Discounts on defeats this month ???

[Robber_Baron]

1 hour ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

I wish people would stop finding excuses

That would be the first step to improvement.

[CptBarney]

2 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Ive asked several times, but ive yet to get an answer when people whine about exactly that. So if you get a win with like 6k damage its fine, but losing with 100k damage is unheard off Most people even dont realize its easy to do well in a defeat as long as you live.

Same reasons, why people irl refuse to do anything about anything despite being aware of them and once an extreme event occurs humanity suddenly grows a brain and then states the sodding obvious 'wE sHOulD dO sOMetHInG aBOuT tHiS'.

 

Sadly almost every generation from mine till the very first has been doing this. Oddly enough when people get curious is when they start to know, then they either choose to ignore or absorb more info (this can be applied to getting better at this game or staying the same).

[OldPappy]

On my end it’s all FUBAR for the last 20 odd games. 😊

And it’s not my teams. I cannot seem to play right at all no matter what. But I know that suddenly I turn it around and pull off a 3000+ exp game in the Neptune and cannot seem to loose no matter what I do. 

Go figure....

[Herbstnebel1975]

8 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

 

You got higher WR because you were playing RTS CVs before the rework (most played class and best WR). Naturally, since they arent in the game anymore, you play the other 3 classes, in which you always had 50% or less WR.

So unless you try to improve (potentially play less hightiers aswell) your WR will continue to drop.

You are partialy right. I was at my best when playing the RTS CV's tier 4-6. But still I managed to keep my general winrate at the same level without playing CV's from february till half of august...now it just collapses.

[Herbstnebel1975]

3 hours ago, B0Tato said:

Some maybe just like being good at what they do/play.

On the other hand, I tried with WoT to maintain a low general winrate by go suicide and blocking some teammates to play well (I know it was not sportive, it was a real [edited]behaviour but it was all for the science) and once I reached 33% the amount of defeats lowered dramaticaly. All of a sudden i started to collect victory's untill I reached 34 or 35% winrate again. So the other way is as hard is having a high winrate what could means there is a system in the game that tries to balance everything around 50% and most common players have a general winrate around 48-52 %. Coinsedense ??? It's hard to believe that IMO.

For the record, I haven't tried this in Wows and I never plan to do so.  No worries.

[Namuras]

4 minutes ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

On the other hand, I tried with WoT to maintain a low general winrate by go suicide and blocking some teammates to play well (I know it was not sportive, it was a real [edited]behaviour but it was all for the science) and once I reached 33% the amount of defeats lowered dramaticaly.

I'd think that going lower than 33% even with trying hard is close to impossible... especially in WoT where no class is comparativily overly influential. 

With RTS CVs it would be possible... but hard and take some dedication to drop your WR below 33%. 

 

I good "guideline" or "rule" someone on these forum once formulated is: 1/3 of your games are won or lost no matter what you do... the remaining 1/3 is your influence. 

9 minutes ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

common players have a general winrate around 48-52 %

I'd argue the average player is below 48% tbh... 

[TohtoriP]

36 minutes ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

On the other hand, I tried with WoT to maintain a low general winrate by go suicide and blocking some teammates to play well (I know it was not sportive, it was a real [edited]behaviour but it was all for the science) and once I reached 33%

I am lost for words. 

[MadBadDave]

Another conspiracy post, yep I too have added my six pence worth about the sudden and erratic change in fortune, well WR.         You'll get the usual "it's you mate, you're crap, or try harder, and stats don't matter anyway".   

 

How many moaners/whiners or whatever you want to call us does it take before people think; there's something in this; and not doggy doodoo ;-). 

 

Tell me is Russia / the game without controversy ?, going by how strong and accurate the well known and world famous Russian BB's are, I have no doubt Russian Subs and Carriers will also be uber.  In light of the CV rework fiasco Is it impossible encountered sudden and unexplained bad runs are just bad luck ?.

 

Btw given release notes for 8.07 concerning match maker, and how it can be tweeked it does make you kinda wonder ;-).

 

Until the next, conspiracy theory.

 

 

[Herbstnebel1975]

Well...just tried it again just before going to sleep. It was a win for once... but even if it was a defeat i could live with it cause it was a thrill till the end.  Sadly, I end up in a battle like this only once in 100 trials or so ?!?

[Herbstnebel1975]

28 minutes ago, MadBadDave said:

Another conspiracy post, yep I too have added my six pence worth about the sudden and erratic change in fortune, well WR.         You'll get the usual "it's you mate, you're crap, or try harder, and stats don't matter anyway".   

 

How many moaners/whiners or whatever you want to call us does it take before people think; there's something in this; and not doggy doodoo ;-). 

