Saltface

Just out of technical curiosity, why is this poll biased? In order to help you answer my question I have hereunder a list with the most common flaws of polls. Could you identify them in the poll in question? Or could you identify other flaws? Would really like to know. Actually, bias, falls under 1. Loaded and leading questions. Maybe, bias, isn't what you wanted to say. Brief helping list 1. Loaded and leading questions: When writing questions for your poll, you want respondents to be able to answer as freely and honestly as possible. This means avoiding loaded and leading questions. A loaded question is one with an in-built assumption, and a leading question is one that nudges the respondent to answer in a particular way. 2. Misplaced questions: Related questions should always be grouped and asked in sequence, using a technique called "laddering." This allows respondents to focus on one thing at a time. If these questions were scattered throughout the survey, the respondent might feel overwhelmed and forget how they answered the previous questions. 3. Incomplete and mutually non-exclusive response categories: Design multiple-choice questions so that the response categories are complete and mutually exclusive. In order to be complete, the response categories must cover all possible answers. This often involves including a "None of the above" or "All of the above" category. For the response categories to be mutually exclusive, there must only be one correct answer. 4. Unintentionally vague questions: Unintentionally vague questions can be difficult to analyze. There is a world of difference between "What do you think about this product?" and "What do you like about this product?" 5. Double-barreled questions: Each question should ask one thing and one thing only. 6. Too many questions There are more delicate points that we could treat but I really believe it is outside the scope of this thread

oops Lapsus linguae?

Damn Norbert, why did you have to post your name. Now you humanized yourself. I can't just treat you as a nickname. Anyway. I did not notice you changed the "elitist word". Now I have. So, that's out of the way. Just for your info, the word "elitist" is like a red cloth for many forumites. Avoid it. Because mate we are talking randoms. And the difference between random and coop is gigantic. Any knowledge you might have acquired in CoOp will be hardly useful in randoms. Nor CoOp reflects the slightest the game in Randoms. Now, since you made the mistake to humanize yourself, lets see what YOU did not read. this: "Disclaimer - I don't argue for or against the +/- 2 MM. I wont say if it is good or it is bad. It is what it is. It is acceptable so long it applies the same to all players. And it does. We are done with that." and this: "My opinion is that MM, be it what it is, is playable for any player that has the basic knowledge of the game. Well, you might feel otherwise. Your feelings are valid. Just as valid as my feelings. But feelings are trumped by facts. Data is hard facts. And I d rather trust data than my feelings (or yours for that matter). Data tells us another story. Data shows that +/-2 MM does not skew the results. Furthermore, number of players on the servers (hard data) tell us that +/- 2 MM is as far as we can go. We don't have the numbers that would allow us to run a different MM. So, as far as I m concerned it is end of story. This is the best MM we can get for now. My advice to you is stop thinking about MM for now. You are allocating resources in a most unproductive way. Concentrate on learning to play. You cant change the MM. But you can be a better player. L2P." Post Number #2679 and for that my mate Norbert and Mr. ACe call me an elitist stat padder? I did. Again. It still makes no sense. Sorry Norbert, it doesn't. are you claiming that you can win over a +2 tier ship if your ship is with a 19pt captain and modules (prem) and signals? Nope. Sad news for you my friend. You can only do that if you L2P. Here is some more sad news: Being (top) tier 10 will not make you perform better. regards Saltface

First of all, I am happy that a player with only 500 battles (like a month playing the game) is so well placed in identifying the reality of everything. Man, next step would be the unification of quantum and relativity theories. Congratulations. However, as much as I might be impressed and exhilarated by your insight and acute expression of the truth, I have to admit that your text looks as if an ape typed a random series of letters and by pure mathematical probability it turned out to be a text. Not a coherent text but a text nevertheless. Did you present any facts or data about how MM is correlated to WR? NO Any data showing that MM is punitive for novice players? NO Any data and facts at all? NO again Actually you presented NOTHING to support ANY argument. Instead, you persistently and rudely characterized with a blanket comment ALL players that are better than you as eltist stat padders. Good for you. EDIT because I pressed <enter> too fast LOL What bothers me is that you seem to be advocating for a system that will result a 50% WR for all players. So, in my humble opinion, there is nothing of value in what you say because you start from a faulty premise that there should be an equality of outcome. And just to close this subject for now: If you are a bad player, even if you are +2 top tier, any good player will farm you till you populate Davis' locker. So, better stop thinking of everybody that achieves better results than you as an elitist and learn how to play the game. I will add to this post also what I have found out. Bad players always complain about the game and call better players elitists. .

