Jump to content


Example: XVM took over your game


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

joelmomma #41 Posted May 15 2017 - 18:26

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 30993 battles
  • 449
  • [FLUKE] FLUKE
  • Member since:
    03-10-2013
Okay time to direct my post back to the original feedback which is, XVM controls the game.  The example is that this months cap and win mission is hindered by players leaving cap to farm damage and kills to please a Wn8 stat perception.

Tazilon #42 Posted May 15 2017 - 18:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 85795 battles
  • 8,844
  • [-40-] -40-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011

View Postjoelmomma, on May 15 2017 - 07:21, said:

Mission assigned by Wargaming is TankRewards Clear and Hold.  Mission condition is to win a game by base capture 5 times.  Problem:  three people on cap and 90% capture, two people drive off the cap with no enemy tanks spotted in order to "farm" damage and kills to pad XVM's Wn8.  This mission completion was not possible due to an add-on that exploits players' perception that Wn8 is "the credible statistical method."  Wargaming provides statistically valid in game stats.  Perfect example how XVM controls the game, and should be banned.

 

Agree 100%.  WNx is one of the biggest problems in WOT today - and has been for a very long time.

Tazilon #43 Posted May 15 2017 - 18:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 85795 battles
  • 8,844
  • [-40-] -40-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011

View Postthe_dude_76, on May 15 2017 - 09:00, said:

 

Of course some of us don't care about stats and are more interested in earning exp and credits...

 

Trying to cap loses more games than it wins! Giving up an advantage by having some of the guns on your team sit idle like fish in a barrel makes no sense most of the time and yet it happens regularly.

 

Then if you were smart, you would cap fast and move on the the next game.  You make more XP and credits that way.

Tazilon #44 Posted May 15 2017 - 18:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 85795 battles
  • 8,844
  • [-40-] -40-
  • Member since:
    09-02-2011
For the record guys, it is not XVM that is the problem.    XVM is simply a GUI.  The problem is WNx, which many XVM modders include their versions of XVM.  XVM, in and of itself, is not the issue.  WNx is.

Edited by Tazilon, May 15 2017 - 18:31.


joelmomma #45 Posted May 15 2017 - 18:33

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 30993 battles
  • 449
  • [FLUKE] FLUKE
  • Member since:
    03-10-2013

View PostTazilon, on May 15 2017 - 12:30, said:

For the record guys, it is not XVM that is the problem.    XVM is simply a GUI.  The problem is WNx, which many XVM modders include their versions of XVM.  XVM, in and of itself, is not the issue.  WNx is.

 

Duly noted

 



Pipinghot #46 Posted May 15 2017 - 19:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 25799 battles
  • 6,771
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View Postjoelmomma, on May 15 2017 - 12:20, said:

View PostPipinghot, on May 15 2017 - 09:41, said:

Trying too hard to cap is the cause of death for many, many teams.

Which is exactly why capping is only a fallback plan. Deliberately putting yourself in the open so people can use you for target practice is just bad playing. If you look at the best players in the game, they usually have very little capping and a lot of defending. When someone's cap average is too high that's a sure sign that you're looking at either a newbie or a n00b. Smart players only cap as a fallback plan.

WE are talking about a mission to cap.

Yes, OF COURSE we are, which is why my very first comment in this thread was:

View PostPipinghot, on May 15 2017 - 09:15, said:

I'd say the real problem is a mission to win by base capture, which is fundamentally silly.

Playing to cap is something n00bs do (or occasionally very good players who are very good at capping without dying, but those people are rare, most are basically committing suicide when they focus too much on capping) therefore a mission that encourages people to cap is also encouraging people to play like n00bs.


Edited by Pipinghot, May 15 2017 - 19:27.


Aranai #47 Posted May 15 2017 - 19:24

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 3829 battles
  • 67
  • [FURST] FURST
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

View PostHow_Bout_Dah, on May 15 2017 - 14:29, said:

also shows how bad a player is and how you will have to adjust your game to try and get a win, capping is for the birds anyways less exp and money. kill entire team = more exp and silver

 

Kill entire team also means a potential to lose the entire sodding game.

zarg12 #48 Posted May 15 2017 - 20:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 16507 battles
  • 350
  • [RT-34] RT-34
  • Member since:
    02-27-2011

View PostAranai, on May 15 2017 - 13:24, said:

 

Kill entire team also means a potential to lose the entire sodding game.

 

If you don't know what you're doing, sure.

Winterpeger #49 Posted May 15 2017 - 20:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 46951 battles
  • 1,578
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostCossack_13, on May 15 2017 - 10:53, said:

I don't know if he did drown himself or not but he ended the game with 0 damage done (we won though).

