Jump to content


Why is the XP in Ranked Battles biased towards IS-7's?


  • Please log in to reply
140 replies to this topic

Halonut24 #41 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 02:45

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6248 battles
  • 408
  • [CS7AO] CS7AO
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

I can't even see how one would even play Devil's Advocate in this.

Evidence seems clear cut... Multiple instances from multiple combinations of Damage/assist/kills... It checks out to me. If I ever play that mode (which may be unlikely, as I suck at using my M48) I will look for this discrepancy. 

However, there is one question that I think is worth asking: EXP BOOSTERS. Do they apply to this game mode, or to the Base EXP totals? If they do, it may explain some of the discrepancies. I have doubts it does though.



Hurk #42 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 02:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 55234 battles
  • 17,374
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

replying to this thread, since the other one is pretty much a sewer. 

 

I tend to agree that these reports coupled with the others posted show that the IS7 *APPEARS* to have a exp advantage in some form over other tanks with similar guns. 

I say appears, because looking at 3 replays and 10 screenshots is NOT enough to draw an actual answer, and the moderators both here, and in the EU put it "its too difficult to know when exactly what etc" with one replay, since you do NOT get that other players data in your replay file, instead you only have your own view of the battle, and not the client/server combined data that shows the server telling the client what proper state its in. 

 

as a side note, im also tending toward the idea that TIME in battle may be how brawling bonus is calculated. that may be the hidden factor here that we cannot account for. 



Scorpiany #43 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 02:52

    Major

  • Game Knowledge Expert
  • 36323 battles
  • 12,958
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    06-27-2013

View PostHalonut24, on Feb 14 2018 - 17:45, said:

I can't even see how one would even play Devil's Advocate in this.

Evidence seems clear cut... Multiple instances from multiple combinations of Damage/assist/kills... It checks out to me. If I ever play that mode (which may be unlikely, as I suck at using my M48) I will look for this discrepancy. 

However, there is one question that I think is worth asking: EXP BOOSTERS. Do they apply to this game mode, or to the Base EXP totals? If they do, it may explain some of the discrepancies. I have doubts it does though.

 

The XP shown on the team panels is the base XP value - This means that it is the unaltered, raw XP that a player received, prior to any bonuses.

Hurk #44 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 02:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 55234 battles
  • 17,374
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostHalonut24, on Feb 14 2018 - 18:45, said:

I can't even see how one would even play Devil's Advocate in this.

Evidence seems clear cut... Multiple instances from multiple combinations of Damage/assist/kills... It checks out to me. If I ever play that mode (which may be unlikely, as I suck at using my M48) I will look for this discrepancy. 

However, there is one question that I think is worth asking: EXP BOOSTERS. Do they apply to this game mode, or to the Base EXP totals? If they do, it may explain some of the discrepancies. I have doubts it does though.

no bonus applies to base exp except the tanks base exp value, which is only significant for older premium tanks. 

consumables, premium time, etc, all apply on the scorecard instead. 



Necrolegion #45 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 19704 battles
  • 2,955
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011
Oh what, the boi Skorpiani is back from the dead!!!!!!

Halonut24 #46 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:01

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6248 battles
  • 408
  • [CS7AO] CS7AO
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013
Ok, that's what I thought. That was really the only doubt I had about this whole situation. With it out of the way, I'd say there's a very strong argument to be made on this problem. Props for pointing it out. Hoping whoever is in charge of things like that will be addressing it. Hate to see that kind of stuff. 

Platedmeat #47 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:02

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 46186 battles
  • 321
  • Member since:
    03-10-2013

View PostScorpiany, on Feb 13 2018 - 00:56, said:

 

I'm not naming & shaming the players, the players are just playing the game. It's the tank that there's an issue with.

 

Edit: Well... What do you know... Apparently you were right. I got struck down for "name and shame". I guess I'll have to edit the names out next time, even if they're not being named nor shamed.

 

In this instance I really hate being right but glad your back Scorp and the strike has been removed. 

Platedmeat #48 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:07

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 46186 battles
  • 321
  • Member since:
    03-10-2013

View PostCabbageMechanic, on Feb 14 2018 - 17:42, said:

Hello Tankers,

After reviewing this thread and the report that caused it to be moderated, I have removed the point from Scorpiany's record and am reinstating this thread.  I initially messaged him about this yesterday afternoon, and after my review and his response, I do not believe that it was his intent to name and shame any of the players shown in the images in the original post.  I would like to ask, both Scorpiany and the rest of you, that if you are posting a scoreboard screenshot please black out the other names unless it is absolutely essential to your thread content and does not violate forum rules.  You may not intend to offend someone, but they might not want their name broadcast to the community at large next to a particularly bad game (and we all have them from time to time).

Regarding Scorpiany's original post,  I do not agree with his position on the question of bias, and neither do many of the individual vehicle statistics.  However, we are looking into this and will file a report if our findings corroborate his belief that there is a base XP discrepancy on the IS-7. 

