Developers posts on forum

Subject: WG must be proud
Link on message: #12826979

_Cerberus__, on May 09 2021 - 03:55, said: They have found another way of scrwn over the new and returning players some more. With their "Wont be sold again tank Pz38" Well done you really proved you wanting to get players to stay or the returning players to stay has been overwhelmingly proven.   Cheers to all the rest that buy it just to pretend they are good by spewing premium rounds all night at the noobs. Pathetic    

Subject: New way for wargaming to manipulate battle outcome
Link on message: #12826975

Griffon458, on May 09 2021 - 10:54, said: In the past wargaming manipulated battle outcome by placing good players on one side with favorable RNG and bad players on other side with either negative RNG or lets face it they are baddies just simple luck of the draw RNG And some times for a laugh wargaming places all blue and purple on one team and all red and orange on another but give the purple team god awful RNG as in they cant hit nuffin ... and end battle is 0-15 seen it happen loads of times and im sure wargaming has been responsible for hundreds of purple players placing their fists through their 240 hz monitors That was then .. and now since update wargaming changed it up a notch with its low tier reprogramming of the bots when facing veteran players they now push you in wolf packs of 3 .. they rarely miss now .. ask all them guys in PZ II J tanks about how they used to drive through bots unscathed and now their armor is all but so so at best .. all other tanks like valentines matildas and PZS35 that used to be well shielded from bots now get eat up by just 1 bot ... yes things have changed for years wargaming has shoved all these dozens upon dozens of tier 4 and under premium crew trainers now they decided that we should be penalized for using them ..

Subject: Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?
Link on message: #12826973

dunniteowl, on May 08 2021 - 14:08, said:   Has 'become' obstinate?   I honestly don't know why you took this long to even discuss it.  I'm just here wondering, "How much longer will reasonable people bang their head against this wall of massive willful ignorance?"   I have decided that this sort of crap thread just is NOT worth the time beyond the first few opening responses and the occasional insertion of opinion in this manner.  Beyond that?   Just    NOT   Worth    It.     OvO

Subject: Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?
Link on message: #12826971

Kefic, on May 08 2021 - 16:33, said: "more balanced teams will result in more balanced battles!"   Only for the good players.   I love when tomatoes complain about blowouts.  As if they matter.  In nailbiter 14-13 scenarios, tomatoes are almost never the surviving tanks.  They've been dead the whole battle, having contributed their typical one or two shots of damage before throwing their tank away.   Again, what these people want, but lack the integrity to say, is more wins.   Period.  Stop humoring them as somehow reasonable people.  They're not.  They're cowards and liars.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/(Wins + Losses)
Link on message: #12826967

Cupujoe, on May 09 2021 - 14:55, said: Strange that you are so concerned about making average players feel better yet admit to being a seal clubber,  which makes new players quit or at least feel like crap. Did you suddenly find a conscience or are you that twisted  ?

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/(Wins + Losses)
Link on message: #12826845

Guido1212, on May 08 2021 - 14:45, said: Draws are losses. Moving the goal post for psychological effect is pointless.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/(Wins + Losses)
Link on message: #12826843

Korvick, on May 09 2021 - 04:51, said:   1) Cool.  Why did you make a 2nd account btw.  I know I got 4 so I am certainly not judging

Subject: When is the next marathon
Link on message: #12826783

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/(Wins + Losses)
Link on message: #12826782

Korvick, on May 09 2021 - 02:50, said:   1) You get more credence if you just post that account name then   2) Humans may associate important milestones, this does not mean that giving people the impression of how good they actually perform, in a PvP environment, is in any way a good idea.  Giving somebody the false impression that they are good when they actually aren't, is just going to make them worse.  This is NOT a care bear game.  If you suck in any way, you will more likely get killed and lose your team a tank.   3) Sorry if I missed something.  But the reason you want Wins/Losses is so that Draws don't detract from your stats right?  So that they go up a bit higher.  All this means is that people will then play for a draw if it looks like they'll take a loss.  Which is never a good thing.

Subject: EMIL 1951 Going to be in store?
Link on message: #12826771

Grillo_Parlante, on May 08 2021 - 20:59, said:   Don't worry.  It's also better than both the somua and the is3a.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/(Wins + Losses)
Link on message: #12826767

RHeadshot, on May 09 2021 - 02:21, said: NOBODY IMPROVES. It doesn't actually change a damn thing, other than to make you think you're better than you are.  Win rate is actually based on facts, and it's very simple.  And they aren't even giving out a participation trophy over it.   Why can't you just accept the truth and either get over it or do something to improve it?  Why do you need somebody to tell you it's not your fault when it is your fault?

