Jump to content


Why should I give a 5-kill guy a top gun?


  • Please log in to reply
249 replies to this topic

Duqe #241 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 02:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 22897 battles
  • 6,881
  • [NEATT] NEATT
  • Member since:
    06-19-2011

View PostrEprEzEnt, on Mar 22 2017 - 01:14, said:

If it's a steamroll match and I'm one of the last few tanks on a losing team and someone had a chance for top gun I suicide.

 

It'd be great that, if you drowned yourself while at full health, you "pay" 15,000 regular experience, or free experience if you don't have that. Or 450,000 credits if you don't have that. Or 7 premium days if neither experience or credits are available.

NeatoMan #242 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 02:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 23480 battles
  • 13,995
  • Member since:
    06-28-2011

View PostDuqe, on Mar 21 2017 - 20:34, said:

It'd be great that, if you drowned yourself while at full health, you "pay" 15,000 regular experience, or free experience if you don't have that. Or 450,000 credits if you don't have that. Or 7 premium days if neither experience or credits are available.

Although I never suicide, IMO nobody owes you a kill (or a top gun for that matter).  Get over it and move on to the next game.



the_Deadly_Bulb #243 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 02:59

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15205 battles
  • 344
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

Should you also have held your shots while they were killing the first 5? Should a person be given sole rights to fire upon an opponent once they fire the first shot that hits? No one owes anyone a kill. Often someone gets the kill that that I worked down, but was unable to finish while I reloaded. That's NOT a stolen kill, that's a team mate taking out a gun, and that's a good thing. Games hard enough without giving purple participation consideration, even if the guy has 5 kills and good damage.

 

If they want the TG, get the kill. Seems simple enough.



TodSoldat #244 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 03:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 28544 battles
  • 3,238
  • [BTB] BTB
  • Member since:
    10-04-2011

View Postthe_Deadly_Bulb, on Mar 21 2017 - 20:59, said:

Should you also have held your shots while they were killing the first 5? Should a person be given sole rights to fire upon an opponent once they fire the first shot that hits? No one owes anyone a kill. Often someone gets the kill that that I worked down, but was unable to finish while I reloaded. That's NOT a stolen kill, that's a team mate taking out a gun, and that's a good thing. Games hard enough without giving purple participation consideration, even if the guy has 5 kills and good damage.

 

If they want the TG, get the kill. Seems simple enough.

 



Boghie #245 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 03:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2675 battles
  • 93
  • Member since:
    04-10-2016

Man,

 

Nobody has actually read the salient posts from OP or from the TG Requester.

Nobody has actually viewed the game - it was actually very good.

These two factors explain much of this conversation.

 

Have any of you actually noticed that the two mortal enemies in this thread haven't slammed each other?  Many of the rest here are yammering about things that did not take place.  OP was not a slug who sat in the back and kill stealed the final tank.  He was not rude.  But, he did lack some grace in that final moment.  Requester was not some guy stat padding and chai-sniping his way to a relatively minor medal.  In the end he was the one that challenged the hill, spotted the severely wounded enemy, but was not honored with the first attempt at a shot he worked for.  There were at least four tanks with that shot, one was Trent who was turning his turret to fire into the [edited]end of the JP, two friendlies stood off, and OP snapped the shot off the spot.  I just watched the E100's game from Trent's tank and it is obvious he was not in communication with either the Requester nor the OP.  He really wasn't having a very good game.

 

Here is something novel:  The in-game, non-platooned communication between Trent and Kaa1el was exceptional.  How about they platoon together and go purple on us...



Kliphie #246 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 03:47

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24200 battles
  • 503
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    07-20-2012

View PostBoghie, on Mar 21 2017 - 21:44, said:

Man,

 

Nobody has actually read the salient posts from OP or from the TG Requester.

Nobody has actually viewed the game - it was actually very good.

These two factors explain much of this conversation.

 

Have any of you actually noticed that the two mortal enemies in this thread haven't slammed each other?  Many of the rest here are yammering about things that did not take place.  OP was not a slug who sat in the back and kill stealed the final tank.  He was not rude.  But, he did lack some grace in that final moment.  Requester was not some guy stat padding and chai-sniping his way to a relatively minor medal.  In the end he was the one that challenged the hill, spotted the severely wounded enemy, but was not honored with the first attempt at a shot he worked for.  There were at least four tanks with that shot, one was Trent who was turning his turret to fire into the [edited]end of the JP, two friendlies stood off, and OP snapped the shot off the spot.  I just watched the E100's game from Trent's tank and it is obvious he was not in communication with either the Requester nor the OP.  He really wasn't having a very good game.

 

Here is something novel:  The in-game, non-platooned communication between Trent and Kaa1el was exceptional.  How about they platoon together and go purple on us...