spot the difference

uhmmmm....nope, you didn't get team-kill penalty. If we are pedantic: It clearly indicates that you have been pinked (lol) for quitting the battle early and inactivity in battle. These two reasons along with team-damage and team-kill are considered Unsporting Conduct. The message continues by reminding you that IF....you have caused damage to your allies you will pay the teamkill penalties, and if you continue being a bad boy they will orange you and let you in CoOp only. Now, I get it that you might not like pink color...but....its really nothing. Its not a penalty. Its a warning. Further to the above, if you leave a battle early (for whatever reason) you get pink. Why are you making a fuss? Aren't the rules such? Do you wish players to be able to come and go as they wish? Because if you don't put a harness to that behavior that's what you will get. As the system cannot recognize if you pulled the plug or your cat spilled your latte on the keyboard or you took a sledgehammer and had an intimate discussion with your PC, you (along with all the others that get out of battle early for whatever reason) will get pink. If it was an accident, pink will go away. If the player continues (for whatever reason) quitting the battle early then Orange and restricted to CoOp. End of Story Note: Preemptive strike (lol) Whatever Reason includes anything except WG server kicking you out. And if they (WG) kick you out then they will give you those nice crates with goodies...they wont turn you pink.

@ACe_1983 Given the number of players in the game -/+2 MM is the best we can have. We don't have enough players to have reasonable waiting times with -/+1 MM. Having told you that and my disclaimer should have saved you from typing a wall of text to vent your frustration about the MM. You know what? If you want to argue about something we cannot change ..... do it alone. No its not rocket science. Its a game. You still need to L2P. Because you don't know how to play. And it is obvious that you don't if cant understand that a T5 BB can Dev Strike a T7 cruiser. is it? according to whom? You? What are the objective criteria? What metrics did you use in order to have the illumination of you discovery?

@ACe_1983 Hi there and welcome to the forum. The place where Knowledge and Skill abound but you really have to dig under the surface to find it. Took me some time to read up .... so let me finish the disclaimer first and get it out of the way: Disclaimer - I don't argue for or against the +/- 2 MM. I wont say if it is good or it is bad. It is what it is. It is acceptable so long it applies the same to all players. And it does. We are done with that. However, what I will say is that (+/- 2 MM) should not be a problem. It is playable just fine. You just need to understand how to play when you are top or bottom tier. You need to excuse the guys that told you it is just a L2P issue. They are right. It all comes down to basic game knowledge. I am not talking about advanced knowledge that needs thousands of high tier battles to discover. Just plain basic game knowledge that you should gain during your low tier battles. Alas most players don't have it. My opinion is that MM, be it what it is, is playable for any player that has the basic knowledge of the game. Well, you might feel otherwise. Your feelings are valid. Just as valid as my feelings. But feelings are trumped by facts. Data is hard facts. And I d rather trust data than my feelings (or yours for that matter). Data tells us another story. Data shows that +/-2 MM does not skew the results. Furthermore, number of players on the servers (hard data) tell us that +/- 2 MM is as far as we can go. We don't have the numbers that would allow us to run a different MM. So, as far as I m concerned it is end of story. This is the best MM we can get for now. My advice to you is stop thinking about MM for now. You are allocating resources in a most unproductive way. Concentrate on learning to play. You cant change the MM. But you can be a better player. L2P. The Forum is a gold mine. Or even better, think of it as a diamond mine. You will dig a great deal of filth to get to a small fragment of huge value. Regards Saltface Tag: @Bear__Necessities P.S. here are the numbers. Have a look for yourself. http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/

I think you are being pedantic in order to avoid the argument. Let me put it this way to you. If you attack and "kill" someone in a place where it is not illegal to attack and kill then you are not a murderer. But you are still a killer. On average 1 out of 12 players "choose" to play CV, despite the fact that it is commonly known and accepted that the other 11 players will not have fun because of said player choosing to play CV. It is by choice. You chose to fly planes and drop bombs in a game about sailing big ships and shooting guns at other big ships. Well, cigarettes are used (smoked) exactly as designed. I would have a very hard time trying not to put fault on the smoker. At least if you want to play CV you better own it. 11 out of 12 will not like what you are doing. Live with it. On topic: OP if you (as a CV player) have a problem with Halland you need to go to lower tiers and refresh the basics. In this game no ship has AA good enough to deny a strike. Unless, the CV player is not up to the task.

So, it is a racist thing to say "russian bias"?

