Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/02/2017 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    @Fabunil News spread fast " Bad news is that wotlabs (from 1/10-17) won’t list players who have a wr under 54% and wn8 under 1500. Because of server costs. Only new accounts or rerolls will be allowed. Rather drastic. " https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2017/10/01/vbaddict-net-update/#comment-94915
  2. 4 points
    The new PR has made pubbies weird towards me they say things like "It's an honor to play with you" and " Glad you were on my team thanks for the carry" and some dude defend me like " fuck that hater he's mad because you're so skilled" I'm just sitting here just stunned as shit right now.
  3. 2 points
    Dude brings T57 in ranked. Doesn't have any repair skill on crewmember..
  4. 2 points

    French Heavy ST Stats

    325 pen on a t8 heavy
  5. 1 point
    Ever since I started researching and comparing the previous MM with the current MM, it seems more and more obvious that strict templates, like our current 3/5/7, 5/10, and all the same tier matches, need to be removed. I have campaigned hard in the NA forums, posted an article here in the early stages of my efforts, and recently spent time on the EU forums. My foreign language skills are non-existent so I am unable to communicate on the RU and SEA platforms. Aside from replying to posts and the occasional fact check on people when they claim odd things, I think this is the end of the road for the campaign. The only other thing I can think of now is to use google translate and send an actual snail mail letter to the WG HQ. I just fear it would read something like this: "Containers need to be evenly given out at different floors so the game has more options," and they will just scratch their heads. Withstanding that, I can only hope that WG will remove these strict template matches soon and restore a match system that has as much variety and interest as the previous system with a few balancing tweaks. I am still optimistic that they will change it overall. The NA Forums are mixed with players of different opinions, but WG tends to ignore the NA server anyway. Here on the now quiet WotLabs, players seem indifferent to the current MM. I'm guessing that is because this community has a high level of skill and easily adapts to the changes and some may even like that it is easier to farm damage under the current system. But again, I don't know if WG monitors this forum frequently. On the EU forums, there seems to be a super-majority of players that want the MM removed. That is a good sign. They have a population WG respects and I get the feeling that their forum admins have good communication with the parent company and that those sentiments will be passed along. The recent spat of content creators criticizing the MM is also heartening. Before I scale back, I'd like to post the information that I have gathered over the past few months, some charts that go along with it in case anyone wants to use them for their own efforts or information, and some sentiments to tie up any loose ends. When I gathered information about the old MM to compare to the new MM I was a little surprised at how wrong my memory was when it came to bottom tier matches. I could have sworn my bottom tier matches would have been more challenging than what I was looking at in my research under the old system. Since I was only looking at 100 games at first, I figured the sample wasn't big enough and it was skewed. Then as I gathered another 100 games from my own replays, and then 200 more games from my friend, I began to see a pattern and that in fact my memory was wrong. As I contemplated this I then remembered that our memories and perceptions are faulty. We tend to recall outstanding events more than common events. So while I was playing thousands of games, the best or the worst matches were the ones that would stand out the most in my mind. This is probably why so many players are paranoid about being in a small group of bottom tier tanks, when in reality it didn't happen that often. Another thing that became visible to me from doing this research was that we formerly had a cornucopia of different match-ups. In that 400 game sample, there were 114 unique matches. Now