 

Tell me is Russia / the game without controversy ?, going by how strong and accurate the well known and world famous Russian BB's are, I have no doubt Russian Subs and Carriers will also be uber.  In light of the CV rework fiasco Is it impossible encountered sudden and unexplained bad runs are just bad luck ?.

 

Btw given release notes for 8.07 concerning match maker, and how it can be tweeked it does make you kinda wonder ;-).

 

Until the next, conspiracy theory.

 

 

Tell me again that I suck...last battle and ... DEFEAT, but it was a thrill so I'm not gonna complain about noobteam..

[Namuras]

57 minutes ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

Tell me again that I suck...

Well... i got bad news for you... you really aren't that good.

[TeaAndTorps]

13 hours ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

GELDKLOPPERIJ

'money-grubbing' would be a good translation. It's what companies tend to do under capitalism. Indeed it's their legal responsibility. I won't say whether that's good or bad, but I will say that if it makes you unhappy it might be time to think about joining a trade union 

 

But I'm not sure what that has to do with win rates?

[MerchantPrince]

Il y a 14 heures, ColonelPete a dit :

You could stop lying to yourself.

You both did not have month long 90% losing streaks....

I would rather believe him, as I've seen that. It seems to help to restart the game entirely a few times, for some weird reason.

 

Il y a 8 heures, DFens_666 a dit :

 

Ive asked several times, but ive yet to get an answer when people whine about exactly that. So if you get a win with like 6k damage its fine, but losing with 100k damage is unheard off Most people even dont realize its easy to do well in a defeat as long as you live.

True enough, but it mostly fails if you either are a ship that cannot run away (think, Russian BB who did not stay J line for the first five minutes), or if you intend to do something other than rack XP, such asattempt to turn the tide. It's unlikely you'll breach 100k, and probable you'll be somewhere between 20k to 60k anyway.
 

 

Il y a 8 heures, GarrusBrutus a dit :

Funny isn't it? You never see threads like

 

"I played like trash this month and got a 55%wr. MM is rigged in my favor." 

 

Nor do I ever see threads like:

 

"I usually have a 70% winrate, but this month only 60%. MM is rigged against me." 

 

Why is it always people who have a winrate that reflects their poor performance over a period of time who complain about the results? You don't get a positive winrate if you don't play to a certain standard. If you are on a losing streak don't push it, because either its not your day or you're not playing your natural game.

 

If you win 90% of your games it's your amazing gaming skills and if you lose 90% of your games it is the evil companies who want your money. Classic. 

 

Good WR would suggest you understand the basics of the game. Dropping massively suggests that something else is a factor, likely MM or player skill on your teams. It *might* be that suddenly you get dropped into unicum teams and you become irrelevant because you're just not good enough, or the opposite, that even though you're not that bad, the potatoness of others makes you irrelevant. Whether or not it's others being too bad or too good, it's not fun at all.

 

Il y a 12 heures, ColonelPete a dit :

As if the MM of Random would influence Ranked MM...

It's kinda conspiracy theory, but from a pure theorist perspective you can't discount it as easily as you just did. It *might* be that the system checks how good/bad you did and sets you up with better/worse players. If you assume that the system, for example, sets you up with better players if you lose too much, you could go lose a few games in Random, then go play Ranked, and get carried by your team. It's the "WG modifies the amount of black balls" hypothesis.
It's likely a ridiculous assumption, but discounting it without any kind of proof isn't good science ^^

 

 

Il y a 14 heures, Saltface a dit :

@Herbstnebel1975

 

Actually streaks are a tell tell sign of randomness. Winning or losing streaks. So, you got a series of bad teams. It is random. Luck. Sometimes you get a series of good teams, but, as it is a fortuitous event you tend not to notice. This is human nature.

 

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi

 

Indeed. Moreover, you can't bet on when the streak will end, because the principle of a streak is that every run is disconnected from the others, causality wise. If you have 20 white balls and 20 black balls and you blind-fish one out, you have a chance out of two to get a black ball. Whether or not you fished  200 black balls before is irrelevant... unless after a certain amount of black balls, WG starts removing some of the black balls from the box.

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, MerchantPrince said:

I would rather believe him, as I've seen that. It seems to help to restart the game entirely a few times, for some weird reason.

It is rather pointless to believe when you can look stuff up. And they are either lying or ignorant.

 

Btw. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens's_razor

 

And yes, that is good science.

[MerchantPrince]

Il y a 7 minutes, ColonelPete a dit :

It is rather pointless to believe when you can look stuff up. And they are either lying or ignorant.

 

Btw. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens's_razor

 

And yes, that is good science.