Oh my, oh my, oh my !! Arrogance galore with a dash of exclusivism, scented with logical fallacies. Attention dear readers, 9 out of 10 of us are useless. Statistically. Big Light in the Sky Boss said so. Full quote and not taken out of context. Clearly presented as statement to refute dfens' claim that one player being afk is a burden to any team. This one counts for arrogance. Exactly dear readers. 9 out of 10. And as you continue on the same train you express your secret desires. Exclusivism! Or are you creating strawmen at the industrial level? Or maybe both of the above? I ll check the logical fallacies with this one. But there are more and, frankly I m bored to point them out. Just for the record answer this: Who said anything of what you posted here? Are these your secret desires or are you insinuating that dfens proposed them? Because he hasn't. He just gave some advise about how to handle a bad internet connection. So? What is it? Some sort of malice? But I m having fun entertaining the idea that you are reflecting your inner desires. Most becoming. The next one is twisted. Trying to tell us that pink is public shaming? So it is not a simple warning that ....duhhh....like.....I m pink....so? Its public shaming? Hence a punishment? Yeah, OK... Please leave the white horse and the shining armor at the wardrobe. Oops, I almost forgot. The advise dfens gave was sound. If you know that your internet connection has problems and disconnects often, be a responsible person and avoid playing randoms, ranked or clan battles until it is fixed. And if once in a blue moon you get pink because you got disconnected, who cares? it is not a punishment. If you want to twist around this sound, clear and straightforward statement...continue. But its rather .... unbecoming I d say. If I was you I would delete my post. I doesn't pay any service to you or anyone.

This is true only in the short run. Long run? Nope. You get more XP and more credits when you win. 50% more. You will be far more productive if you win the battles instead of farming damage and losing. Simple arithmetic and observation of the End Battle screenies prove that Victory is the biggest contributor to a player's XP and credits. If someone on your team does not cap, hydro, radar, spot etc. your team will not win. You will enjoy less credits and XP at the end. Just think that the best XP reward on the losing side is usually less than half the wining team. What does this mean? That if you farm useless damage (even if you score high damage numbers) and you are not contributing towards the victory objectives your team will lose. Despite the fact that you farmed high damage numbers, you will score high on your (losing) team but low in absolute numbers. The definition of bad game economy. The Wiki page is rather informative. https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Base_Earnings

I would take both CE and RL on DDs. The problem comes (for DDs at least) when you need IFHE. However, RL is a strange skill, as it needs a skilled "player" to really benefit from RL as it is a hard to master skill. It works best when in div and both ships of your div run RL and don't play very close to each other. Also, RL works miracles when you communicate with your team. I d suggest new players to stick with CE and after they get the CE skill to try to learn how to play with RL. It will change their game level.

OK this has an easy answer: "your torps your pink" in other words "you launch them you get pink if they hit your teammates". and let me correct your statements please this is the correct reading the only one that is unskilled in the story you describe is the DD that launched torps from the second line. Enjoy your pink and watch out when you torp. DONT hit the green ships, the bad guys are the red ships.

T-61 She is a great ship and I suck at it. LOL But, she is a very good, borderline very strong DD You can't go wrong with getting the T61.

Dear WG Staff, Dear @MrConway, Dear @Crysantos We kindly ask of WG to reconsider removing Narai from the Operations cycle. Kindly keep Narai as is, until such date the replacing debugged Narai is ready. This way your player base will still enjoy Narai until (given your limited resources we assume it will be a long time) such time that the debugged version is ready. Kind Regards Saltface

Hey !! @Blixies Be well..and stay on discord

True ...and this demographic tends to be willing to pay better for better stuff WG might want to consider it

Kraken in Ranked - could be 6 (and I don't complain because I consider the CV secured that kill)

Concerning the DD line ups: Yes and No. Or even better I should say "not necessarily". It all comes down to the strategy applied and quality of players. Given the same quality of players on both teams I would say it would be a very interesting game to watch. And I d give a very fair chance to the DDs.

OOPS. The straw-man approach. No one, except you, in this entire thread has mentioned the OP thing. You just brought it up. LOL No one suggested that you proposed to ban the Kleber. You just want to hard cap ALL DDs, Kleber included. End of straw-man rebuttal. Moreover, in your opening post you suggested that: referring to applying a hard cap as for BBs. Because (again as per your opening statement) you came across a 4 Kleber line up. also stating I guess now you have "an idea" of where I got all this and I would be right to say that this also answers your Tangent question/statement. As far as this statement of yours goes: You quoted my answer to Jethro who was claiming that only trolls and people that favor this line up voted +4. You had already acknowledged the problem, and yes the 4+ saves the situation. I wasn't being pedantic. I was answering to the Troll statement. Bizarre how come you did not see the quote right above my statement. Let me quote it again here so you don't need to search. In conclusion: no one is going on his own tangent. You clearly suggested that we limit all DDs because you came up with a 4 Kleber, 1 Shima Line Up; no one is being pedantic. It was a wrong and biased poll; Concerning this statement Citation needed It is a silver ship and very very easy to get. Just FXP it. So, if it would be such a broken line up that would bring victories I am pretty sure many clans would just FXP it.