 

that's when you hope that it was his 2x or 3x.



Firemoth #50 Posted May 15 2017 - 23:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 34102 battles
  • 3,236
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011

View Postjoelmomma, on May 16 2017 - 03:26, said:

Okay time to direct my post back to the original feedback which is, XVM controls the game.  The example is that this months cap and win mission is hindered by players leaving cap to farm damage and kills to please a Wn8 stat perception.

 

except killing all enemies is a better guarantee to win the game, even without XVM.

 

by capping, you put yourself in the middle of an open field with 0 cover (unless you are on tundra). if the enemy is competent enough to turn around and deny you cap, then they can outplay you while you cap and you can lose the game.

by killing all enemies, you eliminate the ability of the enemy to outplay you, because they are all dead.

 

not to mention, has it occurred to you that other players might not actually care about tankrewards missions? if you are begging for mission completion, then you are relying entirely on the generosity of others anyway.



Fr33kzilla #51 Posted May 16 2017 - 02:59

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 14323 battles
  • 115
  • Member since:
    02-05-2015

View PostHellsfog, on May 15 2017 - 14:39, said:

 

Alternatively, the other players realized that damage translates into more xp and credits for them or they'd rather shoot tanks or maybe they had a mission to kill tanks or get damage. I'm not a big fan of xvm but your complaint is really that they didn't rig the match for you. 

 

Not really. Too many people are so focused on xvm stats now that it IS ruining the game. I'll take a sure win over a  risky chance any day. I've seen some crazy games where a sure win was squandered because of [edited]caring more for personal stats than winning or losing OR the other 14 people on the team. XVM is like a "info system" that existed i another game I played. And like there, that's mod was caustic to the game and ruined the community and play of the game to the point that many people just left the game. Those that push it's use and rely on it are a corrosive element in this game and they need to go or stop using mods like that. You can tell who is good by how they play, you don't need some programming that some worthless scumbag developed so he could shame people less well off than he is. And that's what it really is, a method for some jerks to "stroke their, ermm, ego". End of story.

the_dude_76 #52 Posted May 16 2017 - 15:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostNunya_000, on May 15 2017 - 15:11, said:

 

And chances are that the team killing all red tanks will not change their position as XP earners.  

 

Right, it's just us guys who want to fight that lose out. And of course this doesn't change the fact that 90+% of the time capping does NOT result in earning more than killing the entirety of the enemy team.

the_dude_76 #53 Posted May 16 2017 - 16:00

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostCossack_13, on May 15 2017 - 16:53, said:

I wish I had 10 gold for every time I've seen a team snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by refusing to cap

 

But if you had to give 10 gold every time you see a team snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by TRYING to cap you'd go broke...

the_dude_76 #54 Posted May 16 2017 - 16:03

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View Postjoelmomma, on May 15 2017 - 17:20, said:

 

WE are talking about a mission to cap.

 

Which also requires WINNING... which makes the comment you were responding to spot on.

the_dude_76 #55 Posted May 16 2017 - 16:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostTazilon, on May 15 2017 - 17:29, said:

 

Then if you were smart, you would cap fast and move on the the next game.  You make more XP and credits that way.

 

Really? Because it seems like shooting the tanks that are right in front of me when some scubs ends the game is a faster way to earn exp and credits than sitting in the queue for 30 seconds, then waiting 30 seconds for the battle to start then another minute as you get into position to engage the other team. Oh yeah, then rushing to cap after doing little or nothing

I mean what exactly is the point of playing the game if all you're going to do is rush to cap and sit there? It doesn't seem very "smart" to play a game if you aren't going to actually play the game



Nunya_000 #56 Posted May 16 2017 - 16:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 20390 battles
  • 8,582
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View Postthe_dude_76, on May 16 2017 - 06:56, said:

 

Right, it's just us guys who want to fight that lose out. And of course this doesn't change the fact that 90+% of the time capping does NOT result in earning more than killing the entirety of the enemy team.

 

You have no way to know that.  Honestly, I think it is a push most of the time.

 

If one tank does all the capping, he will earn 100 XP

All players get a Flat XP Bonus if the battle is won by capping.

All players in the cap circle get a Flat Credit bonus on a victory by capping.

 

Total Damage done by the team to the red team is only a coefficient to XP.  That means that the more a player has done in the battle, the more they might get.  However, that coefficient has to be very small per HP.  Chasing a couple of tanks with little HP left likely does not amount to much or else there would be a large XP earned difference between 1 red tank surviving and 3 red tanks surviving.....something I have not seen.  The only players that really benefits are those that actually do damage to the last few tanks. 

