Jump to content


Zombie Apocalypse presented by Corsair

5v5 Zombie kills Gold Type 59

377 replies to this topic

wertadoesminecraft #361 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 20:01

    Private

  • Players
  • 10685 battles
  • 5
  • [-T-S-] -T-S-
  • Member since:
    12-24-2012
Hello, I know I'm not a very good player but my team placed in the top 19.7-19.5 of the tournament and we received an su100y! We were supposed to receive a Type 62 and the chart that says the official rating said they we earned said tank. I hope this gets resolved, and I hope for a response soon. My teammates that should have received this tank are -Wertadoesminecraft -Krafter54  -General_Cannuck99 -Green_Shooter we placed 787-790 which is in the top 19.6% of players. Even the players with 15 zombie kills at the bottom of the list got top 19.9%! Which is in the 20-11% that wins type 62s, I would like feedback soon, please help and thank you.:arta:

jm404k #362 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 20:24

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17640 battles
  • 422
  • Member since:
    12-02-2014

View Postwertadoesminecraft, on Oct 18 2016 - 19:01, said:

Hello, I know I'm not a very good player but my team placed in the top 19.7-19.5 of the tournament and we received an su100y! We were supposed to receive a Type 62 and the chart that says the official rating said they we earned said tank. I hope this gets resolved, and I hope for a response soon. My teammates that should have received this tank are -Wertadoesminecraft -Krafter54  -General_Cannuck99 -Green_Shooter we placed 787-790 which is in the top 19.6% of players. Even the players with 15 zombie kills at the bottom of the list got top 19.9%! Which is in the 20-11% that wins type 62s, I would like feedback soon, please help and thank you.:arta:

 

If you finished 787-790 out of 2,990 you would have finished at 26% roughly which would have awarded you the su100y. Players who did not earn a zombie kill were not counted. Even though many continue to complain even though this is how it has always been. 

IceFLYER #363 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 20:51

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28183 battles
  • 210
  • [ICED] ICED
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View Postdance210, on Oct 18 2016 - 17:05, said:

 

The finals standings are located here.

 

Thank you zazel for posting our PM. As I stated to him, Zombie Kills were only credited to those players who placed 1st - 5th in the New Team and Standard groups, and 1st - 6th for those in the Premium group. No where was it stated that players who placed outside those positions would be credited with Zombie Kills for the Overall Prize. Congratulations to everyone who received a tank.

 

Hey Dance,

 

In this tournament there were 3 groupings based on skill level etc., and each grouping has different zombie kill point payouts (in other words you get more zombie kill points for first (or any placing for that matter) in the "premium" group [8 points] than you do in the "standard" [6] or "new" group [4]).

 

My question is, why was the overall prizing not put into 3 separate groups?  The way you have it setup it tips the scales in favor of the premium group always. I know I must of made an assumption at the start thinking each of the 3 groupings would be placed in their own separate "overall prizing" ...wouldn't of this made more sense???

 

Basically you put us all in 3 different groupings, separating us all, then point award each grouping differently, and then prize us all together as one grouping... makes no sense.


Edited by IceFLYER, Oct 18 2016 - 20:55.


dance210 #364 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 20:59

    Community Specialist

  • -Players-
  • 24318 battles
  • 4,451
  • [D4NCE] D4NCE
  • Member since:
    05-31-2012

View PostIceFLYER, on Oct 18 2016 - 12:51, said:

 

Hey Dance,

 

In this tournament there were 3 groupings based on skill level etc., and each grouping has different zombie kill point payouts (in other words you get more zombie kill points for first (or any placing for that matter) in the "premium" group [8 points] than you do in the "standard" [6] or "new" group [4]).

 

My question is, why was the overall prizing not put into 3 separate groups?  The way you have it setup it tips the scales in favor of the premium group always. I know I must of made an assumption at the start thinking each of the 3 groupings would be placed in their own separate "overall prizing" ...wouldn't of this made more sense???

 

Basically you put us all in 3 different groupings, separating us all, then point award each grouping differently, and then prize us all together as one grouping... makes no sense.

