Developers posts on forum
In this section you'll find posts from the official developers forum. The base is updated every hour and stored on a server wot-news.com. If you encounter any bugs, have suggestions or comments, write to info@wot-news.com
GhostPrime
Biggest Problem With WOT
20.08.2015 19:26:24
Subject: Biggest Problem With WOT
Link on message: #9332788
Link on message: #9332788
GhostPrime: Out of curiosity, has anyone tried to educate players in a
constructive way? maybe try and direct the battle for a win, that
is something that would would be beneficial to everyone on the
team. It may be easier said than done though because some would not
listen... but it may help.
GhostPrime
Biggest Problem With WOT
20.08.2015 19:26:24
Subject: Biggest Problem With WOT
Link on message: #9332788
Link on message: #9332788
GhostPrime: Out of curiosity, has anyone tried to educate players in a
constructive way? maybe try and direct the battle for a win, that
is something that would would be beneficial to everyone on the
team. It may be easier said than done though because some would not
listen... but it may help.
dance210
Skirmish 32 Standings
20.08.2015 17:40:17
Subject: Skirmish 32 Standings
Link on message: #9332360
Link on message: #9332360
dance210: Skirmish 32 Group Stage Standings Top 50% of teams move on to Alpha
Playoff Bottom 50% of teams move on to Bravo Playoff Tie-breaker
round would be needed to determine which team(s) move on to Alpha
Playoff *Note: Standings are not final until after battles Group
Stage rounds are finished. The following teams were
tied and will play the tiebreaker match tonight. The winner moves
on to the Alpha Playoff; the loser continues to the Bravo Playoff.
Lt's Ruff Riders PFAZE Quickscoperz Round 1 + 2 + 3 Rank
Team Games Played Points Earned Points Possible Win Ratio 1
Brutally Lewd 18 51 54 0.944 1 STRAIGHT OUTTA CREDITS 18 51 54
0.944 1 Vanilla 18 51 54 0.944 4 Dead Clan 18 49 54 0.907 5 onani
master 18 48 54 0.889 5 Swag PapiChulos 305 Dank Masters 18 48 54
0.889 7 WGLNA Fantasy All Stars 18 46 54 0.852 8 The Shrekoning 18
45 54 0.833 9 EVADE The Cunning Stunts 18 44 54 0.815 10 [Team 21]
18 43 54 0.796 10 Power Point Players 18 43 54 0.796 12 ILoveEM 18
42 54 0.778 12 Mawho? 18 42 54 0.778 14 mancos al combate 18 41 54
0.759 14 The Underbobs 18 41 54 0.759 16 Bloodbath and Beyond 18 39
54 0.722 17 Team Sela (￣ｰ￣) 18 38 54 0.704 18 ! Zouth Zpawn Bezt
Zpawn 18 37 54 0.685 18 lol not showing up 18 37 54 0.685 20 Boats
'n Hose 18 36 54 0.667 20 -O_O- 18 36 54 0.667 22 Ze Anonymous
Foxey 18 35 54 0.648 23 I is gunna get klicked 18 34 54 0.630 23
Penguins on Rampage 18 34 54 0.630 23 Seventh Sense 18 34 54 0.630
23 TOTEM 18 34 54 0.630 27 CAPOS 18 33 54 0.611 27 CHKM8 Division 1
18 33 54 0.611 27 Iguana Play 18 33 54 0.611 27 Smeshariki 18 33 54
0.611 31 Blue Cheese 18 31 54 0.574 31 union of salt harvesters 18
31 54 0.574 33 Lucky Clovers 18 30 54 0.556 33 Team Honey Badger 18
30 54 0.556 35 Lt's Ruff Riders 18 29 54 0.537 35 PFAZE
Quickscoperz 18 29 54 0.537 37 TeNaCiTy 18 28 54 0.519 38 -Arpeggio
of Blue Steel- 18 27 54 0.500 38 TEARGAS 18 27 54 0.500 40 It's
Complicated 18 26 54 0.481 40 Vos sos Loco Viteh 18 26 54 0.481 42
death before dismount 18 25 54 0.463 43 Window Lickers 18 24 54
0.444 44 Abpraller 18 23 54 0.426 44 what team 18 23 54 0.426 46
Mythos 18 21 54 0.389 46 PUMA torneos team 18 21 54 0.389 46
Spectre For Hire 18 21 54 0.389 49 The Bench Warmers 18 19 54 0.352
50 Bazooka Joes 18 18 54 0.333 51 ATOMS 18 15 54 0.278 52
!LoveShack 18 14 54 0.259 52 Sturm City Rollers 18 14 54 0.259 54
Blitzkrieg 18 13 54 0.241 55 HAUL 18 12 54 0.222 56 Barn yard boys
18 9 54 0.167 57 _UA_ Team 18 7 54 0.130 57 EXTERMINIO GRUPO ELITE
18 7 54 0.130 57 NBG 18 7 54 0.130 57 Weekend Dailys 18 7 54 0.130
61 Grau Stahl Heer 18 6 54 0.111 61 PRO_S 18 6 54 0.111 61 schwere
Panzerabteilungen 18 6 54 0.111 64 101ABGC Devils Brigade 18 5 54
0.093 65 ART 18 3 54 0.056 65 Kings 18 3 54 0.056 65 Toxic Legacy
18 3 54 0.056 68 teamnoob 18 1 54 0.019 69 Beet Farmers 18 0 54
0.000 69 dossies 18 0 54 0.000
dance210
Skirmish 32 Standings
20.08.2015 17:40:17
Subject: Skirmish 32 Standings
Link on message: #9332360
Link on message: #9332360
dance210: Skirmish 32 Group Stage Standings Top 50% of teams move on to Alpha
Playoff Bottom 50% of teams move on to Bravo Playoff Tie-breaker
round would be needed to determine which team(s) move on to Alpha
Playoff *Note: Standings are not final until after battles Group
Stage rounds are finished. The following teams were
tied and will play the tiebreaker match tonight. The winner moves
on to the Alpha Playoff; the loser continues to the Bravo Playoff.