Has nothing to do with luck. It has to do with how fast you can adapt to the situation at hand and react to the environment. If it was "luck" and coincidence what is needed to beat a multi Kleber lineup, as you imply, the top Clans (good players by definition) would field 7 Klebers and have an easy run. They would only lose by accident. But they don't. Actually, "multiple Kleber" setups have achieved nothing beyond a nice meme game. Facts are Facts. Your team came across a meme lineup, got frustrated, and want to ban it. This, in my humble opinion, is fundamentally wrong. It implies that we all should play (and think) the same one game with "small variations". What is proposed here is the death of creativity, inventiveness, innovation and thinking out of the box. It is uniformity. Even worse it is imposed right think. Sorry but I radically disagree. You know how to do one thing. Maybe you are also good at doing this one thing. What you are proposing is essentially that we all do this one thing that you know how to do. Because that's what you know. Anything else frustrates you, short circuits your conditioned brains, you can't counter it and you just want to ban it. A one trick pony that is afraid of something it doesn't know how to deal with. I fervently reject your proposal. I would prefer to discuss how you counter such a lineup not how to ban it. So you believe that a trollish line up replaces skill and allows you to climb the ranks? How come we don't see these trollish line ups more often? Even though it is my personal observation, in more than 100 CW battles this season up to Typhoon, I only saw ONCE a Kleber lineup. How strange that people haven't found out yet the road to success. My clan didn't. We did not have a multi Kleber lineup. Maybe that's why we are not Hurricane yet. I think the issue has been answered already. The Poll is wrong. You have to answer both questions. So, anyone wants to select NO has also to vote YES and tick a number of maximum DDs. That's why you have 4+. You just wanted to call everybody that disagrees with you a troll. Two answers before your post explained the same thing. One is my post #13 and Yedwy #17.

@admiralgpt This poll is broken. You can't vote No. You have to vote both. (answers the question of @Palubarac) This is the first part of my statement. Second part now. NO No restrictions, as restrictions establish a think right uniformity that I dislike. Field any kind of line up that you want. That's part of the game. The selection of the line-up, the strategy and the tactics. Only cheating should be restricted. (this is a preemptive anti troll statement) A second preemptive statement is that swarm tactics are a thing. So long the playing field is level I don't find any reason not to field a line up of 7 Klebers (or any line up for that matter). The choice is yours and yours alone. If you can make 7 Klebers work, fine. The only reason to put limits is to avoid the one and only solution that might break the game. So, if 7 Klebers would make an unbeatable line up, and, at the end it wasn't Clan Wars but instead Kleber Wars (because everybody would field 7 Klebers) I 'd consider a limit. But this is not the case. Klebers are still marginal line ups. Find a way to overcome them. What I get from the above statement is that you find "unfun" (and you are afraid of) anything different from what you know. This is a form of conditioning of thought. You know how to handle a specific situation in a specific way and you are afraid of something that obliges you to change and adapt to a new situation. You know how to solve one problem in a specific way and once you encounter something different you get frustrated and can't adapt. As I said above Swarm Tactics are a thing. If you encounter an opponent that applies swarm tactics find the solution and overcome your opponent. In my book there is no merit in limiting the number of DDs per team. But I am open to any debate. Debating with arguments is a wonderful thing. However, I must mention that the issue is a camouflaged opposition to the use of many Klebers not many DDs. The question is not raised because you cant handle 5 Gearings or 5 YY or 5 any kind of DD. The issue comes when you have to face a meme lineup with many Klebers and you short circuit and you lose your marbles. If we are to debate lets be at least honest. Here is the gist of the matter. A clan (like yours) with strong CV mains opposes a lineup of ships that might (or might not) threaten them. Lets forbid anything that can oppose us. That's what I read. What I also find ironic is that the problem exists with a silver line ship. Which is rather annoying. Just as an example I could argue that Stalingrad could be more of an issue. It is a special ship that you can get only if you have enough steel (a rare special resource). Guess what, new clans don't have enough steel among their members. In contrast, anyone can get a Kleber so long they grind the line of French DDs. A bit unfair isn't it? In conclusion. No limits. Do not restrict people's imagination. Unless it breaks the game. And so far Kleber has not broken the game. We rarely see more than 1 DD per side let alone multiple Kleber lineups.

Damn him?