that number would be smaller with the new light tank system that we have today, but it would still be much MUCH more than what we have in our current set of three strict templates (3/5/7, etc.). The variety of games and balance of top, middle, and bottom tier matches stands out like a beacon of excitement compared to the drab experience we are left with presently. Once you become conscious of these things, it is hard not to notice them. I was smacked in the face with reality and have cursed myself with this knowledge and I apologize for ruining anyone else's perception of the the game now. That isn't my general intention. My goal is to have this MM changed back to what it was, or something similar to what it was as had been proposed on the NA and EU forums. For anyone that wants this information, here is a link to the google doc where I transferred it. It is a copy of the pertinent information from my excel spreadsheets, and while I am confident that the main part is correct, there could be an error or two at the bottom with the layout of matches. The figures above them are correct, but I am not checking the 400 different matches to make sure I copied every single one correctly. So forgive me if there is an error there. IF there is an error, the chart above the matches is correct and I miscopied the match(s) below it. Please note the difference in top tier matches between me and Macduff48 under the current system. He platoons a lot. For the periods I gathered from myself, I rarely platooned. Together, they give a decent rough average for most players in the game whether they platoon or not. Partial top or bottom tier matches refers to 5/10 matches or +1/-1 matches in the old MM. For a more specific description of the data collection, see "The Case Against the 3/5/7 Match Maker" article. I updated it recently and I hope I converted all the numbers correctly. If something doesn't make sense, please let me know. The impetus for starting this research was to see how many top tier tanks were in matches because players kept telling me the old MM was full of games with enormous amounts of top tier tanks. From there it grew to other things, but you will see the top tier tank emphasis in there. Here are the charts I created with the information to make it easier for people to understand the information. Feel free to copy them for your own use. First, here is a general comparison followed by a more specific comparison of the frequency of Top, Middle, and Bottom tier matches. The "partial bottom" for the old MM was included in the Middle Tier numbers on the first chart. (Partial top and bottom refers to the 5/10 format in the new MM and +1/-1 in the old) Here are two graphics on top tier tanks in matches overall, and then with the percent that players were bottom tier in that range out of all of their games. Here are some charts that show the amount of bottom tier tanks in the bottom tier matches from the sample studied. The first one is the raw numbers from the 114 bottom tier matches and the second one is the percent of those raw numbers. This last graphic was created to show the drastic decline in variety. Perhaps it isn't as important, but I will include it anyway. Thank you for your patience if you made it this far. No matter which side of the debate you were on, all civil input was appreciated. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Further Reading: http://forum.wotlabs.net/index.php?/topic/26886-is-something-wrong-with-the-new-match-maker/ http://forum.wotlabs.net/index.php?/topic/27139-the-case-against-the-357-match-maker-ready/ http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/551557-the-great-mm-debate-357-trash-or-triumph/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  6. 1 point
    Thanks for all of the support on here!
  7. 1 point
    Don't ask me how did he get to this conclusion. He had 2.8k rWN8, but the vision mechanics are hax for him. (which is funny because he played a Skorpion)
  8. 1 point
    >play wows coop in podvoisky >rushing through the opening in the middle of the map >isolated queen elisabeth spotted >swiggity swooty I'm gonna get dat BBooty >single shell from secondary battery detonates me from just over 12k hp (almost full) SO FUCKING MAD. WHY I DON'T GET RNG LIKE THIS?
  9. 1 point