Subject: Some Clarification Needed
Link on message: #12826758

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826653

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 23:50, said: Well I suppose if you're this upset about ties affecting WR, it makes sense that my mistake got you in a tizzy.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826648

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 23:46, said: Personally I lose nothing.  My WR probably goes up .5% . Big deal.  Would you be more impressed ?

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826645

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 23:44, said: Lol. I had no intention of stat shaming you.  Wow, grow some balls.  I had just read a series of posts by 3aces basically saying the same as you and mistook him as the OP. Get over yourself. 


Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 22:28, said: That's just sad.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826644

dunniteowl, on May 08 2021 - 23:40, said:     I think YOU'RE missing the point.  The difference in the way it's tabulated, as I said in my FIRST post on this RIDICULOUS topic, is that there would NOT be enough of a difference to make a difference.   If you're trying to do this to make 'people feel better' about their scores, then you're doing it wrong.   If folks want better scores, there is ONE sure fire way to do that -- step up and take the time to learn more and get better.   You don't think they should purposely let everyone that can't hit the damn ball get on base in baseball do you?  You don't think everyone is supposed to score a goal in soccer or football do you?  Do you really think they should all get 'participation' trophies so that they 'feel better' about their less than average performance, do you?   I'll grant you that in plenty of situations WHEN TRAINING folks how to play, that giving them chances to do every part of the game WHILE they're being trained and taught about the game.  All that said, you don't give them awards for learning how.  Awards are provided for folks who EXCEL.  That's the way it's supposed to be, because we all recognize we shouldn't celebrate and encourage mediocrity.   If folks need to 'feel better' about themselves, a game is NOT THE PLACE for that, regardless of how well or poorly they play it.  In fact, I can respect the talent and skill necessary for technically good players to do what they do, but that in no way requires me to stand up and cheer.  It's a game.  An unimportant one at that.   Nothing important EVER happens here and nothing short of the badges and statistics awarded during play should be granted over it.   I'm not a great player.  I'm just slightly above average.  I don't ask anyone to do anything to make my situation be better, feel better or look better.  It is what it is and being something of a realist, I can totally accept my spot on the ladder of skill in this -- or any other game.  I'm here to improve my personal skill at the game while I'm having fun.  If my stats bothered me, I'd do something about them.     Important concept involved here: *I*, not someone else, not WG, not a requested change in the game to make it easier for me for whatever reason, would DO something to make that change.  Well, when I started and played I was a 47/48% player.  After a while, I realized that I wasn't having as much fun and I didn't really like my stats.   But who generated those stats?   Me.  Just me.  Sure, there are other factors involved in the overall distribution of me on a curve that involves 29 other people each game I play, but overall, *I* am the arbiter of my fate and my stats, just as I am the arbiter of my 'feeling good' about playing the game.  No-one else has this 'obligation' if you could call it that.   This sort of conversation is patently absurd.  If you don't like where you 'stand' on the ladder of skill and feels, then YOU have to do something about it.  No-one else should have a say or a hand in it.     And in the wise words of Forrest, Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."   As to the responses to my opinion on grading, those are EXCEPTIONS to the general rule and you both know it.  Regardless, the primary example of grading is still just as ridiculous to compare this game as regards being 'good' or not.  Here 50% is considered above average and decently skilled -- enough to be considered at least 'competent' -- we're not talking Biomedical Research or becoming a doctor, where you would expect things to be a bit different.  Even so, these are STILL ridiculous comparisons to a GAME ffs.     GL, HF & HSYBF!
OvO

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826640

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 23:37, said: Well WG has set the definition.  Accept it or don't.  It is what it is. 

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826636

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 23:33, said: Omg shoot me for my terrible mistake. I bet some people thought less of you for a second. 

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826630

nuclearguy931, on May 08 2021 - 22:48, said:   No, it's wins/games played. If you play 100 games and win 53 of them your percent is 53% regardless of what happened in the other 47 battles. In your calculation you want draws to be eliminated from the count.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826603

Cupujoe, on May 08 2021 - 22:28, said: Let's say for the sake of argument that draws count as nothing. No win, no loss , no game played.

In the case of the OP his WR would go from 48.68% to 49.18.

