Can I Has Tanks Related Question?
Questions you may have about tanks which can be answered by anyone.
726 topics in this forum
-
- 12 replies
- 20,928 views
-
- 24 replies
- 1,095 views
-
- 18 replies
- 2,003 views
-
- 1 reply
- 682 views
-
- 1 reply
- 579 views
-
- 11 replies
- 956 views
-
- 11 replies
- 1,779 views
-
- 15 replies
- 3,181 views
-
- 7 replies
- 3,694 views
-
- 4 replies
- 1,717 views
-
- 41 replies
- 4,079 views
-
- 3 replies
- 871 views
-
- 4 replies
- 987 views
-
- 33 replies
- 3,038 views
-
- 10 replies
- 1,261 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1,440 views
-
- 20 replies
- 1,548 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1,219 views
-
- 27 replies
- 3,710 views
-
- 17 replies
- 3,223 views
-
- 8 replies
- 1,669 views
-
- 12 replies
- 1,724 views
-
- 8 replies
- 2,674 views
-
- 8 replies
- 1,504 views
-
- 15 replies
- 1,409 views
-
Latest Articles
-
Topics
-
-
Recent Status Updates
-
I have some thoughts about winning/losing. It originates from Chess, been playing a lot lately. A game mostly, about precision than anything else. In Chess, you are neither winning or losing until a mistake is made. The mistakee is the loser, but the opponent doesn't win. He loses, but the opponent doesn't actually win. He just capitalises on a mistake. There is no RNG there, so precision is what matters. Higher precision means playing better.
WoT has RNG, but the same thing applies. You are in limbo until a mistake is made. How quick you are at spotting them is what makes a good player. A good example is the 7v7 Ruinberg defense. This was so hard to win as an attacker as you can hold everything fairly easily. Same as GMs in Chess - everything holds and results in a draw.
What about thinking the other way? That you are always winning until you make a mistake? I think it results in super heavy aggression. These are the types of people that fight their way to the top. And the other side - where I am. Passive approach - always in limbo until something shifts the balance in either favour. That's about precision. The former is about mechanics. Obviously they blend, but I think it's interesting to at least entertain the idea that my way of play is flawed, even if it ranked number one at one point.
I basically never take unnecessary trades in Chess to try and keep the board as complicated for as long as possible, mistakes are easier to make there. In WoT - mistakes happen every second but you physically cannot move to capitalise in time on all of them. I'm just curious if there's a method of being there for more of them. So I'm going to play like an asshat to push that limit and try to improve it (WoT). I want ways to push the limits and this is an idea I want to explore..
No Recent Status Updates
.gif.836e07170550a946ba799a2e7540a9d6.thumb.gif.d9aaff08d3c94f9c63f6f0443bca7976.gif)