 

So, by capping, players get a XP and Credits increase vs a few XP for allowing someone to chase down the last tank.  I really could not care less about whether you want to fight.  I do not know you, nor do I owe you anything.  If I can get back to the garage 2 minutes earlier and move on to another battle, there is much more XP and credits to earn than is left in a battle where there is only one or two red tanks left.  If I am not in a position to do damage to the last couple of tanks in the battle, expect my fat butt to be sitting in cap if I am close.



Nunya_000 #57 Posted May 16 2017 - 17:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 20390 battles
  • 8,582
  • [PACNW] PACNW
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

View Postthe_dude_76, on May 16 2017 - 07:16, said:

 

Really? Because it seems like shooting the tanks that are right in front of me when some scubs ends the game is a faster way to earn exp and credits....... 

 

For you maybe, but not for the poor sap in a HT at the cap circle that is clear across the map from the last red tank.

 

Block Quote

than sitting in the queue for 30 seconds, then waiting 30 seconds for the battle to start then another minute as you get into position to engage the other team. 

 

That is irrelevant.  You are going to do that anyway, whether the battle is capped out or the last tank is killed.  Not waiting 2-3 minutes for someone to hunt down the last tank is 2-3 minutes sooner that this process is started.

 

Block Quote

Oh yeah, then rushing to cap after doing little or nothing

I mean what exactly is the point of playing the game if all you're going to do is rush to cap and sit there? It doesn't seem very "smart" to play a game if you aren't going to actually play the game

 

I believe you are confusing two different things.  We are not talking about "fast capping".  Nobody wins with fast capping and it is a poor idea to do....especially when the red team is in a position to reset cap.  We are discussing those that want to "kill all" vs those that will cap out near the end of the battle even when their team is winning 2-12.

 



Pipinghot #58 Posted May 16 2017 - 17:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 25799 battles
  • 6,771
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    11-20-2011

View Postthe_dude_76, on May 16 2017 - 09:56, said:

View PostNunya_000, on May 15 2017 - 15:11, said:

And chances are that the team killing all red tanks will not change their position as XP earners.  

Right, it's just us guys who want to fight that lose out. And of course this doesn't change the fact that 90+% of the time capping does NOT result in earning more than killing the entirety of the enemy team.

It does for the person capping.

 

If you are trying to chase down and kill the 1 or 2 opponents that are still left, and you want someone to leave cap while you to it, you are asking them to give up their credits and XP so that you can have it instead. That's just selfishness talking.



the_dude_76 #59 Posted May 17 2017 - 16:18

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostPipinghot, on May 16 2017 - 16:54, said:

It does for the person capping.

 

If you are trying to chase down and kill the 1 or 2 opponents that are still left, and you want someone to leave cap while you to it, you are asking them to give up their credits and XP so that you can have it instead. That's just selfishness talking.

 

I never ask someone to get off of cap but I don't hesitate to do it myself if I see someone else is about to get another kill. Because the reality is that cap points are next to worthless, especially if there are multiple tanks on cap. And isn't it equally selfish to deny someone else the opportunity to earn real exp and credits just so you can pick up a fraction of a fraction of the same for yourself??

the_dude_76 #60 Posted May 17 2017 - 16:35

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28814 battles
  • 599
  • [GSRM] GSRM
  • Member since:
    12-27-2011

View PostNunya_000, on May 16 2017 - 16:23, said:

 

For you maybe, but not for the poor sap in a HT at the cap circle that is clear across the map from the last red tank.

I have no issue with the players who couldn't do anything else even if they wanted to. It's the guys who did nothing when they could have.

Block Quote

 That is irrelevant.  You are going to do that anyway, whether the battle is capped out or the last tank is killed.  Not waiting 2-3 minutes for someone to hunt down the last tank is 2-3 minutes sooner that this process is started.

2-3 minutes?? Really?? I thought we weren't talking about fast capping?? Because unless there are a lot of enemy tanks left on the other team it would rarely take that much time to finish the match. After all, the average match only lasts about 5 minutes so the idea that you'd have to sit and wait around for half of the match while your teammates finishes off the other team isn't very realistic.

 

The bottom line for me is this- the matches where everyone earns the most are the matches where all of the enemy tanks are killed. The matches where many enemy tanks are left alive result in significantly lower scores for everyone. You can earn as much in a great battle that results in a loss than you can winning a battle that leaves half of the enemy alive. For me the math on that is pretty easy. 9 times out of 10 the additional percentage of earning will outweigh the additional percentage of time spent because the amount of time spent in the average battle is a small number to begin with

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users