Lt's Ruff Riders PFAZE Quickscoperz Round 1 + 2 + 3 Rank
Team Games Played Points Earned Points Possible Win Ratio 1
Brutally Lewd 18 51 54 0.944 1 STRAIGHT OUTTA CREDITS 18 51 54
0.944 1 Vanilla 18 51 54 0.944 4 Dead Clan 18 49 54 0.907 5 onani
master 18 48 54 0.889 5 Swag PapiChulos 305 Dank Masters 18 48 54
0.889 7 WGLNA Fantasy All Stars 18 46 54 0.852 8 The Shrekoning 18
45 54 0.833 9 EVADE The Cunning Stunts 18 44 54 0.815 10 [Team 21]
18 43 54 0.796 10 Power Point Players 18 43 54 0.796 12 ILoveEM 18
42 54 0.778 12 Mawho? 18 42 54 0.778 14 mancos al combate 18 41 54
0.759 14 The Underbobs 18 41 54 0.759 16 Bloodbath and Beyond 18 39
54 0.722 17 Team Sela (￣ｰ￣) 18 38 54 0.704 18 ! Zouth Zpawn Bezt
Zpawn 18 37 54 0.685 18 lol not showing up 18 37 54 0.685 20 Boats
'n Hose 18 36 54 0.667 20 -O_O- 18 36 54 0.667 22 Ze Anonymous
Foxey 18 35 54 0.648 23 I is gunna get klicked 18 34 54 0.630 23
Penguins on Rampage 18 34 54 0.630 23 Seventh Sense 18 34 54 0.630
23 TOTEM 18 34 54 0.630 27 CAPOS 18 33 54 0.611 27 CHKM8 Division 1
18 33 54 0.611 27 Iguana Play 18 33 54 0.611 27 Smeshariki 18 33 54
0.611 31 Blue Cheese 18 31 54 0.574 31 union of salt harvesters 18
31 54 0.574 33 Lucky Clovers 18 30 54 0.556 33 Team Honey Badger 18
30 54 0.556 35 Lt's Ruff Riders 18 29 54 0.537 35 PFAZE
Quickscoperz 18 29 54 0.537 37 TeNaCiTy 18 28 54 0.519 38 -Arpeggio
of Blue Steel- 18 27 54 0.500 38 TEARGAS 18 27 54 0.500 40 It's
Complicated 18 26 54 0.481 40 Vos sos Loco Viteh 18 26 54 0.481 42
death before dismount 18 25 54 0.463 43 Window Lickers 18 24 54
0.444 44 Abpraller 18 23 54 0.426 44 what team 18 23 54 0.426 46
Mythos 18 21 54 0.389 46 PUMA torneos team 18 21 54 0.389 46
Spectre For Hire 18 21 54 0.389 49 The Bench Warmers 18 19 54 0.352
50 Bazooka Joes 18 18 54 0.333 51 ATOMS 18 15 54 0.278 52
!LoveShack 18 14 54 0.259 52 Sturm City Rollers 18 14 54 0.259 54
Blitzkrieg 18 13 54 0.241 55 HAUL 18 12 54 0.222 56 Barn yard boys
18 9 54 0.167 57 _UA_ Team 18 7 54 0.130 57 EXTERMINIO GRUPO ELITE
18 7 54 0.130 57 NBG 18 7 54 0.130 57 Weekend Dailys 18 7 54 0.130
61 Grau Stahl Heer 18 6 54 0.111 61 PRO_S 18 6 54 0.111 61 schwere
Panzerabteilungen 18 6 54 0.111 64 101ABGC Devils Brigade 18 5 54
0.093 65 ART 18 3 54 0.056 65 Kings 18 3 54 0.056 65 Toxic Legacy
18 3 54 0.056 68 teamnoob 18 1 54 0.019 69 Beet Farmers 18 0 54
0.000 69 dossies 18 0 54 0.000
dance210
Skirmish 32 Standings
20.08.2015 17:40:17
Subject: Skirmish 32 Standings
Link on message: #9332360
Link on message: #9332360
dance210: Skirmish 32 Group Stage Standings Top 50% of teams move on to Alpha
Playoff Bottom 50% of teams move on to Bravo Playoff Tie-breaker
round would be needed to determine which team(s) move on to Alpha
Playoff *Note: Standings are not final until after battles Group
Stage rounds are finished. The following teams were
tied and will play the tiebreaker match tonight. The winner moves
on to the Alpha Playoff; the loser continues to the Bravo Playoff.
Lt's Ruff Riders PFAZE Quickscoperz Round 1 + 2 + 3 Rank
Team Games Played Points Earned Points Possible Win Ratio 1
Brutally Lewd 18 51 54 0.944 1 STRAIGHT OUTTA CREDITS 18 51 54
0.944 1 Vanilla 18 51 54 0.944 4 Dead Clan 18 49 54 0.907 5 onani
master 18 48 54 0.889 5 Swag PapiChulos 305 Dank Masters 18 48 54
0.889 7 WGLNA Fantasy All Stars 18 46 54 0.852 8 The Shrekoning 18
45 54 0.833 9 EVADE The Cunning Stunts 18 44 54 0.815 10 [Team 21]
18 43 54 0.796 10 Power Point Players 18 43 54 0.796 12 ILoveEM 18
42 54 0.778 12 Mawho? 18 42 54 0.778 14 mancos al combate 18 41 54
0.759 14 The Underbobs 18 41 54 0.759 16 Bloodbath and Beyond 18 39
54 0.722 17 Team Sela (￣ｰ￣) 18 38 54 0.704 18 ! Zouth Zpawn Bezt
Zpawn 18 37 54 0.685 18 lol not showing up 18 37 54 0.685 20 Boats
'n Hose 18 36 54 0.667 20 -O_O- 18 36 54 0.667 22 Ze Anonymous
Foxey 18 35 54 0.648 23 I is gunna get klicked 18 34 54 0.630 23
Penguins on Rampage 18 34 54 0.630 23 Seventh Sense 18 34 54 0.630
23 TOTEM 18 34 54 0.630 27 CAPOS 18 33 54 0.611 27 CHKM8 Division 1
18 33 54 0.611 27 Iguana Play 18 33 54 0.611 27 Smeshariki 18 33 54
0.611 31 Blue Cheese 18 31 54 0.574 31 union of salt harvesters 18
31 54 0.574 33 Lucky Clovers 18 30 54 0.556 33 Team Honey Badger 18
30 54 0.556 35 Lt's Ruff Riders 18 29 54 0.537 35 PFAZE
Quickscoperz 18 29 54 0.537 37 TeNaCiTy 18 28 54 0.519 38 -Arpeggio
of Blue Steel- 18 27 54 0.500 38 TEARGAS 18 27 54 0.500 40 It's
Complicated 18 26 54 0.481 40 Vos sos Loco Viteh 18 26 54 0.481 42
death before dismount 18 25 54 0.463 43 Window Lickers 18 24 54
0.444 44 Abpraller 18 23 54 0.426 44 what team 18 23 54 0.426 46
Mythos 18 21 54 0.389 46 PUMA torneos team 18 21 54 0.389 46
Spectre For Hire 18 21 54 0.389 49 The Bench Warmers 18 19 54 0.352
50 Bazooka Joes 18 18 54 0.333 51 ATOMS 18 15 54 0.278 52
!LoveShack 18 14 54 0.259 52 Sturm City Rollers 18 14 54 0.259 54
Blitzkrieg 18 13 54 0.241 55 HAUL 18 12 54 0.222 56 Barn yard boys
18 9 54 0.167 57 _UA_ Team 18 7 54 0.130 57 EXTERMINIO GRUPO ELITE
18 7 54 0.130 57 NBG 18 7 54 0.130 57 Weekend Dailys 18 7 54 0.130
61 Grau Stahl Heer 18 6 54 0.111 61 PRO_S 18 6 54 0.111 61 schwere
Panzerabteilungen 18 6 54 0.111 64 101ABGC Devils Brigade 18 5 54
0.093 65 ART 18 3 54 0.056 65 Kings 18 3 54 0.056 65 Toxic Legacy
18 3 54 0.056 68 teamnoob 18 1 54 0.019 69 Beet Farmers 18 0 54
0.000 69 dossies 18 0 54 0.000
Triple_Crown
Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
20.08.2015 17:16:23
Subject: Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
Link on message: #9332282
olaechea, on Aug 20 2015 - 02:36, said: Yesterday night I send de aplicacion for mi team (renoobs) and when
we login for the tournament in the condición of formed (formado in
spanish) but we hadn't any sheduled battle and the opción of aply
was there again... we couldn't play
Link on message: #9332282
olaechea, on Aug 20 2015 - 02:36, said: Yesterday night I send de aplicacion for mi team (renoobs) and when
we login for the tournament in the condición of formed (formado in
spanish) but we hadn't any sheduled battle and the opción of aply
was there again... we couldn't playTriple_Crown: Once you have completed your team , you need to submit it -
on this occasion you did not go through that last step - hope this
clarifies the reason why you were not in the Tournament. Please try