You precisely CANNOT look that up, unless you have a codebase access, which sounds rather unlikely, or you set up a mod on thouanbds of players 's computers to follow their WR's progress based on their teammates's play, which sounds even more unlikely.
Hitchen's razor, by the way, does clearly not apply here, unless you apply it to your claim that his analysis is wrong. It's great that you have knowledge of epistemology (and, apparently, of cognitive bias and statistics), but you can't dismiss an hypothesis simply because you do'nt like it.
I actually believe Occam's razor to be a better reference: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/occam.html

 

Cognitive bias (as referenced earlier), and basic stats, suggest that the correct explanation relies on people ignoring their successes and only noticing their failures when observing the games they play and the teams they met. THAT is good science, it brings a likely explanation. I outlined a possible, though much less likely (and therefore, not passing Occam's law) explanation. I believe that the wording is what trips you up here. "Evidence" in Hitchen's law can be something as fickle as "a sensible alternative explanation for a phenomenon that is not instantly destroyed by known facts." For example, "the Earth is not flat" is a theory, it explains sensibly the observation that people disappear when they get over the horizon (or, likely, big buildings do...). Your claim is akin to the one that since you can't go in Space and bring evidence back, you should ignore that theory till rocket science is invented.

Anyway, I agree with you with the root of the matter, his theory is pretty unlikely, but since there is a financial incentive for the company to nurture some players at the expense of most, you can't really discount it entirely based on a pretty flawed application of Hitchen's law.

As a side note, Hitchen is not a scientist, he's a journalist and a political essayist, and his "law" (like Occam's) is not actually a scientific law, but rather a good guideline to public debate and scientific approach, that may sometimes fail.

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, MerchantPrince said:

You precisely CANNOT look that up,...

But I did. Their stats are public....

 

And science is to bring proof to your claim. If you do not bring proof, your claim is not scientific and can be ignored.

A hypothesis is just a hypothesis. You can make a hypothesis about everything ("the moon is a big ball of cheese"). It does not mean much.

[MerchantPrince]

Il y a 7 minutes, ColonelPete a dit :

But I did. Their stats are public....

 

And science is to bring proof to your claim. If you do not bring proof, your claim is not scientific and can be ignored.

A hypothesis is just a hypothesis. You can make a hypothesis about everything ("the moon is a big ball of cheese"). It does not mean much.

You looked their stats up. You did not look their stats compounded with their teammates's behavior up... It seems your scientific rigor is lacking if you can't even check the full statement you're trying to disprove.
Besides, science is NOT to bring proof to your claim. Science is to bring a theory that is not yet disproved, to have someone who may be you prove it, then others prove it again for counter reference, then some people finding edge cases where the theory doesn't quite match, and then another theory is designed to account for those cases. Are you even a scientist?
Anyway, this is getting pretty confrontational, I'm not even the OP, I have no cheese or Moon in the matter, so to say. I wish you a great evening or day and some awesome battles.
 

[MacFergus]

How do you think these purple fellows keep their WR up? They group up with fellow purple players and precede to pull down the trousers of the enemy and spank them very hard.

 

Finding a solo purple player is quite hard in fact its rarer than finding rocking horse poo , So if you really give a monkeys about your WR you know what to do now but I will say this as a solo player myself I have never grouped with any chaps I don't expect for my WR to go above 55% I would be happy with 50% Even if your between 47% 50% your pretty average.

 

Purple players you will find have well over 1/3 to 1/2 their games in Divisions with other good players and this keeps their WR nice and healthy against the rest of us peasants and that's it really no great secret its virtually the same in any WG product tema up with decent players and reap the rewards.

 

[mtm78]

18 hours ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

I've noticed that some players are leaving the game earlier as they see that another upcoming defeat is near and any resistance is futile.

 

If I see those I report them, would save all my reports for them... but frankly I don't really see this at all in game. 

 

18 hours ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

A few weeks ago, a famous gamer of my country was on the radio talking about the history of videogames and how they evolved. When the speaker asked his opinion about games like Fortnite, World of tanks and all other variants where you can pay for ingame stuff, his repley was very short. He had issues  to call it videogames but more like... I don't know a good english word for it...GELDKLOPPERIJ...what means something like GOLDDIGGING COMPANYS .

 

Nah, klinkt meer als een alu hoedjes probleem ( ed: I told him it's an alu hat issue, not a 'golddigging company' even if it's true, they are a company and they want to make a profit ). World of X free2play model is pretty expensive if you make that choice. Single premium ship can be a triple A game in price. But those things are optional, I know 100% free to play players who gotten a few free premiums throughout events and so on, and who never spend a penny on the game. 

 

And their still good players, better as me. 

 

16 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

You got higher WR because you were playing RTS CVs before the rework (most played class and best WR). Naturally, since they arent in the game anymore, you play the other 3 classes, in which you always had 50% or less WR.

So unless you try to improve (potentially play less hightiers aswell) your WR will continue to drop.