    ppl ain't got shit on me

    ppl ain't got shit on me
  10. 1 point
    lmao that m48 tho
  11. 1 point
    9.5k damage in 3 minutes
  12. 1 point
    Had to catch up before heading away for the weekend. Himmelsdorf can be fun: Miscellaneous silliness: Effective HEAT use: We all know this feeling: Pubbies getting first hand experience with Chode$tarz: And this was just a ridiculous sequence:
  13. 1 point

    French Heavy ST Stats

    First game Amx Mle 45 with 80% crew and no 75% first skill: Victory! Battle: Sacred Valley Vehicles: AMX M4 mle. 45 Experience received: 4.150 (x2 for the first victory each day) Credits earned: 55.227 Battle achievements: High Caliber, Mastery Badge: "Ace Tanker" This gonna be expensive ._.
  14. 1 point


    If there is a color more purple than purple, can we please name that color Fabunil now, for he is now our lord and master
  15. 1 point

    The Minion Consortium Wants You

    Good 'ole M-I-T Hope you all are doing AWESOME!!!
  16. 1 point


    Hi, welcome to wotlabs. I have reviewed your case and as @monjardin said the reason wotlabs doesn't show your stats anymore is because we no longer track players with a WR/WN8 below a certain threshold (I believe it was 52% WR and 1.5k WN8?) Starting in October all accounts below that threshold will be removed from the database, though due to technical reasons several accounts were already affected. The reason this is to save server ressources, you see over 90% of the tracked playerbase have stats that lie below that threshold, yet a vast majority of them never used our services or/and are inactive players and accessed their wotlabs profile, as a result it was decided to remove these profiles permanently to cut down the costs of the wotlabs servers (Running the WotLabs servers costs several thousands $ each month mind you) Anyways, only accounts created before the 1st of Juli 2017 are going to be affected by this, so if you created your account after this date your profile should be safe! Alternativly you can also increase your stats to be above the threshold until the deadline of the 1st of October and your profile should get restored automatically. Of course, you can also create a new World of Tanks account if you want your stats to be tracked in the future. I hope I could help! -Fabunil, purple poaster & representative in the wotlabs WN8-committee
  17. 1 point
    The first step on the path of ascension
  18. 1 point
    Sell your Sheridan and reclaim your T49, its so much worse. We do it because its funny, not because its good!
  19. 1 point
    You're clearly a dumbass so who cares? Derpidan truly is an awful tank. Tier 10 lights are pretty weak to begin with and 152 Sheridan is probably the worst of the bunch. You can still get some laughs and such but the availability of soft tanks goes down significantly with tier 10 MM. You don't even have an advantage over other mediums so basically all the tanks in the game can take a dump on you. The T49 trolls much harder and is a far better tank tier for tier. Just for reference, when Crab and I platoon we usually run 65-70% in T49s whereas we're running 54% with Derpidans. And the lolpen rate is way higher in T49s.
  20. 1 point
    U ppl talking about xvm focus like u know shit Congrats, bigger wn8 - more stuns
  21. 1 point