again for a later event ! Thank you TC
Triple_Crown
Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
20.08.2015 03:20:43
Subject: Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
Link on message: #9330620
jag314, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:08, said: We gave 2nd battle away because we thought we were over according
to WEB PAGE. Please advise. SHOTS FIRED CAPTAIN CUMBERLAND Bracket
Link on message: #9330620
jag314, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:08, said: We gave 2nd battle away because we thought we were over according
to WEB PAGE. Please advise. SHOTS FIRED CAPTAIN CUMBERLAND Bracket
Triple_Crown: Jag please open a dispute and include the replay - I will
review it ~Triple Crown
Triple_Crown
Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
20.08.2015 03:17:17
Subject: Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
Link on message: #9330605
Cazzo75, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:53, said: todays stand to tourney page says encounter and 15 tier points,
forum says no restrictions and standard. Brought 15 points
last battle vs 18, but it was standard. So were gonna go with 18
for the next battles since the forum was half right with the game
mode.
shikonoob, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:53, said: Yah i see it too.. and in 2 battlers I enter 15 points team, boot
outher team have 18 points... and we lost 2 battlers for
it...
shikonoob, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:03, said: send me u email for me send the screens...
jag314, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:08, said: We gave 2nd battle away because we thought we were over according
to WEB PAGE. Please advise. SHOTS FIRED CAPTAIN CUMBERLAND Bracket
Link on message: #9330605
Cazzo75, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:53, said: todays stand to tourney page says encounter and 15 tier points,
forum says no restrictions and standard. Brought 15 points
last battle vs 18, but it was standard. So were gonna go with 18
for the next battles since the forum was half right with the game
mode. Triple_Crown:
shikonoob, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:53, said: Yah i see it too.. and in 2 battlers I enter 15 points team, boot
outher team have 18 points... and we lost 2 battlers for
it... Triple_Crown:
shikonoob, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:03, said: send me u email for me send the screens...Triple_Crown:
jag314, on Aug 20 2015 - 00:08, said: We gave 2nd battle away because we thought we were over according
to WEB PAGE. Please advise. SHOTS FIRED CAPTAIN CUMBERLAND Bracket
Triple_Crown: Use the usual dispute process please guys and I will
personally review them. Please email
to tournaments@wargamingamerica.com - here is the policy
- I am ok with a screenshot of the end of Battle screen as long you
include all the other info AND as it clearly shows the teams
tanks. Disputes must adhere to the protocol detailed below
or risk having the dispute dropped by tournament administration.
Disputes must be submitted immediately after the round has
concluded. Disputes must be emailed
to tournaments@wargamingamerica.com The email subject/title
must include the word “Dispute:” followed by the name of the event
for which you are filing a dispute. Disputes may only be filed by
the team captain or any team member listed under team’s contact
details. Disputes must include the following in the body of
the email or risk having the dispute dropped by tournament
administration: In-game name of the player submitting the dispute
Date of the Stand-To Your team’s name with a link to your team’s
page created for you during registration Your opponent’s team name
and a link to your opponent’s team page created during registration
Reason for dispute: e.g. “I would like to report the team for using
a tank that was not allowed, the StuG III.” An attached replay of
the disputed battle(s) Triple Crown
Triple_Crown
Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
20.08.2015 02:52:20
Subject: Stand To Week of August 17th - 'Three and Easy'
Link on message: #9330506
rgMekanic, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:40, said: todays stand to tourney page says encounter and 15 tier points,
forum says no restrictions and standard. Brought 15 points
last battle vs 18, but it was standard. So were gonna go with 18
for the next battles since the forum was half right with the game
mode.
Link on message: #9330506
rgMekanic, on Aug 19 2015 - 23:40, said: todays stand to tourney page says encounter and 15 tier points,
forum says no restrictions and standard. Brought 15 points
last battle vs 18, but it was standard. So were gonna go with 18
for the next battles since the forum was half right with the game
mode.Triple_Crown: You were correct - the Forum detail was correct as was the
detailed Tournament page but the text for Tier Total was incorrect
- if you lost that first match send me a screen capture of the
replay battle result and I'll react accordingly ( and not to the
detriment of the other team ) ...apologies fyi there was an
update to our scheduling system this am that caused some minor
headaches for us today and as a result I totally missed this
typo... ~Triple Crown
Content_WG
PAX 15 Player Gathering
20.08.2015 01:30:31
Subject: PAX 15 Player Gathering
Link on message: #9330181
Link on message: #9330181
Content_WG: Join us in Seattle for a night of fun during PAX!
Full news text
Full news text
Pigeon_of_War
9.10 Common Test Issues and Bugs Thread
20.08.2015 01:30:15
Subject: 9.10 Common Test Issues and Bugs Thread
Link on message: #9330180
Link on message: #9330180
Pigeon_of_War: I should not, the Common Test is currently OFF right now. Should be
up later on tomorrow!
veganzombiez
Clan Spotlight Stream: Absolutes 08/26/15
20.08.2015 00:22:14
Subject: Clan Spotlight Stream: Absolutes 08/26/15
Link on message: #9329873
Link on message: #9329873
veganzombiez: From 1600 to 1800 PT (1900 ET - 2100 ET) on August 26, 2015, there
will be a Clan Spotlight stream in Absolute skirmishes! If
you encounter the Spotlight Detachment, you can get 500 gold for a
win, 250 gold for a loss, 0 for a draw, and double the gold if you
stream!