 

Teams and players didn't stay in the same group all week; it varied depending on their performance and the number of teams that registered each day.

IceFLYER #365 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 21:08

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28183 battles
  • 210
  • [ICED] ICED
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View Postdance210, on Oct 18 2016 - 19:59, said:

 

Teams and players didn't stay in the same group all week; it varied depending on their performance and the number of teams that registered each day.

 

If that is how it worked, was that stated in the rules for this tournament anywhere?  

 

But that aside, since what you say happened, would it of made more sense then that on day one of the tournament everyone starts in the exact same grouping level? This way as you progress through the tournament you are placed up or down based on skill. Starting on day 1 in different skill groups skews the result of the effect of teams rising or falling in group skill level (which since it was already stated that the day 1 placement of players into their skill group was based on stats going back a ways some months again skews the effect). The tournament should not of let any teams start off with an advantage in zombie kill points.

 

 

edit: thinking about it though, given the fact that each tournament was a separate sign up over 5 days time, and you could of say on day 2 filled your team up with different skill level players then okay that makes sense that teams would be in different brackets or even if you kept the same players in your team as you won more you would possibly be ranked up.  It does still leave doubt though in the fact that we all were gunning for the same prizes, yet placed in different groupings that awarded more or less kill points for the same placing of 1st or 2nd etc.. It looks like it is attempting to award better play, or to put it another way, to drive you to become better to get those awards.  Still, not sure it's the best move to separate us all into 3 skill groups and be tallied up together for the prizing.


Edited by IceFLYER, Oct 18 2016 - 21:23.


Drikan #366 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 21:15

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 18683 battles
  • 58
  • [NET] NET
  • Member since:
    02-23-2012

View Postdance210, on Oct 18 2016 - 14:59, said:

 

Teams and players didn't stay in the same group all week; it varied depending on their performance and the number of teams that registered each day.

 

Performance didn't seem to move you around any, we went 44-0-1, stayed in the new team bracket all week.

IceFLYER #367 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 21:24

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 28183 battles
  • 210
  • [ICED] ICED
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View Postdance210, on Oct 18 2016 - 19:59, said:

 

Teams and players didn't stay in the same group all week; it varied depending on their performance and the number of teams that registered each day.

 

edit: thinking about it though, given the fact that each tournament was a separate sign up over 5 days time, and you could of say on day 2 filled your team up with different skill level players then okay that makes sense that teams would be in different brackets or even if you kept the same players in your team as you won more you would possibly be ranked up.  It does still leave doubt though in the fact that we all were gunning for the same prizes, yet placed in different groupings that awarded more or less kill points for the same placing of 1st or 2nd etc.. It looks like it is attempting to award better play, or to put it another way, to drive you to become better to get those awards.  Still, not sure it's the best move to separate us all into 3 skill groups and be tallied up together for the prizing.

saboslobo #368 Posted Oct 18 2016 - 23:59

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 11701 battles
  • 254
  • Member since:
    07-11-2013

View Postdance210, on Oct 18 2016 - 20:59, said:

 

Teams and players didn't stay in the same group all week; it varied depending on their performance and the number of teams that registered each day.

 

Hello are we  able to change the tank to lower prize 

 



Livewire70 #369 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 00:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 23268 battles
  • 1,157
  • [ROLF] ROLF
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014
In other words they put their favorites in the right place and ignored the rest like always

scyorkie #370 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 00:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 74349 battles
  • 3,847
  • Member since:
    10-26-2011

View Postjm404k, on Oct 19 2016 - 03:24, said:

...Players who did not earn a zombie kill were not counted. Even though many continue to complain even though this is how it has always been. 

 

Not true. Read: http://forum.worldof...m/page__st__180

Guest_Bencho96_* #371 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 01:47

  • Guest

View Postzazel, on Oct 18 2016 - 15:46, said:

but are the 0 kills being counted or not?

 

 

doenst seem like it

RECON_RANGER #372 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 05:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 40572 battles
  • 2,014
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

View PostDrikan, on Oct 18 2016 - 21:15, said:

 

Performance didn't seem to move you around any, we went 44-0-1, stayed in the new team bracket all week.

