166 replies to this topic

[BayouPhantom]

ArmorStorm, on Apr 15 2019 - 21:57, said:

 

  I have NEVER had a 20 game losing streak, and possibly not even a 10-game streak.  Believe what you will, wrong as it is. 

 

For whatever it's worth, I have had 10 game losing streaks.  Never had a 10 game winning streak though.  I've had a few at 5 or 6.  Never had a 20 game losing streak though because I got tired of losing and did something else long before that point.  So, it does happen, maybe not to you and that's good, but it does happen.

[BayouPhantom]

SteelRonin, on Apr 15 2019 - 23:44, said:

the only rigged thing here is the Russian Number Generator

 

According to WOT, the RNG is nothing more than a hamster on a wheel generating numbers in each server.  I wonder who is in charge of hamster influencing....

[I_QQ_4_U]

GeoMonster, on Apr 15 2019 - 16:39, said:

 

I agree ... but I guess you haven't been looking at the recent stats that show a recent RAPID decrease in the player base.

 

 

And what does that have to do with proving people are leaving because of some delusional belief in rigging? The majority of people stop playing a game because they are bored of it, the wacko black helicopter types are just a tiny minority and even then many seem to keep on playing and rant about how horrible the game is. I quit playing DAOC after 8 years(9 if you count the year I played freeshards afterwards), I had pretty much zero problems with the game, I had just played it a long bloody time. So I can imagine a lot of long time WoT players are in the same boat and newer ones either moved on to a new shiny(like the majority of gamers do) or couldn't get the hang of it and went looking for a game hoping they could do better.

[da_Rock002]

NeatoMan, on Apr 15 2019 - 17:30, said:

Too bad those extremes don't happen as often as you claim.

 

 
 

 

Too bad top players don't see those battles as often as the players who fill the majority of slots on those two unbalanced teams.    If top players saw them more often, their WRs would be more awesome and overwhelming.   And it would be much clearer to everyone how screwed the MM is, and who that screwing benefits.

 

 

Top players like yourself don't see as many of those gifts as newbies and less-skilled for a very simple reason.    There are 2-3 times as many weaker players in them as there are top players.    It's very much like the reason tier8 players see so many bottom tier battles in the 3-5-7 templates WG has recently cut back. 

[da_Rock002]

Thank you for providing a chart that showed why you think those MM provided don't happen for everyone.    In fact they don't happen for the top players as often as they happen for newbies and less-skilled, the ones who populate those matchups way more often.

 

That's a pretty clear picture of what you saw, isn't it?      Looks like the Sure Things (unbalanced matchups) aren't a HUGE part of the WoT you experienced over >4k battles, but they obviously are part of your enjoyment. 

 

 

[da_Rock002]

Edited by da_Rock002, Apr 16 2019 - 12:00.

[_Tsavo_]

It's been discussed to death, Rock, that chart shows how far he's moved the bell.  A bad player would see it shifted to the left and a dead average Joe would see it near the middle.   Ain't rocket science 

[Copacetic]

_Tsavo_, on Apr 16 2019 - 12:00, said:

It's been discussed to death, Rock, that chart shows how far he's moved the bell.  A bad player would see it shifted to the left and a dead average Joe would see it near the middle.   Ain't rocket science

 

rock is too daft to understand that or just doesn't want to admit it.

he has certainly picked an appropriate nickname

[Insanefriend]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 04:49, said:

Too bad top players don't see those battles as often as the players who fill the majority of slots on those two unbalanced teams.    If top players saw them more often, their WRs would be more awesome and overwhelming.   And it would be much clearer to everyone how screwed the MM is, and who that screwing benefits.

 

The reason the top players don't see as many lopsided matches is they stop them from happening.  They are where they need to be on the map, support their team to great effect, hit and pen most shots.  It's all about you as a player, not mm or your teammates.  You always just need to ask yourself after a battle what could I have done, where could I have gone, what should I have targeted, why did I miss so many shots.  Set a goal to always do at least your hp in damage or a goal to learn how to play up at the front lines.  Just don't blame your team, go down fighting in every match and take as many of them with you as you can.

[Kliphie]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 05:59, said:

 

_Tsavo_, on Apr 16 2019 - 06:00, said:

It's been discussed to death, Rock, that chart shows how far he's moved the bell.  A bad player would see it shifted to the left and a dead average Joe would see it near the middle.   Ain't rocket science 

 

Copacetic, on Apr 16 2019 - 06:48, said:

 

rock is too daft to understand that or just doesn't want to admit it.

he has certainly picked an appropriate nickname

 

​

[NeatoMan]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 05:59, said:

<when all else fails post this chart that I know nothing about, and actually contradicts one of my most repeated claims>

 

Only in daRock world is 43:57 odds considered a sure bet.  btw, I fail to see where that chart says anything about rolfstomps.

 

also he posts a chart that shows how much the individual is responsible for his own win rate, and specifically highlights just how much he is responsible, and then says the individual isn't important as far as his own win rate.

 

I love it when they try to argue logically and then end up burning their own arguments to the ground.

 

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 05:49, said:

Top players like yourself don't see as many of those gifts as newbies and less-skilled for a very simple reason.    There are 2-3 times as many weaker players in them as there are top players.    It's very much like the reason tier8 players see so many bottom tier battles in the 3-5-7 templates WG has recently cut back. 