DavidBowieRocks
Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
19.08.2015 23:43:57
Subject: Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre! DavidBowieRocks: Vai sim!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
DavidBowieRocks
Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
19.08.2015 23:43:57
Subject: Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre! DavidBowieRocks: Vai sim!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
DavidBowie4Ever
Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
19.08.2015 23:43:57
Subject: Concurso: Ganhe Ingressos para a Brasil Mega Arena!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre!
Link on message: #9329684
RBressan, on Aug 19 2015 - 11:13, said: Boa ideia Spanha.... reservando espaço também! rss ....esse
ano vai ter breja no centro?? o7 Pierre! DavidBowie4Ever: Vai sim!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
Essa semana a gente publica os detalhes!
veganzombiez
Global Map 2.0 General Feedback
19.08.2015 22:13:45
Subject: Global Map 2.0 General Feedback
Link on message: #9329273
linuvwen, on Aug 19 2015 - 06:36, said: why is there a star on the tier 8 front?
Gyarados, on Aug 19 2015 - 10:48, said: So they took away defense bids, dramatically increased the amount
of influence to upgrade provinces, gave us like 70 240g provinces,
and kept the upgrades at +120 per level. Sweet af.
Link on message: #9329273
linuvwen, on Aug 19 2015 - 06:36, said: why is there a star on the tier 8 front?veganzombiez: The star is the recommended Front for your clan.
Gyarados, on Aug 19 2015 - 10:48, said: So they took away defense bids, dramatically increased the amount
of influence to upgrade provinces, gave us like 70 240g provinces,
and kept the upgrades at +120 per level. Sweet af. veganzombiez: Defense bids were replaced with Sappers. If the latter
isn't enough, Defense bids may be turned back on. Increasing
the upgrade value is already in discussion.
veganzombiez
Global Map 2.0 Bug Report Thread [Update 7/24]
19.08.2015 22:10:54
Subject: Global Map 2.0 Bug Report Thread [Update 7/24]
Link on message: #9329264
Dlur, on Aug 19 2015 - 08:57, said: If you go to the Log on the new global map, everything is in
Russian.
Link on message: #9329264
Dlur, on Aug 19 2015 - 08:57, said: If you go to the Log on the new global map, everything is in
Russian.veganzombiez: Control + F5 to clear your cache and refresh the page.
Content_WG
WGLNA Playoffs Promise Intense Action, Drama
19.08.2015 21:54:13
Subject: WGLNA Playoffs Promise Intense Action, Drama
Link on message: #9329206
Link on message: #9329206
Content_WG: High Woltage Caballers, Team Refuse enter postseason as favorites
to win it all.
Full news text
Full news text
veganzombiez
Map not fixed
19.08.2015 21:00:00
Subject: Map not fixed
Link on message: #9329028
Link on message: #9329028
veganzombiez: Our developers are working on improvements to the UI.
veganzombiez
Suddenly found 10,000 gold in clan treasury, how do I find out who earned it?
19.08.2015 20:55:16
Subject: Suddenly found 10,000 gold in clan treasury, how do I find out who earned it?
Link on message: #9329012
BDNeon, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:19, said: So I decide to peruse the clan page and I have a mini heart attack
when I find out we're sitting on 10k gold in the treasury that
seems to have popped into existence while I wasn't looking, but I
can't seem to find out where it came from, searching through the
history of Income doesn't give me anything on it. I can't in good
conscience do anything with it until I learn how it was obtained.
So how would I go about it?
Link on message: #9329012
BDNeon, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:19, said: So I decide to peruse the clan page and I have a mini heart attack
when I find out we're sitting on 10k gold in the treasury that
seems to have popped into existence while I wasn't looking, but I
can't seem to find out where it came from, searching through the
history of Income doesn't give me anything on it. I can't in good
conscience do anything with it until I learn how it was obtained.
So how would I go about it?veganzombiez: You got it back in February for the Facebook Clan Emblem
contest.
ElPozoleOlmeca
No puedo ver Replays
19.08.2015 20:48:59
Subject: No puedo ver Replays
Link on message: #9328985
Link on message: #9328985
ElPozoleOlmeca: Hay un truco para poder ver sus repeticiones. No me lo van a creer
pero aquí va, selecciona la repetición que quieres ver y haz una
copia, después mueve la copia en la carpeta principal
(C:\Games\World_of_Tanks) y dale doble clic.
Listo.
PollotheDestroyer
No puedo ver Replays
19.08.2015 20:48:59
Subject: No puedo ver Replays
Link on message: #9328985
Link on message: #9328985
PollotheDestroyer: Hay un truco para poder ver sus repeticiones. No me lo van a creer
pero aquí va, selecciona la repetición que quieres ver y haz una
copia, después mueve la copia en la carpeta principal
(C:\Games\World_of_Tanks) y dale doble clic.
Listo.
ApolloArtemis
No puedo ver Replays
19.08.2015 20:48:59
Subject: No puedo ver Replays
Link on message: #9328985
Link on message: #9328985
ApolloArtemis: Hay un truco para poder ver sus repeticiones. No me lo van a creer
pero aquí va, selecciona la repetición que quieres ver y haz una
copia, después mueve la copia en la carpeta principal
(C:\Games\World_of_Tanks) y dale doble clic.
Listo.
veganzombiez
New Global Map 2.0
19.08.2015 20:42:16
Subject: New Global Map 2.0
Link on message: #9328960
KingKira14, on Aug 19 2015 - 04:14, said: So as we all know the new global map has went live today with new
provinces and in a new geographical location. Decided to hop on and
see if i could find a province for my clan and i found that the new
outlook is pretty nice but there is one major problem. The map
hints were in Russian. Is anyone else getting the same problem?
Link on message: #9328960
KingKira14, on Aug 19 2015 - 04:14, said: So as we all know the new global map has went live today with new
provinces and in a new geographical location. Decided to hop on and
see if i could find a province for my clan and i found that the new
outlook is pretty nice but there is one major problem. The map
hints were in Russian. Is anyone else getting the same problem?veganzombiez: Control + F5 should fix the issue since it'll refresh your
cache.
veganzombiez
The New Global Map is Almost Here!
19.08.2015 20:21:26
Subject: The New Global Map is Almost Here!
Link on message: #9328898
SlyGambit, on Aug 19 2015 - 03:57, said: GG OTTER and CHAI. Getting on the map before it officially launches
because you literally know how the map works better than WG.