Will .5% really make him feel that much better ?
That's just sad.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826600

dunniteowl, on May 08 2021 - 14:01, said: How would WG putting a stop to draws make a REAL difference?   My number of draws to games played is: 378/35169 = 1.07%   The textual equivalent of BFD or So Effing What?   You really think that's going to provide me a Huge Morale Boost by removing that and somehow finding a way to convert them to Wins or Losses?  If they did that, wouldn't it be fair to think that about half of those should be one and the other half the other?  That would literally mean nothing more to me than it does now -- big effing deal.   And, as someone else pointed out, these are Random Public Matches, a 7-2-0 is no different to me than a 6-2-1 or any other variation on a theme with that example as you could care to factor.   To me a Draw is a loss that BOTH sides deserved.  They chap my hide when they happen and I have done my best to win, every game.  Which means that currently I get to experience said hide chapping 1% of the time I play.  How is this a problem?  How is it something that requires redress?  Why would anyone give a rat's butt over that?   And, apparently, the server average is 2%.  You want a lower draw rate?  Play harder, smarter and more determined to win is all I can advise.   If you want a morale boost by having a better win rate, EARN IT.  If that's too difficult, then I guess, learning to deal with being disappointed in a game instead of in real life would also be my advice.   These sorts of threads make me wonder about some people.  That they would put out THIS level of effort to find a way to inflate their WRs by suggesting WG 'fix' it for them, when, if they put as much effort into playing and learning more about the game, they'd get that inflation and then some by doing so.   As I have said for some time now, though, this game let's 'you do you,' and some folks would rather do the 'you' that says, 'please make it easier for me to win.'   YMMV, but I find that method of 'doing me' to be quite ineffective at making me win more, feel better about myself or even to feel as if I challenged myself.     I'll take a hard pass, thanks.  If you can only do you in this game, isn't it more effective to attempt to do the 'best you' that you can?  No-one else can 'do that you' for you and no-one else has any obligation -- or ability -- to do any 'you' for you.     GL, HF & HSYBF!
OvO

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826592

ProfessionalFinn, on May 08 2021 - 19:11, said: This 50% pass-floor must be used in the Dummies School.  Are you an alumnus?  First time I have ever heard of such a thing.  But there are plenty of screwy and fruitcake posts in this forum. 


dunniteowl, on May 08 2021 - 21:36, said: In NO school I ever attended (and I attended 20 schools during the course of my education, both primary and secondary) did a 50% score PASS.   In fact, 60% was usually a D, which is a NOT PASSING grade.  Below 60% was usually considered an F.  F = FAIL.   I have no idea where you got this idea from, but whichever schools you went to?  They FAILED you.  Or, you weren't paying enough attention and they simply 'passed' you out of their classes so that they wouldn't have to see you in the same chair as last year.   50% pass?  FAIL!     OMG SMHD FAIL     OvO

Subject: 60TP Help
Link on message: #12826510

Subject: EMIL 1951 Going to be in store?
Link on message: #12826500

Subject: Tier VI - (medium) PZ IV Schmalturm - advice ?
Link on message: #12826334

Subject: EMIL 1951 Going to be in store?
Link on message: #12826333

Draschel, on May 08 2021 - 03:05, said: Just asking-   Why would you wish to purchase Emil 1951?  Somua and IS3A are both considerably better.  

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826315

3aces, on May 08 2021 - 05:39, said:   I have wondered this same question. For example if you watch NFL football, a draw is considered a draw and not a loss. The same thing in NBA basketball, NHL hockey and MLB baseball. For any gamblers out there, a tie means that you do not lose your money in most games like BlackJack and Poker. I can't really say what goes on in Belarus or Russia but perhaps they consider draws to be losses. There is another reason that i can think of is that it is an easier solution to calculate win rate so programmers do not have to have another variable, so perhaps they are just lazy.    


dunniteowl, on May 08 2021 - 06:27, said:   Even though a tie is considered a tie, it STILL does not contribute to a player's WINNING stats and IS included in the overall games count, such that, a ball player or ball team that plays 140 games, winning 76, losing 52 and having 12 ties will still be shown a Win Rate calculated as 76/140.   Or am I missing something here?  Their Tie Rate would be 12/140.  Their Loss Rate would be 52/140.   Again, I ask you, "Am I missing something here?"   I don't think so.  Just because a tie is not a loss, it certainly is NOT a win and while WG treats a draw as a loss (and IMO rightly so), the overall WR is calculated as Games Won/All Games Played, nicht wahr?  Regardless of draws or losses, the WR is STILL calculated as Total Wins/Total Games.   This is known, Kaleesi.     GL, HF & HYSBF!
OvO

Subject: Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?
Link on message: #12826309

Siege_Engine, on May 08 2021 - 02:51, said:   Yes.  I'm truly "articulating", MORE balanced teams (randomly* or otherwise) will result in MORE balanced battles.      I'm happy to let you pontificate what "balanced" means.   

