Italiax, on Mar 31 2013 - 04:28, said:
Nice attitude, way to go!
People need to understand that majority of so called 'unicums' rerolled at least once in their WoT career, starting on completely fresh accounts after going through the learning curve, joining good clans etc, All of that extensive knowledge about the game mechanics, experience, skipping a lot of real stinkers via free XP conversion, never playing stock tanks and access to good players to platoon with allowed them to achieve such good stats.
I have awful overall stats on my account because I never rerolled, nor have I ever spent any gold to convert XP, played stock tanks, have not platooned once. However, if I go to noobmeter.com it shows that I have 57% w/r and 2000+ efficiency playing solo etc. in the last ~1000 battles. Does that mean I'm a good player? Hell no! I have not played a single stock or junk tank in the last 1000 battles, that's all. Then when I take a look at some purple accounts what I see? A couple of premium tanks and cherry picked OP tanks with a bunch of platoon achievements.
Moral of the story, stop worrying about your stats and QQ on the forum, go watch some good replays on youtube or wotreplays instead.
theMoP, on Mar 31 2013 - 05:42, said:
I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me!
I'm a ~50%er, and...that's...ok.
Do you actually read what he wrote?
Part where he goes full retard in bold:
GseriesARFCOM, on Mar 29 2013 - 20:15, said:
I completely agree. The current system is irrelevent to 90+% of WOT players. It is simply not an accurate measure. I routinely place in the top 4 players(Often 1 or 2) on my team but I am rated as a average player. Since I am "Average" That SHOULD mean there are a roughly equal number of players that play better than me and worse then me. In actual gameplay this simply is not true. It's not even close.
He doesn't understand what average means. In this game there are few highly above average players and a ton of slightly below average players.
Then he contuniues to make his own play better than his stats show. He says this rating is not even close, when his stats (to me) say 50% W/R and that (to me) is clearly very close to being average. Rating yourself based on how high in the after battle report doesn't really work for a bunch of battles. I can say that I'm "always at the top" (even though that is not true), there simply is no evidence he is providing that this rating is wrong in the evaluation of his skill.
That is where I kindly remind him that he is by no means any better than an average player:
BanzaiBonsai, on Mar 29 2013 - 21:06, said:
You have a 50% W/R and you are average (by a good players standards that means terribad).
Then he goes on with this part:
My guess is the system is intentionally skewed. There simply is no way for typical player to get an above average rating without spending alot of REAL money by purchasing gold rounds, XP, consumables etc.
And that is where my answer is:
Take your consiracy theories elsewhere.
Get out of this thread. Now.
You know, I don't have anything against average players, but they have to understand that they are average. A player that doesn't understand that and either blames a rating or the game itself is very unlikely to ever improve.