Hilarious.
Link on message: #9328898
SlyGambit, on Aug 19 2015 - 03:57, said: GG OTTER and CHAI. Getting on the map before it officially launches
because you literally know how the map works better than WG.
Hilarious. veganzombiez: Per Armageddon Knight of the Apocalypse medal:
Capture and hold the "Spaceport" province in New Swabia at
the end of the Armageddon event. Awarded to all Clan members
who are on the Clan roster at the end of the event. In addition,
these Clans will get territories on the new Global Map after its
release.
GhostPrime
See, video games ARE good for jobs!
19.08.2015 19:14:14
Subject: See, video games ARE good for jobs!
Link on message: #9328671
Link on message: #9328671
GhostPrime: There has been a lot of talk in recent years about even cars that
may be driven with PS3 controllers. The idea is that people who
have grown up with video games are able to use that control type.
The same goes for Unmanned military vehicles.
GhostPrime
See, video games ARE good for jobs!
19.08.2015 19:14:14
Subject: See, video games ARE good for jobs!
Link on message: #9328671
Link on message: #9328671
GhostPrime: There has been a lot of talk in recent years about even cars that
may be driven with PS3 controllers. The idea is that people who
have grown up with video games are able to use that control type.
The same goes for Unmanned military vehicles.
Pigeon_of_War
9.10 Common Test Issues and Bugs Thread
19.08.2015 19:07:59
Subject: 9.10 Common Test Issues and Bugs Thread
Link on message: #9328640
Link on message: #9328640
Pigeon_of_War: Hey Tankers! We are going to be restarting the Common Test
here soon, likely tomorrow, and with it we will be fixing many of
the issues brought up here. Stay tuned for more details!
dance210
Skirmish 34
19.08.2015 18:57:47
Subject: Skirmish 34
Link on message: #9328587
Link on message: #9328587
dance210:
Skirmish Rules Tournament Page Registration for entire
tournament Registration for weekend
only playoffs Looking for a
Team/Players Group Stage Standings Basic Tournament
Information for Skirmish 34 Please see tournament page for all information Team
Size: 6 combatants + 3 reserves Map: Murovanka
Mode: Encounter Tier Point Minimum: 14 Tier Point Maximum: 28
Tier Limits: This represents the max tier allowed. Teams are
allowed to bring lower tiers. Light: Tier 4 Medium:
Tier 5 Heavy: Tier 5 TD: Tier 5 SPG: Tier 4
dance210
Skirmish 34
19.08.2015 18:57:47
Subject: Skirmish 34
Link on message: #9328587
Link on message: #9328587
dance210:
Skirmish Rules Tournament Page Registration for entire
tournament Registration for weekend
only playoffs Looking for a
Team/Players Group Stage Standings Basic Tournament
Information for Skirmish 34 Please see tournament page for all information Team
Size: 6 combatants + 3 reserves Map: Murovanka
Mode: Encounter Tier Point Minimum: 14 Tier Point Maximum: 28
Tier Limits: This represents the max tier allowed. Teams are
allowed to bring lower tiers. Light: Tier 4 Medium:
Tier 5 Heavy: Tier 5 TD: Tier 5 SPG: Tier 4
dance210
Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
19.08.2015 18:36:46
Subject: Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments!
TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.
Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments! TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
dance210: I'm thinking your are over-complicating a relatively simple
rule. The simple explanations added after each draw rule are there
to help players understand what each means. What was left off the
Opponent Strength rule, is that it refers to all other opponents
not covered by 1 and 2 (e.g. does not include the group leader or
other tied team(s)). In this case, because of Opponent
Strenght, xBBx was removed from the three-way tie having been
defeated by Lost in Space. Once the two-way tie was established,
the draw rules were redone, starting from the top. While I
can see your point, the rules are always followed in this pattern,
for this tournament as well as all others that we have done.
dance210
Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
19.08.2015 18:36:46
Subject: Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments! TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.
Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments! TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
dance210: I'm thinking your are over-complicating a relatively simple
rule. The simple explanations added after each draw rule are there
to help players understand what each means. What was left off the
Opponent Strength rule, is that it refers to all other opponents
not covered by 1 and 2 (e.g. does not include the group leader or
other tied team(s)). In this case, because of Opponent
Strenght, xBBx was removed from the three-way tie having been
defeated by Lost in Space. Once the two-way tie was established,
the draw rules were redone, starting from the top. While I
can see your point, the rules are always followed in this pattern,
for this tournament as well as all others that we have done.
dance210
Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
19.08.2015 18:36:46
Subject: Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments! TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.
Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
Link on message: #9328500
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 20:05, said: Let me begin by thanking you for years of fun
tournaments! TL;DR version If your findings are
BADD 4th, DARKS 5th, xBBx 6th, then: BADD is 4th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,5) DARKS is 5th with an opponent
strength, final rank of (1,2,3,4) xBBx is 6th with an opponent
strenght, final rank of (1,2,4,7) This was addressed in my
'spoiler' earlier post B.3. Is the intent of Tiebreaker 3 to
permit a team with an opponent strength final rank of (1,2,3,5) to
place higher than a team with an opponent strength final rank of
(1,2,3,4)? I'm going to guess that was neither your intent or the
intent of Tiebreaker 3. My argument (condensed): 4th DARKS
final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent
strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7)
The placement I'm arguing for fully satisfies the letter and
spirit of Tiebreaker 3, as it looks at final opponent strength. As
previously mentioned I examined all [13] possible permutations of
the three teams and their final standings before finding this one
perfect fit. Summation: - There is no question that
Tiebreaker 3 is a complex rule to implement and interpret as it
fundamentally requires determining a final score of opponents when
the final score is the issue at hand, kinda like saying 'The winner
is the team who won'. I got around that conundrum by exploring all
possible final scores [permutations of 4th, 5th and 6th place] and
(purely coincidentally) there was only one that resulted in a 100%
logical fit. Offhand, I'd say that this is a rare case. - As a
result, I renew my appeal to place DARKS 4th, BADD 5th and xBBx 6th
as that's the only way I exhaustively concluded that Tiebreaker 3
is resolved logically and truthfully. - I'm not requesting that any
other teams lose gold, only that ours receives our award. - After
all is said and done, I am satisfied with (but was not requesting)
a final result of DARKS 4th place (BADD 4th place and/or xBBx 4th
place) as long as DARKS receives the full 1000 gold award. - As
always, love the tourneys and ty ty ty! If you're still not
convinced, the details of my argument are in the 'new' spoiler. I
can't claim to have evaluated every possible permutation (that's an
unknown unknown) but I can assure you I've assessed every
permutation I could think of. If I understand the
Tiebreaking Rules correctly, the Tiebreaking rules are: a) Applied
hierarchically and iteratively (If there is a n-tie by points, then
apply Tiebreaker 1 and only Tiebreaker 1. If some tied teams
remain, and the Tie is unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 2 and only
tiebreaker 2, and if still unresolved, apply Tiebreaker 3 and only
Tiebreaker 3). b) When exhausted with no resolution, the result is
Tiebreaker 4 (Complete Draw). IF it is your position that
Tiebreaking 3. results in a draw for BADD and DARKS, then, as we
are tied, shouldn't Tiebreaker 4 (complete draw) apply, with the
result BADD and DARKS tie for 4th place? This was not the argument
I was making, but I will be satisfied with that result. IF
instead, it is your position that Tiebreaking 3. results
preliminary in a draw between BADD and DARKS, but then DARKS loses,
because BADD lost to DARKS a) How does the fact that DARKS lost to
BADD relevant to Tiebreaker 3? If so, why isn't the fact that DARKS
beat xBBx, who beat BADD also considered in Tiebreaker 3? b) Even
if we accept that DARKS loses to BADD, arbitrarily (for the sake of
argument), then BADD holds 4th place with a final opponent strength
of (1,2,3,6) and DARKS holds 5th place with a final opponent
strength of (1,2,3,4)! That is, of course, an unacceptable result
because Tiebreaker 3 clearly appeals to final opponent strength.