 



Kenshin2kx #247 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 04:11

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 12564 battles
  • 2,986
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostBoghie, on Mar 21 2017 - 16:44, said:

Man,

 

Nobody has actually read the salient posts from OP or from the TG Requester.

Nobody has actually viewed the game - it was actually very good.

These two factors explain much of this conversation.

 

Have any of you actually noticed that the two mortal enemies in this thread haven't slammed each other?  Many of the rest here are yammering about things that did not take place.  OP was not a slug who sat in the back and kill stealed the final tank.  He was not rude.  But, he did lack some grace in that final moment.  Requester was not some guy stat padding and chai-sniping his way to a relatively minor medal.  In the end he was the one that challenged the hill, spotted the severely wounded enemy, but was not honored with the first attempt at a shot he worked for.  There were at least four tanks with that shot, one was Trent who was turning his turret to fire into the [edited]end of the JP, two friendlies stood off, and OP snapped the shot off the spot.  I just watched the E100's game from Trent's tank and it is obvious he was not in communication with either the Requester nor the OP.  He really wasn't having a very good game.

 

Here is something novel:  The in-game, non-platooned communication between Trent and Kaa1el was exceptional.  How about they platoon together and go purple on us...

 

Its rarely a bad thing to ensure clarity in context ... that said, notice the highlighted and underlined portion I wish to focus on.  Perhaps its semantics, but I am thinking that you used the term honored to indicate some kind of unspoken award to this player?  The simple and matter of fact truth here is that the player admits to the fact that he could not take the shot in real time (5 seconds?)  ... that being the case, the game, a war and real life ... goes on ... with the option open to all in expedient position to take the shot and end the 'gaming conflict'.   Note, I am not attributing mitigating circumstance for any of the tanks ... rather trying to point out the only relevant facts as endorsed by WG ... which translates into shoot the opposing side in the hope of taking that tank out of the game.  

 

So, in the end, it really does not matter if everyone in that game behaved like angels, devils or anything in between.   What does matter though is that no rules per WG were broken, one side lost and the other won ... the honor that you mentioned?  That is in the mind and the perception of some of the players ... nothing more, nothing less.  It is what it is.  Now if you asked someone from WG for their imput .. I'd put down real money that they may sympathize to a degree, but ultimately reiterate the rules and guidelines, and compassionately but firmly suggest to "play more"  for the legitimate chance at any of the 'epic' medals.  

 

Now, just to be clear ... Personally, I think it would have been nice to let the guy have it ... that said, ask a 100 others and you will have a different take and different feelings on the matter ... all of which are valid as opinion.  

 

At the end of the day, that tanker could have killed 14 red and be one shot away at a perfect 15 ... and yet another player who has the opportunity to make the kill, is just as entitled to do so by WG standards ... so if this is a vent, then so be it, but please acknowledge the unmitigated FACT ... that this player is not "owed" that final kill ... 



Boghie #248 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 05:04

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2675 battles
  • 93
  • Member since:
    04-10-2016

View PostKenshin2kx, on Mar 21 2017 - 19:11, said:

 

Its rarely a bad thing to ensure clarity in context ... that said, notice the highlighted and underlined portion I wish to focus on.  Perhaps its semantics, but I am thinking that you used the term honored to indicate some kind of unspoken award to this player?  The simple and matter of fact truth here is that the player admits to the fact that he could not take the shot in real time (5 seconds?)  ... that being the case, the game, a war and real life ... goes on ... with the option open to all in expedient position to take the shot and end the 'gaming conflict'.   Note, I am not attributing mitigating circumstance for any of the tanks ... rather trying to point out the only relevant facts as endorsed by WG ... which translates into shoot the opposing side in the hope of taking that tank out of the game.  

 

So, in the end, it really does not matter if everyone in that game behaved like angels, devils or anything in between.   What does matter though is that no rules per WG were broken, one side lost and the other won ... the honor that you mentioned?  That is in the mind and the perception of some of the players ... nothing more, nothing less.  It is what it is.  Now if you asked someone from WG for their imput .. I'd put down real money that they may sympathize to a degree, but ultimately reiterate the rules and guidelines, and compassionately but firmly suggest to "play more"  for the legitimate chance at any of the 'epic' medals.  

 

Now, just to be clear ... Personally, I think it would have been nice to let the guy have it ... that said, ask a 100 others and you will have a different take and different feelings on the matter ... all of which are valid as opinion.  

 

At the end of the day, that tanker could have killed 14 red and be one shot away at a perfect 15 ... and yet another player who has the opportunity to make the kill, is just as entitled to do so by WG standards ... so if this is a vent, then so be it, but please acknowledge the unmitigated FACT ... that this player is not "owed" that final kill ... 

 

Nobody is talking rules.  A Tomato who tipped himself upside down in the cap seven seconds into the game could have taken that shot after Trent spotted the target - and, it would have been within the rules of the game.