 

Hey Cabbage, instead of "However, we are looking into this and will file a report if our findings corroborate his belief that there is a base XP discrepancy on the IS-7"  

Why don't ya'll just file a report either way regardless of what ya'll find. I am sure there are ALOT of people that would love to know just exactly wth is going on.



Halonut24 #49 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:12

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6248 battles
  • 408
  • [CS7AO] CS7AO
  • Member since:
    06-15-2013

View PostFreemanofTreve, on Feb 14 2018 - 19:07, said:

 

Hey Cabbage, instead of "However, we are looking into this and will file a report if our findings corroborate his belief that there is a base XP discrepancy on the IS-7"  

Why don't ya'll just file a report either way regardless of what ya'll find. I am sure there are ALOT of people that would love to know just exactly wth is going on.

 

I second this notion. I believe a thorough explanation would be greatly appreciated, and put many minds at ease.

norsewolf #50 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:17

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 60700 battles
  • 264
  • [PINGU] PINGU
  • Member since:
    06-29-2012
WHY THE F**** IS SWAMP IN RANKED QUE 

Hurk #51 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 03:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 55234 battles
  • 17,374
  • [KGR] KGR
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View Postnorsewolf, on Feb 14 2018 - 19:17, said:

WHY THE F**** IS SWAMP IN RANKED QUE 

the micropatch today was to fix that i believe.



ReFossa #52 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 04:03

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 32399 battles
  • 400
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011
This issue requires an answer.

Edited by TheRevFossa, Feb 15 2018 - 04:04.


Chameleon_1999 #53 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 06:37

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 28544 battles
  • 199
  • Member since:
    11-09-2014
Poor Russians. I feel bad for them. =(

simba90 #54 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 06:41

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 16787 battles
  • 905
  • Member since:
    06-03-2012

As posted in the other thread, which not one of the rabid pitchfork wielding people even acknowledged.

Here is a counter to this thread. I know it is a single screenshot of a single battle.

Sample size matters BOTH ways.

Spoiler
Spoiler

 



Chameleon_1999 #55 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 06:43

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 28544 battles
  • 199
  • Member since:
    11-09-2014

Does anyone really even bother to shoot Russian tanks? Save ur credits.

 



Digital_Dog #56 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 07:01

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 8555 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    03-29-2016

Ranked Battles are not worth playing.  The MM is the same crappy MM that has one team of good players seal clubbing a lower skilled team far too often. 

 

Now there is Russian bias in the experience earned?  Another WoT mode that was dysfunctional before it hit the servers. 

 

Devs need to drink more tea and stay away form the distilled potato juice.



monjardin #57 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 07:16

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 23071 battles
  • 53
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

I don't know if it's really the IS-7. Check out this gem of a game from a Super Conqueror that beat me out for a chevron.

 

 

 



FlakKnight #58 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 07:27

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13200 battles
  • 648
  • Member since:
    11-13-2013

View Postmonjardin, on Feb 15 2018 - 06:16, said:

I don't know if it's really the IS-7. Check out this gem of a game from a Super Conqueror that beat me out for a chevron.

 

 

 

 

Damaged 4 modules, 11 shots on target.  I'm still guessing that potential damage is a larger component than we think.

_Bagheera_ #59 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 11:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 36334 battles
  • 5,671
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

I posted this in another thread I think but I'll post it here. There ARE hidden credit modifiers for premium tanks in the game. This is blatantly obvious in tanks like the Churchill III and KV5 compared to premiums of the same teir, so it is not much of a stretch to assume there may be different credit and XP modiers for tech tree tanks. 

 

The KV5 is not expected to get much damage, so gets its bonus credit moidier, therefore doing a small amount of damage with it compared to something like a T34 will net you MUCH more profit. Ive had 4k damage games in a T34 vs tier 10s and walked out with only 70k profit...a paltry 2k or 3k in my KV5 when it was actually possible without prem spam and i can get away with nearly 100k profit. 

 

IF we had the means to datamine this info it would quickly answer this question. That is literally the only thing I can think of that would give you such a sizable bonus for an IS-7 over other tanks. And also look to see if there are have been ninja changes to suspect premiums like the FCM50T and JT88

 

There may be even some destiny 2 level shenagins going on where they are ninja buffing or nerfing certain tanks XP rates to slow people grinding for them/leveling crews in them? Would explain how the wildly popular batchat as was mentioned either here or in another IS7 thread does nearly 2k damage but gets less XP than a basically AFK IS-7. 


Edited by _Bagheera_, Feb 15 2018 - 11:46.


_Bagheera_ #60 Posted Feb 15 2018 - 11:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 36334 battles
  • 5,671
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011

Also remember, at a time the IS-7 was WILDLY unpopular and considered pretty power creeped and got replaced by other tanks. There may have been ninja buffs to its XP bonuses to conpensate for it being unpopular. Now that its been slightly "buffed" those changes may not have been removed, 

 

Like the ground resistances on the T54 mod 1 after it got a 760hp engine and light tank power to weight ratios......






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users