It doesn't seem then that Tiebreaker 3 is applied at all -
and T3 does clearly say final rank. Seems counter-intuitive,
but this is the stuff I explored in the TL;DR spoiler in my
original post.Given the starting position:
- DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (unknown final rank), so DARKS lost to 1-3 and BADD - so DARKS prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (unknown final rank), so BADD lost to 1-3 and xBBx - BADD's prelim 'score' is 1,2,3,(4/5/6).
- xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (unknown final rank) and 7, so xBBx lost to 1,2,7 and DARKS. xBBx prelim score 1,2,(4/5/6),7. Now, as dance210 collapses the many possible final outcomes, into one final state, we open Schrödinger's box, the cat is now alive, and ... With BADD in 4th place, DARKS in 5th and xBBx in 6th ... Opponent Strength: What was the final rank of any team(s) that have defeated the tied teams? - DARKS lost to 1,2,3 and BADD (which is 4th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,4) but is somehow in 5th place. - BADD lost to 1,2,3 and xBBx (which is 6th place) and ended up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,3,6) but is in 4th place (how???) - xBBx lost to 1,2, DARKS (which is 5th place) and 7, ending up with a final Opponent Strength of (1,2,7,5) and is in 6th place. However (my argument), if DARKS is 4th, BADD is 5th and xBBx is 6th, then we open Schrödinger's box and ... 4th DARKS final opponent strength is (1,2,3,5) 5th BADD final opponent strength is (1,2,3,6) 6th xBBx final opponent strength is (1,2,4,7) I think I explored all [13] possible combinations of DARKS, BADD and xBBx in 4th-6th place, but I can't be sure [transparently in my original 'spoiler']. If I did, then the only logical conclusion is DARKS 4th BADD 5th xBBx 6th. There is an alternate possibility that xBBx 4th, BADD 5th and DARKS 6th leads to a logically valid conclusion, but to be true a final opponent strength of (1,2,6,7) would need to be better (for placement) than a final opponent strength of (1,2,3,4). Even if I didn't explore all possible combinations (for example, I missed one or more possible combinations) of teams and placements, DARKS 4th BADD 5th and xBBX 6th is still valid, and stacked up against one or more valid propositions, then a finding of 'tie' would be the rational outcome. If additional detail is required, my original reply [open spoiler] assesses the [13] permutations I could come up with.
dance210: I'm thinking your are over-complicating a relatively simple
rule. The simple explanations added after each draw rule are there
to help players understand what each means. What was left off the
Opponent Strength rule, is that it refers to all other opponents
not covered by 1 and 2 (e.g. does not include the group leader or
other tied team(s)). In this case, because of Opponent
Strenght, xBBx was removed from the three-way tie having been
defeated by Lost in Space. Once the two-way tie was established,
the draw rules were redone, starting from the top. While I
can see your point, the rules are always followed in this pattern,
for this tournament as well as all others that we have done.
Trevzor
Skirmish 32 Standings
19.08.2015 18:16:14
Subject: Skirmish 32 Standings
Link on message: #9328451
Link on message: #9328451
Trevzor: Skirmish 32 Group Stage Standings: Round 2 Top 50% of teams move on
to Alpha Playoff Bottom 50% of teams move on to Bravo Playoff
Tie-breaker round would be needed to determine which team(s) move
on to Alpha Playoff *Note: Standings are not final until after
battles Group Stage rounds are finished. Rank Team Name Total
Points Earned Total Points Possible Win Ratio 1 [Team 21] 34 36
0.944 2 Brutally Lewd 33 36 0.917 2 onani master 33 36 0.917 2
STRAIGHT OUTTA CREDITS 33 36 0.917 2 Vanilla 33 36 0.917 6 EVADE
The Cunning Stunts 32 36 0.889 7 Dead Clan 31 36 0.861 7 WGLNA
Fantasy All Stars 31 36 0.861 9 ILoveEM 30 36 0.833 9 Swag
PapiChulos 305 Dank Masters 30 36 0.833 9 The Shrekoning 30 36
0.833 12 The Underbobs 29 36 0.806 13 Team Sela (￣ｰ￣) 28 36 0.778
14 Mawho? 27 36 0.750 15 mancos al combate 26 36 0.722 15 Ze
Anonymous Foxey 26 36 0.722 17 ! Zouth Zpawn Bezt Zpawn 25 36 0.694
17 lol not showing up 25 36 0.694 17 Power Point Players 25 36
0.694 20 Boats 'n Hose 24 36 0.667 20 CAPOS 24 36 0.667 20 CHKM8
Division 1 24 36 0.667 20 Iguana Play 24 36 0.667 24 Penguins on
Rampage 22 36 0.611 24 Seventh Sense 22 36 0.611 24 TOTEM 22 36
0.611 27 Bloodbath and Beyond 21 36 0.583 27 -O_O- 21 36 0.583 27
Smeshariki 21 36 0.583 27 Team Honey Badger 21 36 0.583 31 It's
Complicated 20 36 0.556 32 death before dismount 19 36 0.528 32 I
is gunna get klicked 19 36 0.528 32 what team 19 36 0.528 35
-Arpeggio of Blue Steel- 18 36 0.500 35 Lucky Clovers 18 36 0.500
35 Mythos 18 36 0.500 35 TeNaCiTy 18 36 0.500 39 Lt's Ruff Riders
17 36 0.472 39 PFAZE Quickscoperz 17 36 0.472 41 Blue Cheese 16 36
0.444 41 union of salt harvesters 16 36 0.444 41 Vos sos Loco Viteh
16 36 0.444 44 Abpraller 15 36 0.417 44 TEARGAS 15 36 0.417 44
