Jump to content


40 loses to 5 wins


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
140 replies to this topic

Cenotaph #21 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:42

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9305 battles
  • 1,593
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 17:38, said:

I like how most blame me and don't consider the other 14 teammates. Remember this is a team game and I was on 40 losing teams(12 - 15 teams in a row) and 5 winning teams.

 

Probably because you have some of the absolute worst stats in the game... I imagine there are bot accounts that do better than you.

 

If -you- are the absolute worst player on your team, every single battle you play... how is the loss anyone else's fault, before your own?

 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
G
M
T
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
  no-repeat scroll 100% 0px;">Detect languageAfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEnglishEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIri[edited]alianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSesothoSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Switch languages"> 
no-repeat scroll 100% 0px;">AfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEnglishEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIri[edited]alianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSesothoSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Listen to the translation"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Copy translation"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Font size"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Help"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Pin pop-up bubble"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
Text-to-speech function is limited to 200 characters
repeat scroll 0% 0%;">
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Show Translator's button 3 second(s)"> 
Options : History : Feedback : Donate Close


Mazati #22 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:45

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5068 battles
  • 172
  • Member since:
    06-19-2013

View Postg4143, on Nov 22 2017 - 01:19, said:

Yup! 40 loses to 5 wins and 12 - 15 of those loses were in a row! You could excuse this if it was a one time thing an anomaly but it isn't. These losing streaks happen all the time and the probability that its random is very unlikely. The game is rigged, its contrived, its programmed to behave this way.

 

Next time you lose 3 or 4 in a row stop playing for awhile maybe wait till the next day, spamming the battle button is on you, just walk away

legolion17 #23 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:51

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 6700 battles
  • 323
  • [HHOUR] HHOUR
  • Member since:
    06-16-2016

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 19:38, said:

I like how most blame me and don't consider the other 14 teammates. Remember this is a team game and I was on 40 losing teams(12 - 15 teams in a row) and 5 winning teams. When you consider that MM is supposed to choose teams which are approx. equal then it becomes highly unlikely to be on 40 losing teams out of 45 games.

 

maybe the 5 games you won you just had good teammates.or they knew how to fight against a weakness like you

g4143 #24 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:56

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9189 battles
  • 413
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

View Poststrenfoo, on Nov 22 2017 - 02:41, said:

 

We're not saying every one of those losses was solely your fault.  We're saying that the only thing you have control over is your own performance so there's no point worrying or complaining about how poorly your team does.  The only thing you can do is improve your own skills.  The more you do that, the less these kinds of big losing streaks will happen.

 

Want to now the difference between a good player and a bad player in this game?  Bad players blame their team.  Good players blame themselves.

Again you flatter me. You must think the whole team's outcome rests on my skill. I'm not blaming my team. I'm blaming the game.



Beornotns #25 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:57

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 24226 battles
  • 2,485
  • [-SCA-] -SCA-
  • Member since:
    08-07-2014

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 17:26, said:

 

Stating an obvious fact is not playing the blame game. The game is contrived! The game is programmed to behave this way and everyone knows it.

 

I'm going to stop you there.  This is the common misconception fallacy.  Stop being lazy and embracing a "commonly known" thing that is, in fact, not.

 

Give evidence.  Jesus people nowadays talk $#it like "obviously" and "of course" when their arguments are neither obvious or a matter of course.

 

~B



HI_FIVE #26 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 43743 battles
  • 3,032
  • [UQ] UQ
  • Member since:
    05-29-2012

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 21:19, said:

Yup! 40 loses to 5 wins and 12 - 15 of those loses were in a row! You could excuse this if it was a one time thing an anomaly but it isn't. These losing streaks happen all the time and the probability that its random is very unlikely. The game is rigged, its contrived, its programmed to behave this way.

 

why didnt you quit at 20 losses rip your w/r

g4143 #27 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 02:58

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9189 battles
  • 413
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

View Postlegolion17, on Nov 22 2017 - 02:51, said:

 

maybe the 5 games you won you just had good teammates.or they knew how to fight against a weakness like you

 

You have to decide if the whole team's outcome depends on me or it doesn't. I can only defend from one side at a time.