This is daRock still trying to tell everyone that some players get better team mates than other players.  This is the most continuous piece of fail-crap on the forums.  Everyone else who tried to maintain this position has come to their senses and realized the error of their ways when shown how it works... except daRock.   Nobody should ever listen to a word this guy posts.  There is not a shred of verifiable math or logic in anything he says.

 

it's as simple as 2d6+1 vs 2d6+6,  but that kind of math and logic is obviously way beyond the capacity of daRock

[anonym_ap1ksDfS46wX]

These threads are useful for seeing which players understand how statistics and evidence work and those that enjoy conspiracy theories that prop up their egos.

The first group have both good and bad players, the second are looking for excuses for their bad play so never change.

[da_Rock002]

_Tsavo_, on Apr 16 2019 - 06:00, said:

It's been discussed to death, Rock, that chart shows how far he's moved the bell.  A bad player would see it shifted to the left and a dead average Joe would see it near the middle.   Ain't rocket science

 

 

That chart also happens to show the "luck" his teams have had.   

 

You're right, it's not rocket science.

He's not seen as many one-sided matchups but they've all been winners.    Which is naturally what happens for players no longer learning the game.

[Firemoth]

[da_Rock002]

Insanefriend, on Apr 16 2019 - 07:04, said:

 

The reason the top players don't see as many lopsided matches is they stop them from happening.  They are where they need to be on the map, support their team to great effect, hit and pen most shots.  It's all about you as a player, not mm or your teammates.  You always just need to ask yourself after a battle what could I have done, where could I have gone, what should I have targeted, why did I miss so many shots.  Set a goal to always do at least your hp in damage or a goal to learn how to play up at the front lines.  Just don't blame your team, go down fighting in every match and take as many of them with you as you can.

 

 

That is also shown by neato's chart to be tin foil.

Look to the left of the chart.   See how many battles his presence failed to stop from being sure losses.

It's pretty clear he wasn't the key to the probabilities, nor the outcomes.

 

 

As for what the chart was supposed to mean.....     

They show around 5K battles he participated in.   They show how many were won and how many lost.   They also show the probability of a win or loss.   Since the probability isn't a set value, it's obviously based on more than just one player's contribution toward that probability, which means it considers more than just neato's influence.     So.....   it reflects the MM's handiwork (or lack of it) on balancing the influence of 30 players' skills and not one person's influence.

 

Thanks neato for supplying such revealing data. 

Edited by da_Rock002, Apr 16 2019 - 14:08.

[da_Rock002]

BTW....……     Another tinfoil idea is the one that:

"BALANCING TEAMS WON'T CHANGE THE NUMBER OF BLOWOUTS"

 

It's another diversionary 'argument'.

 

The problem with the WoT Signature unbalanced matchups isn't with the number of blowouts.   They do happen naturally.   How often is another thing, but their volume doesn't mean spit.

 

The problem with WoT Signature matchups is simple.   The majority of the players in them are not top players.   The players in them who invariably benefit from being in them may not see them as often as others, but the win chance is most often a sure bet.     Replacing those sure bet WoT Signature battles top players see with even odds for everyone in the matchup is what WG should be wanting.

[NeatoMan]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 07:58, said:

He's not seen as many one-sided matchups but they've all been winners.    Which is naturally what happens for players no longer learning the game.

The reason I have more winners than losing ones is entirely due to me and nobody else (since I play solo).  You completely fail to understand the background of that chart, and why anybody would get more or less winners than losers.  It's all due to the individual.  Until you admit that you will always be wrong.

 

or just keep posting and showing everyone how little you understand what you post.

 

for everyone else:  pay attention in school kids, or you'll end up like daRock

[NeatoMan]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 08:18, said:

BTW....……     Another tinfoil idea is the one that:

"BALANCING TEAMS WON'T CHANGE THE NUMBER OF BLOWOUTS"

 

The problem with WoT Signature matchups is simple.   The majority of the players in them are not top players.   The players in them who invariably benefit from being in them may not see them as often as others, but the win chance is most often a sure bet.     Replacing those sure bet WoT Signature battles top players see with even odds for everyone in the matchup is what WG should be wanting.

That is not something that is exclusive to blowouts.  It is also true of the losing teams in general.  Weaker players end up on losing teams more often.   It's statistically inevitable,.   Are you saying you want to eliminate winning and losing as well?  everyone gets 50:50?

[TonksForNothing]

Glad to see I can leave for years and come back to the exact same threads by the exact same sorts of players complaining about rigging. Then the exact same sub-50% W/R players jump in to echo the claim until NeatoMan shows up, as he would have years ago, with the numbers to shut 'em all down as they try desperately to find a hole in the data.

 

It's like I never left.

 

There's no hole in the data, and much like the majority of your matches you can't win this fight solely because you are the one fighting it: MM is not rigged and you just need to get better to see your W/R go up above 50%. NeatoMan showed exactly why this is the case.

[Copacetic]

da_Rock002, on Apr 16 2019 - 13:58, said:

 

 

That chart also happens to show the "luck" his teams have had.   

 

You're right, it's not rocket science.

He's not seen as many one-sided matchups but they've all been winners.    Which is naturally what happens for players no longer learning the game.

 

and there is nothing wrong with that