Window Lickers 15 36 0.417 47 Sturm City Rollers 13 36 0.361 48
Bazooka Joes 12 36 0.333 48 PUMA torneos team 12 36 0.333 48
Spectre For Hire 12 36 0.333 48 The Bench Warmers 12 36 0.333 52
!LoveShack 10 36 0.278 52 Blitzkrieg 10 36 0.278 54 ATOMS 9 36
0.250 54 HAUL 9 36 0.250 56 EXTERMINIO GRUPO ELITE 7 36 0.194 56
NBG 7 36 0.194 58 _UA_ Team 6 36 0.167 58 Barn yard boys 6 36 0.167
58 PRO_S 6 36 0.167 58 schwere Panzerabteilungen 6 36 0.167 62
Weekend Dailys 5 36 0.139 63 Grau Stahl Heer 3 36 0.083 63 Toxic
Legacy 3 36 0.083 65 ART 2 36 0.056 66 101ABGC Devils Brigade 1 36
0.028 66 teamnoob 1 36 0.028 68 Beet Farmers 0 36 0.000 68 dossies
0 36 0.000 68 Kings 0 36 0.000
Trevzor
Weekday Warfare 31 Official Standings
19.08.2015 17:49:44
Subject: Weekday Warfare 31 Official Standings
Link on message: #9328367
Link on message: #9328367
Trevzor: Weekday Warfare 31 Group Stage Standings: Day 2 Top 16 by rank
(including ties) teams move on to Rounds 4 + 5 Bottom 5% of
teams by rank (including ties) are eliminated between rounds
*Note: Standings are not final until after battles Group Stage
Round 3 is finished. Rank Team Name Games Played Points
Earned Points Possible Win Ratio 1 Mandingo Warriors 14 42 42 1.000
2 WW1 14 39 42 0.929 3 Cancer is real 14 38 42 0.905 4 killswitch
needs his ritalin 14 36 42 0.857 4 PENDING APPROVAL 14 36 42 0.857
4 SCUD Launcher Poised to Strike 14 36 42 0.857 7 Nooblets 14 34 42
0.810 8 Celine Dion Death Squad 13 31 39 0.795 9 NoAmmo 10SBP 14 33
42 0.786 9 Rogue Pack 14 33 42 0.786 9 -Violent Display Of Power-
14 33 42 0.786 12 La Tr4ck 14 31 42 0.738 13 Serbian team 14 30 42
0.714 13 The Goats of Doom 14 30 42 0.714 15 LUIGI 13 27 39 0.692
15 They_Say_Y0L0_Hax 13 27 39 0.692 17 Bear Huggers 14 28 42 0.667
17 pwsgteam 14 28 42 0.667 19 DOA's team 14 27 42 0.643 19 Triple
xXx 14 27 42 0.643 21 I won't make inappropriate names 13 24 39
0.615 21 Madgod's Maniacs 13 24 39 0.615 23 Ping 999 14 24 42 0.571
24 ! ♠Ravenous Ravenous Renegades♠ 13 22 39 0.564 24 The power of
m@ster tacos 13 22 39 0.564 26 ¿º-º?noobs 14 23 42 0.548 27 KBoOm
14 22 42 0.524 27 Lucky Clovers 14 22 42 0.524 29 cruz del sur 14
21 42 0.500 30 PWS-B waffle squad bagel divison 13 18 39 0.462 31
The Irish Enforcers (TIE) 14 18 42 0.429 31 TUCSA 14 18 42 0.429 33
MASK 13 15 39 0.385 34 IRMÃOS DE AÇO BR 14 15 42 0.357 35 EFM 14 12
42 0.286 35 Gunz of Anarchy 14 12 42 0.286 37 gone to the dark side
13 10 39 0.256 38 Dreadnoughts 14 10 42 0.238 39 [X-0-X] Two Black
Eyes 14 9 42 0.214 39 América-Del- sur 14 9 42 0.214 39 Welcome
Free Join On Time Come . 14 9 42 0.214 42 _UA_ Team 13 7 39 0.179
42 Quality Chaos 13 7 39 0.179 44 Ghost 14 6 42 0.143 45 (UMM)
United Metal Marauders 14 5 42 0.119 46 re noobs 14 4 42 0.095 47
B-501 14 2 42 0.048 47 IMBRA ALFA 14 2 42 0.048
Triple_Crown
Late Night Mayhem - 9pm PDT SATURDAY 22nd AUGUST 3v3 Tier 6
19.08.2015 17:45:34
Subject: Late Night Mayhem - 9pm PDT SATURDAY 22nd AUGUST 3v3 Tier 6
Link on message: #9328346
Rommel85, on Aug 19 2015 - 14:29, said: It says Ensk, but shows a picture of Mittengard.
Link on message: #9328346
Rommel85, on Aug 19 2015 - 14:29, said: It says Ensk, but shows a picture of Mittengard.Triple_Crown: Good morning Rommel85, you were quick of the mark - it had
been posted for only 3 minutes ! Thank you and the correct
wonderful vista of download Ensk has now been added...appreciate
all your support in the Stand-Tos' and you keeping an eye on my
early am editing... ~Triple Crown
Triple_Crown
Late Night Mayhem - 9pm PDT SATURDAY 22nd AUGUST 3v3 Tier 6
19.08.2015 17:24:45
Subject: Late Night Mayhem - 9pm PDT SATURDAY 22nd AUGUST 3v3 Tier 6
Link on message: #9328294
Link on message: #9328294
Triple_Crown: Another Special tournament in response to our players
request to have events later in the evening ! Similar
rules to our Daily Stand-Tos' - THIS
SATURDAY's LATE NIGHT MAYHEM'S starts at 9pm
Pacific Time and FEATURES A ROUND-ROBIN STYLE BATTLE **
TEAMS MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL NO LATER THAN 5pm PDT ON THE
DAY OF THE EVENT ** CURRENT TOURNAMENT :Stand-To 8.22.15
- Late Night Mayhem - 3v3 Tier 6Tournament Page
Registration Basic Tournament
Information:Tier 6, no restrictions Teams up to 3 with one reserve
Mystery Maps 9pm PDT Battle Start ( *** IF FOR SOME
REASON THESE IS A LATE NIGHT SERVER RESET DURING THE TOURNAMENT,
THE EVENT WILL BE CANCELLED AND MADE NULL AND VOID ) Teams
must be SUBMITTED BY 5pm PDT day of event for approval to
participate - instructions on applying HERE Prize
PaymentsPrizes are credited to player accounts as quickly as
possible but could take up to 7 days after the event
has finished. There may be a delay in crediting the gold if a
player changes his/her name. FULL
RULES
Capitao_Desastre_
Clan brasileiro....de bots
19.08.2015 13:53:07
Subject: Clan brasileiro....de bots
Link on message: #9327927
Tankthief, on Aug 18 2015 - 23:52, said: http://wotlabs.net/na/clan/BRAZ/ Sério, pelos menos
metade desses jogadores devem ser bots. Capitão Desastre, por favor
investigue isso, porque é uma piada.