Doomslinger__ #28 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:03

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 483
  • Member since:
    10-09-2017

The only way to win over 50% of the time is to get matches like this. I would say the difference between an above 50% player and a below 50% player is the frequency of time they get results like this. The sub 50% might get 1 battle out of 100 like this but the over 50% crowd could get these several times over a 100 battle sample. Compare my results in my 3 marks of excellence T67 to the enemy team who had a sub 50% win ratio T67 player and he was even platoon clubbing for more wins. I did significantly more than the total of his platoon combined. If you know what you are doing, you can have win ratios of around 60% solo at mid tiers even if you are not that great at the game. If you want to boost win rates even more, a platoon o three of these can garner a 75% win rate for each battle session if you really want to do some padding.

 



Blucraft #29 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:08

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 8061 battles
  • 824
  • Member since:
    08-20-2011

OP, I'm sure it has nothing to do with you :sceptic:.  Here's a suggestion, stop and review the replay if you have two loses in a single tank.  Find the weakness in "your" game.

 

-Blu



Doomslinger__ #30 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:10

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 21 battles
  • 483
  • Member since:
    10-09-2017

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 21:38, said:

I like how most blame me and don't consider the other 14 teammates. Remember this is a team game and I was on 40 losing teams(12 - 15 teams in a row) and 5 winning teams. When you consider that MM is supposed to choose teams which are approx. equal then it becomes highly unlikely to be on 40 losing teams out of 45 games.

 

I like how when my team is losing, my tomato allies start to blame me for that loss. So basically they blame one other player for a loss and not the team but if you point the finger at them they say that it is a team game and not their fault and that there are 14 other players to blame. How does that logic work exactly? Why isn't it a team game when you guys blame that one player that is still alive, did 2x his hit points for damage and is still alive trying to carry you to a win you don't even deserve? You can't have it both ways.

 

Here is my opinion on the "blame game" for losses: If you scored in the top 5 for xp, you can blame your allies for a loss. If you finished in the bottom 10 for xp, you cannot blame your allies or teams for that loss because you contributed to that loss yourself. Simple logic and it is the truth. For your overall win rate, simply look at your averages in the tanks you play. If you are below certain average levels, you are contributing to losses overall. For mid tiers you could use marks of excellence as a fast way to measure this in your tanks. If you can get 1 mark you are just carrying your own weight, 2 marks and you are carrying above your weight and 3 marks and you are doing the work of at least 3 players in most battles. If you can't even get 1 mark of excellence, you are dragging teams down each time you click the battle button. So you had a rare battle where you got top score? That was more luck than skill if you have 0 marks on your tank's gun and you get results like that rarely and that can be proved by looking at your service record.


Edited by Doomslinger__, Nov 22 2017 - 03:57.


Slatherer #31 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 31907 battles
  • 3,243
  • Member since:
    01-21-2014

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 17:58, said:

 

You have to decide if the whole team's outcome depends on me or it doesn't. I can only defend from one side at a time.

 

You're not giving us enough info.  What tanks were you playing?  How much damage and kills per game?  Did you survive until the end of the match or die pretty early on?  How many tanks on your team did zero damage?  How quickly did they die?  Any other relevant info? 

 

Help us understand.  Otherwise, we just will look up your stats and come up with our own conclusions.



g4143 #32 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:18

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9189 battles
  • 413
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

View PostBlucraft, on Nov 22 2017 - 03:08, said:

OP, I'm sure it has nothing to do with you :sceptic:.  Here's a suggestion, stop and review the replay if you have two loses in a single tank.  Find the weakness in "your" game.

 

-Blu

 

Again you flatter me. You are suggesting the team's whole success rests on my shoulders. Remember I have 14 other teammates and they lost too. Isn't it funny how its a team win but an individual's loss.



BigDollarBillz #33 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 36165 battles
  • 2,591
  • [SBW] SBW
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011
11losses in a row in my tier 9 cent. You know what all my fault. I'm having trouble with this tank for some reason. A few more losses away from rage selling it.

__WarChild__ #34 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:19

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 13753 battles
  • 1,788
  • [FGTVE] FGTVE
  • Member since:
    06-03-2017

First ask: "Can someone win 100% of their games?"

 

If the answer is YES, then win rates matter.

If the answer is NO, then the % of games that you cannot win is your "UnWinnable Rate" - which you don't control.

 

Obviously, exceptional players can have a tremendous impact on the results of a battle and therefore, will have a higher win rate over time.  But even the most super of the unicums lose games. To avoid strings of losses, great players will platoon up, pick "carrying tanks" and put a tremendous amount of effort into ensuring a win.  Average players or players just having fun (and not wanting to research or learn what to do first) will suffer negative streaks for many games at a time.  It is possible that none of those losses are their (or your) fault, but without reviewing each game, no one will really know.