Subject: Tier VI - (medium) PZ IV Schmalturm - advice ?
Link on message: #12826308

Subject: [ S T ] Changes to the following: M48A2 Räumpanzer, 59-Patton, M46 Patton KR,...
Link on message: #12826292

Spam_Goose, on May 07 2021 - 18:01, said: and it has a 90mm gun on a tier 8 heavy.....pretty laughable 

Subject: EMIL 1951 Going to be in store?
Link on message: #12826290

The_Unfriendly_Canadian, on May 08 2021 - 04:04, said: Why does that matter? some want to collect, some don't care about what's better, some want a swede HT crew trainer, some just want a emil that makes more credits. I'd like to get the 1951, hopefully it comes to the bond shop.

Subject: EMIL 1951 Going to be in store?
Link on message: #12826201

Subject: Referrall Program, best recommended tank for recruiter?
Link on message: #12826192

Stretch35, on May 07 2021 - 14:41, said:   Is the Jagd88 still good? I've been going through the referral program and I'm not sure why, but I'm kind of leaning towards that premium as my first pick. I loved the tech tree Jagdtiger and I remember the Jagd88 was an absolute nightmare to get in front of back in the day, but I'm not sure if the times have been kind to it or not. Most pref MM tanks nowadays are woefully powercreeped compared to how they originally performed.

Subject: USC was downgraded
Link on message: #12826151

bake3020, on May 07 2021 - 14:51, said:
Just because you get good ping doesn't mean that others do.  Last night, mine was nearly unplayable with ping well over 100 and spikes as high as 500.  It wasn't on my end, I checked and as usual, it's a problem that WG keeps saying isn't them yet turns out to be them.  I rarely have this issue with Armored Warfare which has a global server and the ping is so much better, even though the server is not even located in the US.  It's stuff like this that should tell us just exactly what WG really thinks of the NA.  As for the failed SA, I don't know what to think except: FAILURE.

Subject: Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?
Link on message: #12826146

Siege_Engine, on May 08 2021 - 01:13, said:   Yeah yeah yea.  And I've told you (and showed you) over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.  MORE Imbalanced teams (randomly* or otherwise) won't result in LESS imbalanced battles.  

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826145

TheGuardian050, on May 08 2021 - 01:12, said: While I actually completely agree with you, I was told in the past that they don't want to encourage draws (aka passive play) so they want draws to penalize both teams.

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826143

RHeadshot, on May 08 2021 - 01:37, said: How about integrity, truth, honesty?  Guess that doesn't matter to you.  It's a WIN rate, which means wins divided by games.  

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826141

Projectile_Misfired, on May 08 2021 - 01:43, said: You might want to check the mathematics of your formula. With this formula, almost every player will have, at a minimum, a 75% W/R....with many nearing or over 100%. What I think you meant for a formula is W/R = Wins/(Battles - Draws).   But in truth, even taking "draws" out of the equation isn't going to increase most players' W/R by more than 2%. Maybe it will make some players "feel" better...maybe not. A long time ago when I was new to the game, I felt that if a game ended in a DRAW, it shouldn't even be counted as a "Battle" or maybe even as "half a Win". But now, I guess it doesn't really matter to me how it gets "counted". 

Subject: Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?
Link on message: #12826081

Siege_Engine, on May 08 2021 - 01:05, said:   No, just no.  You can snip something small out of context from my post however you want.  And you can stat however you want.  And you can platoon however you want.  But, bottom line, I don't think that rofl-stomp games that are over in 3 minutes are good games.  They aren't and most people would agree with me.     Randomly* putting all the tomatoes on one side is the issue for most of the complaints on this forum.    And you can't convince me that putting all of the tomatoes on one side -- and all of the skilled players on the other -- randomly* or otherwise -- makes less rofl-stomps, more balanced, more interesting, longer games.  Snip whatever posts you want.  Use whatever stats you must.  But, No, just no.  It doesn't work.   

Subject: Win Rate should be Wins/Losses
Link on message: #12826075