Link on message: #9327927
Tankthief, on Aug 18 2015 - 23:52, said: http://wotlabs.net/na/clan/BRAZ/ Sério, pelos menos
metade desses jogadores devem ser bots. Capitão Desastre, por favor
investigue isso, porque é uma piada.Capitao_Desastre_: Eles podem não necessariamente ser bots. Pode ser que eles
não vejam o jogo pelo lado competitivo, jogando pela diversão de
conduzir um tanque digital sem outras preocupações.
dance210
Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
19.08.2015 04:26:14
Subject: Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
Link on message: #9326919
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:42, said: I would be happy with the *result* of a 3 way tie and full payment,
but application of the Tiebreaking rules doesn't lead to that.
Tiebreaking Rule 1 doesn't produce a clear result, because
DARKS beat xBBx, xBBx beat BADD, BADD beat DARKS. Tiebreaking Rule
2 doesn't produce a winner, because all three teams lost to Group
Leader.
Assume a 3 way tie for 4th [1/13] and looking at the 3rd Tiebreaking rule (final rank of any team[s] defeating the tied team)
A.1.a. DARKS in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4. (1,2,3 and 4th place BADD)
A.1.b. BADD in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4 (1,2,3 and 4th place xBBx)
A.1.c. xBBx in 4th lost to 1,2,4,7 (1,2 and 4th place DARKS, 7)
Conclusion: Logically invalid; (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,4,7) cannot be equivalent, therefore there cannot be a 3 way tie. That being said, there's no question that it was an exhausting undertaking to go through all 13 possibilities (3 way tie being the first one considered), and it is possible that I made mistakes, or didn't consider some possibilities. It gave me an even greater appreciation of the esports team.
Link on message: #9326919
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:42, said: I would be happy with the *result* of a 3 way tie and full payment,
but application of the Tiebreaking rules doesn't lead to that.
Tiebreaking Rule 1 doesn't produce a clear result, because
DARKS beat xBBx, xBBx beat BADD, BADD beat DARKS. Tiebreaking Rule
2 doesn't produce a winner, because all three teams lost to Group
Leader.Assume a 3 way tie for 4th [1/13] and looking at the 3rd Tiebreaking rule (final rank of any team[s] defeating the tied team)
A.1.a. DARKS in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4. (1,2,3 and 4th place BADD)
A.1.b. BADD in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4 (1,2,3 and 4th place xBBx)
A.1.c. xBBx in 4th lost to 1,2,4,7 (1,2 and 4th place DARKS, 7)
Conclusion: Logically invalid; (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,4,7) cannot be equivalent, therefore there cannot be a 3 way tie. That being said, there's no question that it was an exhausting undertaking to go through all 13 possibilities (3 way tie being the first one considered), and it is possible that I made mistakes, or didn't consider some possibilities. It gave me an even greater appreciation of the esports team.
dance210: Three-way tie 1. Head-to-Head: Each team won and lost to another
team; no winner 2. Head-to-Head against group leader: all teams
lost to group leader; no winner 3. Opponent strenght: xBBx lost to
a weaker team. The lonely BADDIES and DARKSIDERS still tied
We now have a two-way tie 1. Head-to-head: The lonely
BADDIES defeated DARKSIDERS; The lonely BADDIES is the winner
dance210
Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
19.08.2015 04:26:14
Subject: Word of Tanks 5th Anniversary Extravaganza!
Link on message: #9326919
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:42, said: I would be happy with the *result* of a 3 way tie and full payment,
but application of the Tiebreaking rules doesn't lead to that.
Tiebreaking Rule 1 doesn't produce a clear result, because
DARKS beat xBBx, xBBx beat BADD, BADD beat DARKS. Tiebreaking Rule
2 doesn't produce a winner, because all three teams lost to Group
Leader.
Assume a 3 way tie for 4th [1/13] and looking at the 3rd Tiebreaking rule (final rank of any team[s] defeating the tied team)
A.1.a. DARKS in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4. (1,2,3 and 4th place BADD)
A.1.b. BADD in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4 (1,2,3 and 4th place xBBx)
A.1.c. xBBx in 4th lost to 1,2,4,7 (1,2 and 4th place DARKS, 7)
Conclusion: Logically invalid; (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,4,7) cannot be equivalent, therefore there cannot be a 3 way tie. That being said, there's no question that it was an exhausting undertaking to go through all 13 possibilities (3 way tie being the first one considered), and it is possible that I made mistakes, or didn't consider some possibilities. It gave me an even greater appreciation of the esports team.
Link on message: #9326919
zombieyeti, on Aug 18 2015 - 17:42, said: I would be happy with the *result* of a 3 way tie and full payment,
but application of the Tiebreaking rules doesn't lead to that.
Tiebreaking Rule 1 doesn't produce a clear result, because
DARKS beat xBBx, xBBx beat BADD, BADD beat DARKS. Tiebreaking Rule
2 doesn't produce a winner, because all three teams lost to Group
Leader.Assume a 3 way tie for 4th [1/13] and looking at the 3rd Tiebreaking rule (final rank of any team[s] defeating the tied team)
A.1.a. DARKS in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4. (1,2,3 and 4th place BADD)
A.1.b. BADD in 4th lost to 1,2,3,4 (1,2,3 and 4th place xBBx)
A.1.c. xBBx in 4th lost to 1,2,4,7 (1,2 and 4th place DARKS, 7)
Conclusion: Logically invalid; (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,3,4) and (1,2,4,7) cannot be equivalent, therefore there cannot be a 3 way tie. That being said, there's no question that it was an exhausting undertaking to go through all 13 possibilities (3 way tie being the first one considered), and it is possible that I made mistakes, or didn't consider some possibilities. It gave me an even greater appreciation of the esports team.
dance210: Three-way tie 1. Head-to-Head: Each team won and lost to another
team; no winner 2. Head-to-Head against group leader: all teams
lost to group leader; no winner 3. Opponent strenght: xBBx lost to
a weaker team. The lonely BADDIES and DARKSIDERS still tied
We now have a two-way tie 1. Head-to-head: The lonely
BADDIES defeated DARKSIDERS; The lonely BADDIES is the winner
Реклама | Adv