 

I think this Trent guy was being nice when he is talking 5 seconds.  His gun was pre-aimed to within a few degrees of the target when he spotted him.

 

The real question OP (Kaa1el) had regarded the team kill.  He thought Trent???? and the E100 were in kahoots.  

 

Block Quote

So I am asking why players like IS-7 and E-100 righteously thinks any 5-kill player should entitled for the final kill? Why players like me shall yield the final kill? Shouldn't any medal being earned instead of being asked? 

 

He thought that when he took the kill a buddy of Trent???? TKed him.  Very doubtful.  I watched the actions of the E100 during the game and all I can say is I hope they were not on Team Speak.  Their coordination was not good.  

 

On the other hand, OP, and the rest of the 2 line players coordinated quite well.  Any of the tanks and the arty in that group 'earned' that easy kill.  The arty took a big chunk out of the final target out after Trent???? spotted him from the tracks.  Then Trent???? took another big chunk out of him before the target went dark.  Then all the tanks and TDs on the (now) 3 line moved to firing positions at the rails as Trent???? moved up the hill (while asking for the final shot).  OP snapped the shot about a second or two before Trent???? could have.  But, then so could have the arty, the E100, or the capping JP.  Next the E100 TKs OP and Trent???? and the arty each battle chat 'Wow'.  There was no flaming in game, and no flaming here by the participants - just interpretations.

 

Anyway, someone send this to Jingles:

  • The Good:  The game.  Especially the chaps that initiated the battle on the 2 line
  • The Bad:  Kaa1el should have smiled at an exceptional game, been proud of his, and stood off in grace and humor
  • The Ugly:  A turd TKing somebody.  I have seen videos where I might be tempted to state that a TK was justified.  This is not one of them.  Claus would like this for his [edited]series too!!!

 

And a Tier IV/V Tomato like me who studies this game can learn something.  But, I do have a critique (take it with a grain of salt).  Why did the 2 line group allow the T110E5 to survive so long?  I saw many side shots offered.  That guy lived way too long - he probably thought he was the shiznit and all the rest of his team were [edited]ters.

 



TodSoldat #249 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 06:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 28544 battles
  • 3,238
  • [BTB] BTB
  • Member since:
    10-04-2011

View PostBoghie, on Mar 21 2017 - 21:44, said:

 but was not honored

 

There is no honor in war and when you consider the TKers and the cheats there's not really any in this game either. Your statement right there has ensured that I never let anyone outside of my clan get a kill for TG. I, nor anyone else, is here to honor other players. I don't give a crap if a dude gets every kill and over half the damage he's doing nothing more than playing a game and is nothing special. Worship stats or whatever but I'm gonna stick with reality

the_Deadly_Bulb #250 Posted Mar 22 2017 - 20:06

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15205 battles
  • 344
  • [WCTNT] WCTNT
  • Member since:
    03-11-2014

View PostTodSoldat, on Mar 21 2017 - 21:15, said:

 

There is no honor in war and when you consider the TKers and the cheats there's not really any in this game either. Your statement right there has ensured that I never let anyone outside of my clan get a kill for TG. I, nor anyone else, is here to honor other players. I don't give a crap if a dude gets every kill and over half the damage he's doing nothing more than playing a game and is nothing special. Worship stats or whatever but I'm gonna stick with reality

 

^ This.

 

WoT is a game. Its my goal to destroy as many opponents as possible and get as much for myself as I can, while making every effort to assist my team toward victory. I don't need to watch the replay. The entire premise that someone should hold fire, while someone else gets the kill is just nonsense. Maybe, and that's just maybe, if the other player was 'tooned with me, we were buddies and we both had shots, I might give him the kill. Taking a kill when you have a shot isn't greedy, its the point of the damn game!


 

I don't provide what I don't expect. I don't expect others to 'leave' me kills.


 

There have been a few times in recent battles where I've been very close to a Radley's. I've never had 8 kills, but I've been aiming and about to get there a couple of times and the opponent fell to another's gun. Tough darts for me, I wasn't quick enough. No I never complained, yes I was a bit disappointed, but tough darts. My disappointment should NOT and does not mean the other player shouldn't have taken the shot they had.


 

IMO there is no way to put lipstick on this pig. No one deserves a kill they couldn't make. Nobody!


 

Its as laughable as when I've killed and driven my way across the map and I'm on cap getting more hard earned exp and someone chats "off cap please". Its laughable, sorry but I have needs too, so no. Why should I give up all the exp for capping and a sure win, so someone I don't know can get a kill? What if they don't get the kill? What if they get wasted trying and I wait long enough to lose what was a sure win? Nope not happening. Winning is the object, not providing opportunities for the slow to get up to speed.


 


 


Edited by the_Deadly_Bulb, Mar 22 2017 - 20:12.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users