the MM taking into account your previous defeats?

@Exocet6951 So many things wrong with your statement above my friend. You are claiming that: because it could be done and others have done it in the past WG could be also doing it. You entertain the idea that someone is possibly guilty of fraud because someone else was guilty of fraud at some other time. This is patently wrong. Just for the sake of fun I will exaggerate what you just said. "Saltface could be a serial killer. I am not trying to convince you that he is but I am trying to convince you that it is possible." That's a dumb statement. OFC it is possible. I could be a serial killer. In the same way you could be a mathematical genius. You could be. Why not? there is a possibility. Are you one? Why aren't you entertaining the idea? Because you have no damn evidence to back up what you say. For all you know WG could be out to change the minds of people with subliminal advertising and promote Russian political ideology, They could be doing it. Why not? Others have done so and it is not unheard. Are you going to give a second thought to the aforementioned preposterous statements? No you aren't. Yet you are eager to subscribe to a similar idea. You see I find it a lot more plausible that the game mechanics produce silly outcomes (because of faulty coding) rather than that "excellent manipulative coding" is in place to manipulate the game experience so that through very complex calculations the system will determine which shot will score a cit and which one will score an overpen. Furthermore, the system has to be able to time the rigged shots in such a way that the players brain will produce certain amounts of serotonin and endorphin that will make the player feel satisfied and happy and increase his game spending. Sorry, as I said before, you are not convincing. And, I might add here, the poll was a tad biased because the above option was never presented. ( @loppantorkel ) The poll wanted to support the narrative of "rigged". The readers were never presented with the idea that some of the things they observe in game could be faulty programming (and we have a lot of bugs that we know exist so it can happen !!) No. Either pure RNG or manipulation. Programming Error? And to further reinforce my statements, in one of my previous posts I showed that some observations are entirely explainable with the game mechanics.But even that is not enough. Even if something can be explained by game mechanics some people wish to go by "it is possible that RNG is manipulated therefore it is manipulated" So I am not hostile with every idea other than my own. I am hostile with dumb stupid ideas that have absolutely no backing evidence and are presented as the one and only truth. You are free to believe what you want. And I am free to reject something so long there is no evidence about it.

thinks of how to flame the discussion...lol.... me thinks that Pete is right, no bot has more than 45%. Should it have more we d call it a cheat. LOL moving the goalposts to semantics

one thing is for sure, bots know how to aim and don't camp. So if your suspected bot shoots well its a bot. A human player will shoot the clouds.

low tier can be very fun. Phra will give you 4 deep water torps every 36 seconds? something like that with around 5K concealment. At T2. Isokaze will just spamm 6 every 37 seconds. She is agile and swift. At T4.