 

The key is, if you're having fun, don't worry about it.  On the other hand, if it upsets you and you're miserable, you need to figure out a different plan or mentality.

 

Best of Luck!

 

WarChild 



g4143 #35 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:20

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9189 battles
  • 413
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

View PostSlatherer, on Nov 22 2017 - 03:17, said:

 

You're not giving us enough info.  What tanks were you playing?  How much damage and kills per game?  Did you survive until the end of the match or die pretty early on?  How many tanks on your team did zero damage?  How quickly did they die?  Any other relevant info? 

 

Help us understand.  Otherwise, we just will look up your stats and come up with our own conclusions.

 

You are talking about 45 games. I can remember some of then having half the teammates with 50 - zero damage. I can remember some of them where I was top three for damage(and I was playing arty).


Edited by g4143, Nov 22 2017 - 03:21.


g4143 #36 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:25

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9189 battles
  • 413
  • Member since:
    04-24-2015

View PostRake, on Nov 22 2017 - 03:20, said:

 

Then why is it you have one of the worst win rates in the game?  Does the game pick you out personally?  And if you really believe that, why are you still playing the game?

 

Again I'm not saying I'm a great player. I'm saying the game has unlikely streaks built into it.  Its unlikely that one day I win most games and then on another day I lose most games. One would expect a frequency to be around your norm and not the extremes people experience all the time(remember its not just me raising this concern).

Edited by g4143, Nov 22 2017 - 03:27.


Absolute #37 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:48

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 11732 battles
  • 225
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View Post__Arc__, on Nov 22 2017 - 02:30, said:

There isn't any conclusive evidence to prove if the game is rigged or not. There's reason to believe it is, but not enough evidence to prove it. In my experience, when I play well and contribute to the game, I win more often. When I play like trash, I go on losing streaks. If the game truly is rigged, my impact on the game should have minimal influence on the battle. The fact that I can lead my team to victory, or lead my team to a defeat means that game isn't "rigged" to the degree that people complain. So what if it's rigged? If you play well, you can overcome the so called "rigging". You can't win them all, but you can win more than you think you can. If you're having a bad day, take a break and come back later.

 

Literally spells it out in WG's MM patent https://www.google.c...tents/US8425330 how they place losing players in a game that they're more likely to win and vice versa.

 

"matchmaking servers can assign players to sessions to provide players with varied gaming experiences without frustrating or boring the player. Battle sessions are balanced while the difficulty levels of the battle session for each player are controlled."

 

"According to another aspect, the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player's win/loss ratio decreases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the lower end of the allowable range, whereas as the player's win/loss ration increases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the upper end of the allowable range."

 

"Thus, when a player has been repeatedly put into too many difficult battles, the balancing is done in favor of easier battle sessions, thereby encouraging the player by providing an easier game environment. Similarly, when the player has been repeatedly put into too many easy battles, the balancing is done in favor of harder battle sessions, thereby keeping the player challenged instead of letting the player become bored with easy games. A first possible algorithm is to divide the permissible battle levels evenly across a range from zero (0) to two (2), and place the vehicle into the battle level corresponding to the win/loss ratio, where any ratio greater than two (2) automatically results in the vehicle being placed in the highest possible battle level. "


Edited by Absolute, Nov 22 2017 - 03:50.


Cenotaph #38 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9305 battles
  • 1,593
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 17:58, said:

 

You have to decide if the whole team's outcome depends on me or it doesn't. I can only defend from one side at a time.

 

Dude... I'm willing to wager that you are rarely, if ever, on your teams top 10 players.

 

If you are in the bottom ranks of your team, every single time you play the game, then the loss is certainly more your fault than the rest of the team.

 

Learn to have some personal responsibility, or expect to be treated with contempt.

 

 

 

View PostAbsolute, on Nov 21 2017 - 18:48, said:

 

Literally spells it out in WG's MM patent https://www.google.c...tents/US8425330 how they place losing players in a game that they're more likely to win.

 

"matchmaking servers can assign players to sessions to provide players with varied gaming experiences without frustrating or boring the player. Battle sessions are balanced while the difficulty levels of the battle session for each player are controlled."

 

"According to another aspect, the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player's win/loss ratio decreases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the lower end of the allowable range, whereas as the player's win/loss ration increases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the upper end of the allowable range."