 

Ouch, that hurts even me just reading it. 

 

17 hours ago, Herbstnebel1975 said:

Tell me how it comes that the majority of MY battles end up like

The only constant in those battles is you, so why don't you tell us?

 

Anyway you're in a clan, I'm sure you have people there who can show you how things are done properly. If not, plenty of people on youtube / twitch who are showcasing really good gameplay practices!

[Saltface]

5 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"

 

Oh I just started to like you more. 

When I first mentioned Hitchens’ Razor last year I ended up in a “fight”.

Add to this that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” and you have the picture.

 

@MerchantPrince

yes, the late Christopher Hitchens was a journalist and an excellent debater. However, his razor followed Carl Sagan’s quote above. He, was a scientist. Anyway, we can all present a hypothesis. We must also present the empirical data to support our hypothesis. We must also present the falsification process of our hypothesis. And, if our hypothesis stands the scrutiny and resists the falsification efforts of our peers it will find its way in due course of time to become a theory. Conspiracy “theories” however, based on anecdotal singular observations are only good for reality shows. As far as I am concerned any hypothesis or claim that cannot be corroborated by data and evidence or cannot be falsified is none of my concern.

 

Furthermore, unfortunately, the use of statistics in this forum is rather distorted. Statistics is a serious domain of mathematics. Non diligent reading of the numbers is very dangerous.it usually ends up in very silly conclusions.

 

regards

Saltface

 

[loppantorkel]

5 hours ago, MerchantPrince said:

Besides, science is NOT to bring proof to your claim. Science is to bring a theory that is not yet disproved, to have someone who may be you prove it, then others prove it again for counter reference, then some people finding edge cases where the theory doesn't quite match, and then another theory is designed to account for those cases.

Exactly, I'm just bringing the theory for you to test

[ColonelPete]

6 hours ago, MerchantPrince said:

You looked their stats up. You did not look their stats compounded with their teammates's behavior up... It seems your scientific rigor is lacking if you can't even check the full statement you're trying to disprove.

Then read again. Winning or losing is easy to see and that is what they claimed. 

[MerchantPrince]

Il y a 6 heures, Saltface a dit :

Oh I just started to like you more. 

When I first mentioned Hitchens’ Razor last year I ended up in a “fight”.

Add to this that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” and you have the picture.

 

@MerchantPrince

yes, the late Christopher Hitchens was a journalist and an excellent debater. However, his razor followed Carl Sagan’s quote above. He, was a scientist. Anyway, we can all present a hypothesis. We must also present the empirical data to support our hypothesis. We must also present the falsification process of our hypothesis. And, if our hypothesis stands the scrutiny and resists the falsification efforts of our peers it will find its way in due course of time to become a theory. Conspiracy “theories” however, based on anecdotal singular observations are only good for reality shows. As far as I am concerned any hypothesis or claim that cannot be corroborated by data and evidence or cannot be falsified is none of my concern.

 

Furthermore, unfortunately, the use of statistics in this forum is rather distorted. Statistics is a serious domain of mathematics. Non diligent reading of the numbers is very dangerous.it usually ends up in very silly conclusions.

 

regards

Saltface

 

Can't fault your logic. Then again, it's pretty much my second point in the first place ...

[MerchantPrince]

Il y a 5 heures, loppantorkel a dit :

Exactly, I'm just bringing the theory for you to test

Meh. Get yourself some postgrads like everyone.

[Floofz]

15 hours ago, MacFergus said:

How do you think these purple fellows keep their WR up? They group up with fellow purple players and precede to pull down the trousers of the enemy and spank them very hard.

 

Finding a solo purple player is quite hard in fact its rarer than finding rocking horse poo , So if you really give a monkeys about your WR you know what to do now but I will say this as a solo player myself I have never grouped with any chaps I don't expect for my WR to go above 55% I would be happy with 50% Even if your between 47% 50% your pretty average.

 

Purple players you will find have well over 1/3 to 1/2 their games in Divisions with other good players and this keeps their WR nice and healthy against the rest of us peasants and that's it really no great secret its virtually the same in any WG product tema up with decent players and reap the rewards.

 

 

As someone else said the problem doesnt lie in staying at 50-55% winrate. Id also be happy with 50-52% winrate because it would mean that I would be within my skillgap. But here in lies the problem, the WR doesnt behave like that, atleast not for me, or atleast not within the past 4-5 months. When Im playing solo I will have a winrate either below 40% or above 65%. And its not on a day to day basis either. I will be stuck with a very low winrate or a very high winrate for weeks, so my overall WR jumps up and down from 56.0% up to 57% like a jojo. This isnt random behavior, this is a pattern. What the motivations are I dont know, but I would be suprised if it was anything but making people spend money on the game.