 

That's because WG runs tourney's off an old laptop which is why it crashed today and we get 1,000 spam tourney results.  There is no magical formula but rather minimum wage employees putting teams in whatever bracket they want with no oversight because this is a game and nobody really cares since NA does not have much longer to live before we are merged with EU.    

RECON_RANGER #373 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 05:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 40572 battles
  • 2,014
  • Member since:
    12-23-2013

View PostKurso, on Oct 18 2016 - 17:55, said:

I don't think they need to count all zeros. If a team didn't participate it's fair to exclude them.

 

But to exclude teams that did participate and got no points is insane. I'm not sure how that makes any sense at all.

 

Why would it make any sense?  It's WG.  They just make it all up as they go along and the appeals process leads to a garbage can. 

94EXPOS #374 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 17:14

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 47630 battles
  • 143
  • [5D] 5D
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013

Ignoring all players that got 0 zombie kills is just a very obvious strategy by Wargaming to cut back as much as possible on prize payouts. Who cares if players in any tournament get 0 pts. They will not get free gold and/or prizes unless there are several no shows in a grouping in a platournament or 1 v 1 as has rarely happened in the past. In this type of tournament that we just played in, that prize payout for zero wins/kills is IMPOSSIBLE. So dropping all players with 0 zombie kills wether they participated or not is just WRONG! But just another way for Wargaming to undermine and shaft their customers as theyve done by cutting back clan wars and tournament payouts by 95% per week since they made the changes this past spring when we used to have daily Stand Tos, weekday Warfares and Skirmishes. 

 

No salt   just facts. Wargaming has shafted players big time. Maybe some of you are fine with that. Myself and many more  ...are not. I guess this falls into the category of 95% less is better than 100% less. 


Edited by 94EXPOS, Oct 19 2016 - 20:49.


Guest_porkchop39_* #375 Posted Oct 19 2016 - 17:18

  • Guest
So many pocket lawyers, so much salt...


Great tourney Dance, was fun.

T_Hawks #376 Posted Oct 24 2016 - 21:33

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 23612 battles
  • 141
  • Member since:
    09-01-2012

View Postporkchop39, on Oct 19 2016 - 16:18, said:

So many pocket lawyers, so much salt...


Great tourney Dance, was fun.

 

o7 pork

pork how did you feel when wargaming killed bronze and silver league? I see TD is no longer a league team...

These tournament changes result in the same feeling / effect you league guys felt when WG ruined league. It really sucks for both casual tournament people and the serious players like myself.

 

In addition to that, I see that WG is saying they made these changes because these are the changes the tournament players wanted? I have seen 10 times more posts about people hating the changes. I can honestly only recall 1 post that was not a hate post and all it said was that the poster thought the changes were meh. No one I have talked to has said that they asked wg for these changes so who exactly are WG getting their idea's from? (I blame WG not Dance. I do not think she gets final say in the tournament rules). lol.

 



94EXPOS #377 Posted Oct 25 2016 - 02:09

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 47630 battles
  • 143
  • [5D] 5D
  • Member since:
    07-23-2013
Yeah I dont blame Dance either. On that note I would like to know exactly WHO at Wargaming is responsible for these changes? Wargaming likes putting all their employees in their videos...so who is it? Lets put a name and a face to the genius responsible for these extremely negative changes that affect tournament and clan war players.

Edited by 94EXPOS, Oct 25 2016 - 04:21.


T_Hawks #378 Posted Oct 25 2016 - 18:54

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 23612 battles
  • 141
  • Member since:
    09-01-2012

View Post94EXPOS, on Oct 25 2016 - 01:09, said:

Yeah I dont blame Dance either. On that note I would like to know exactly WHO at Wargaming is responsible for these changes? Wargaming likes putting all their employees in their videos...so who is it? Lets put a name and a face to the genius responsible for these extremely negative changes that affect tournament and clan war players.

 

lets upvote this guy to the FRONTPAGE ;)



Reply to this topic



  
For security reasons, please do not provide your personal data or the personal data of a third party here because we might be unable to protect such data in accordance with the Wargaming Privacy Policy.


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users