 

"Thus, when a player has been repeatedly put into too many difficult battles, the balancing is done in favor of easier battle sessions, thereby encouraging the player by providing an easier game environment. Similarly, when the player has been repeatedly put into too many easy battles, the balancing is done in favor of harder battle sessions, thereby keeping the player challenged instead of letting the player become bored with easy games. A first possible algorithm is to divide the permissible battle levels evenly across a range from zero (0) to two (2), and place the vehicle into the battle level corresponding to the win/loss ratio, where any ratio greater than two (2) automatically results in the vehicle being placed in the highest possible battle level. "

 

 

So, if the MM was working like this... why is the OP's WR so bloody low?

 

Shouldn't the game be trying to force him to 50% WR?

 

So, I guess what you are implying, is that the OP is so damned bad at this game, that the MM cheating can't even make up for his uselessness?

 

Either that, or you have no idea what you are talking about...

 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
G
M
T
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
  no-repeat scroll 100% 0px;">Detect languageAfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEnglishEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIri[edited]alianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSesothoSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Switch languages"> 
no-repeat scroll 100% 0px;">AfrikaansAlbanianArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CroatianCzechDanishDutchEnglishEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIri[edited]alianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSerbianSesothoSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshYiddishYorubaZulu
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Listen to the translation"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Copy translation"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Font size"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Help"> 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Pin pop-up bubble"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
Text-to-speech function is limited to 200 characters
repeat scroll 0% 0%;">
repeat scroll 0% 0%;"> 
 
repeat scroll 0% 0%;" title="Show Translator's button 3 second(s)"> 
Options : History : Feedback : Donate Close


The_Boz #39 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 03:50

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9689 battles
  • 1,057
  • Member since:
    06-13-2012

View Postg4143, on Nov 21 2017 - 18:25, said:

 

Again I'm not saying I'm a great player. I'm saying the game has unlikely streaks built into it.  Its unlikely that one day I win most games and then on another day I lose most games. One would expect a frequency to be around your norm and not the extremes people experience all the time(remember its not just me raising this concern).

 

You have the stats of a BOT. YOU are a degradation to your team in EVERY battle. That will have an affect on the winning chance in EVERY game you play. Your failure to see how this affects YOUR team in EVERY battle is staggering.

__Arc__ #40 Posted Nov 22 2017 - 04:03

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 30352 battles
  • 256
  • [191] 191
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

View PostAbsolute, on Nov 21 2017 - 21:48, said:

 

Literally spells it out in WG's MM patent https://www.google.c...tents/US8425330 how they place losing players in a game that they're more likely to win and vice versa.

 

"matchmaking servers can assign players to sessions to provide players with varied gaming experiences without frustrating or boring the player. Battle sessions are balanced while the difficulty levels of the battle session for each player are controlled."

 

"According to another aspect, the matchmaking server may store a win/loss percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player's win/loss ratio decreases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the lower end of the allowable range, whereas as the player's win/loss ration increases, the player becomes more likely to be placed in battles having battle levels at the upper end of the allowable range."

 

"Thus, when a player has been repeatedly put into too many difficult battles, the balancing is done in favor of easier battle sessions, thereby encouraging the player by providing an easier game environment. Similarly, when the player has been repeatedly put into too many easy battles, the balancing is done in favor of harder battle sessions, thereby keeping the player challenged instead of letting the player become bored with easy games. A first possible algorithm is to divide the permissible battle levels evenly across a range from zero (0) to two (2), and place the vehicle into the battle level corresponding to the win/loss ratio, where any ratio greater than two (2) automatically results in the vehicle being placed in the highest possible battle level. "

 

Here's the thing, though, we don't know which games, if any, WG uses this for. WG has several online games. Companies have been known to patent something and not use it just so other companies can't use the idea. Can you prove which games, if any, WG uses this matchmaker for? It's reasonable to assume they use it for WoT, but there's no way to prove it.

 

Even if you assume this matchmaker is present in WoT, don't you think the matchmaker would be dragging this sorry player (OP) up, instead of setting him off on losing streaks? His claim that this game is rigged is nullified based on the fact that he's a horrible player. If he was winning 80% in 45 battles with bot stats, you could argue this is a classic case of WG patent rigged MM, but it's the opposite. He's losing with bot stats, which is what we should be expecting. Somebody that does nothing has a negative impact for his team, and contributes to the loss instead of for the win. The patent would suggest MM would compensate for the fact that he is doing nothing every game, and put him on teams that can carry his weight for him, leading to closer to 50% wins. That isn't what's happening.

 

Considering the OP is on a massive losing streak, it seems that this should be an argument for MM not being rigged, and players that do nothing every game SHOULD lose all the time. It's laughable that somebody as bad as the OP would be complaining about how often they lose.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users