    XM551 Sheridan - Tubby Leopard

    A Chode$tarz Guide to Dealing with Superheavies This is applicable to both the Sheridan and T49, although the Sheridan has a number of advantages that make it better than the T49 for dealing with the current heavy armor meta. Specifically, the Sheridan has a signficant advantage in the aim time, accuracy, and reload departments. It can more often afford to aim shots, it can more often actually hit where you are aiming, and you can do it much more often. However, the concept is perfectly applicable to the T49 (and really any time you fire HE). When to shoot super heavies? Basically, when there is nothing better to be doing. I will still look for flanking opportunities and chances to go after their softies first. But given the prevalence of heavies these days and the fantastic map design, you will regularly find yourself trying to gun down heavies. What are we trying to accomplish? First and foremost, to be annoying. That stupid Maus goes through all the work of angling nicely off that corner, bouncing all your stupid teammate's HEAT shells, until some annoying bastard (you) comes along and starts chipping his health down a couple hundred at a time. You asshole. I see there being three useful types of shots to take. The first is to just try and hit the enemy; it's not worth trading shots so you may not have the time to aim. Let 'er rip and take whatever damage you might get (always amusing to roll a -16). Second, go for a tracking shot. A tracking shot at the right moment can lead to an enemy being annihilated by your team. Our 152mm of Glory is rather excellent for that. Aim for a lower plate near the track. However, many times a track shot won't accomplish much and in this case we want to aim our shot to do the maximum amount of damage. That's what the rest of this guide is about. HE Basics When an HE shell contacts a surface but doesn't penetrate, rays are drawn from the point of impact to all armored surfaces within the blast radius (direct line of sight only). The damage done is a function of shell alpha, raw armor thickness (angling doesn't matter), and distance from the point of impact to the armored surface. This is calculated for all surfaces within the blast radius (I think) and the highest possible damage option is selected. Long story short, the goal when shooting HE is to hit directly or as close as possible to the thinnest armor on an enemy tank to generate the maximum damage. Simple enough right? The Superheavy's Weakness Heavy armor all around blah blah blah. Except for: On pretty much every tank the engine deck/hull roof is very thin. This can lead to some awkward moments for tanks like an IS-4 which has a relatively low hull; it's piddly 30mm can be overmatched by tanks next to it with ease. On a Maus, which otherwise has 185mm+ plates, the engine deck is a piddly 50mm. So if you shoot the engine deck you will do significantly more damage than hitting any of the (much thicker) armor on the tank. Well, that's great, but you usually can't shoot the engine deck directly. So what do we do? Simple, we try to hit as close to the deck as possible. Here is our friendly Maus who is nicely angled off the side of a building. But he is still exposing a contact surface that is very close to the engine deck; so we aim for that spot... By hitting at the base of the turret our point of impact is very close to the engine deck so our damage will be very close to what it would be if we shot the engine deck directly. For example, hitting the turret 0.5m above the deck will still do 86.4% of the damage compared to hitting the deck directly (for a standard Sheridan HE shell). I call this "decking" and it is surprisingly effective against heavies. Facing down a Maus from the front it is possible to do 350+ damage per shot and in a way that no amount of angling can save them. Other bonuses include the possibility of critical crew damage or engine fires. While doing 350 damage every 16 seconds is far from exceptional DPM, it seems to have a psychological impact on the average pubbie. The average player doesn't know how to push to win or spend their hitpoints effectively, so they will take their E-100 to a corner and play angle games because they think that is being good. Taking 2-3 HE shells will drive them off and prevent them from ever pushing forward. Of course, the effectiveness is magnified if you have a ChodeFriend doing the same thing. Letting loose a salvo that does 700+ in a second seems to terrify the confused pubbie. If they don't back off, you can do it 16 seconds later and suddenly that big fat heavy is missing half its health. Below is the armor model for a bunch of the tier 10 heavies. I was surprised that even the IS-7 has a thin deck that is accessible frontally. I also found it interesting that the Type 5 heavy has a 75mm deck which explains why even good shots on it do less damage. E-100 VK7201/PzVII Maus JPE-100 IS-4 IS-7 Type 5 T110E5 What about shooting Gold HE? Gold HE increases the splash radius from 3.66 to 5.11. This increases the damage from a non-direct hit. Is the bonus damage enough to be worth the huge credit cost? I wasn't sure so I decided to do the math: From the wiki: actualDamage=0.5*nominalDamage*(1-ImpactDistance/SplashRadius)-1.1*nominalArmorThickness*SpallCoefficient The important part is the factor (1-ImpactDistance/SplashRadius). As your splash radius increases the damage reduction for distance decreases. This is easiest to see when you put it into a spreadsheet: As you can see in the table, the splash radius only begins to matter when you hit far away from the thin armor section. For direct hits it doesn't matter at all. Gold only gets you 35 more damage when hitting a meter away. So the question is whether you regularly hit far away from the weak armor. In my experience decking E-100s (which has the 40mm deck armor shown in the table) I typically roll in the 350-400 damage range. This means that firing gold HE would only increase damage by 10-20 which is miniscule. Note that the damage increase from splash radius is independent of armor thickness so the damage increase is the same for 30/40/50mm decks. Based on this math, I see no value in firing gold HE for deck shots unless it is an absolutely game clutching moment. Now, enjoy these gifs of super heavies getting abused by light tanks:
  22. 1 point
    I hope people start dropping their Optics. It's already enormously fun abusing people with my 500+ view range/40% camo light tanks. Removing your vision will enhance that greatly! More on topic though, the additional benefit from iVents over regular vents is so tiny that it really doesn't change anything. iVents only adds 4 meters view range which isn't significant enough to change the decision on vents or Optics. If you ran Optics on a tank before it makes sense to continue running Optics. If you ran vents before, continue running vents.
  23. 1 point
    fuck right off with your game is dead bullshit. tired of hearing this pathetic excuse for trying to make something better. if everyone who says "lawl gaem ded" was right it would have failed in 2013
  24. -1 points

    Carrier thread

    If you're playing air supremacy load out in randoms, you're a faggot, no exceptions. Even with the 1-1-1 on the Lexington my average results are still much better than playing the cuck load out.
  25. -1 points
    nice one, but WN8 in 2K17? LUL