Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/07/2017 in all areas

  1. 10 points
  2. 4 points
    Brb going to play defender and laugh at the plinking sounds from the horde of E25s.
  3. 3 points
    XVM https://clips.twitch.tv/SquareColorfulPassionfruitTheTarFu
  4. 3 points
    I wouldn't play it if I could buy it. I just want things I can't have is all.
  5. 2 points
    Less than 250 bonds to go until MORE BETTERER T49 MEMES
  6. 2 points
    https://clips.twitch.tv/SolidSpotlessCrocodileDxCat @SmyleeRage is pulling moves straight out of The Matrix in a Sheridan on stream.
  7. 2 points
    You mean the O-oooooooooo AAAAE-A-A-I-A-U- JO-oooooooooooo AAE-O-A-A-U-U-A- E-eee-ee-eee AAAAE-A-E-I-E-A- JO-ooo-oo-oo-oo EEEEO-A-AAA-AAAA tank?
  8. 2 points
  9. 2 points
    Base t100lt gets 19,84% and with 100% camo it goes up to 35.80 which is almost double. Now imagine almost double of 29% you would get something close to 60 without considering the crew's boost. So no a tank with ~60% camo would be so broken that a Defender with tier 6 preferential MM would look balanced in comparison. You are right this is WG afterall but I dont think they are this stupid...... I mean I hope so
  10. 1 point
    After a thread on the forums about aimtime and how it works. I decided I wanted to figure it out exactly. All we know for now is that aim time is the time it take to reduce the aimcircle to 40% its size, dispersion is something that say show much the circle gets bigger and accuracy is the size of the aimingcircle when fully aimed. However, we do not know the exact relations between these 2 and how exactly they influence the size of the aiming circle at all times. So thats what I set out to do, finding a mathmatical description of the size of the aimingcircle. The method is simple: measure the size of the aimingcircle for different tanks and speeds in a trainingroom. Thanks for uglycousin for giving me a second person to set up the trainingroom. To measure the size of the circle, first I did the test driving in the room. Then I watched the replays and paused at certain moments. I then took a screenshot of my whole screen, makign sure I was always in 8x zoom. Then I took those screenshots into paint and measured the circle diameter in pixels. I will now describe the process and results of my investigation. But if you dont want to read that, scroll down tot he conclusion on the bottom. Disclaimer: the following formulas are NOT what WG uses, I made a linear model that describes the size of the aimingcircle as close as possible. Aiming circle bloom I assumed there where 3 variables that had an influence on bloom: speed, dispersion and accuray. I tried to do test in which I held 2 variables constant to see the influence of 1. I started with gathering data of 2 different dispersion numbers for which I picked 4 tanks with different accuracy and measured the size at each speedincrease of 10 untill 50 kph. These are the raw results: From that I made a graph of the dispersion in function of speed , and calculated the gradient of the graph assuming linear increase. Then obviously the aiming circle size = C*v+accuracy. With V=speed and C being the gradient, which consist of unknown factors. To check the linear approach was decent I plotted the model and experiment: As you can see the linear approach to the speed factor isnt perfect but not massivly different, only in the middle it differs. I am happy enough with this. Now we need to determine what the C factor consist off. Since there are only 2 variables left, it has to consist dispersion or/and accuracy components. As you can see in the data, with the same dispersion numbers, the aiming circle fort he same speed is bigger when the accuracy is bigger. So there has to be an accuracy factor in C, which is proportional to accuracy. Here you can see accuracy vs circle size: As you can see, the increase isnt marginal. We can now rewrite our formula as: Size=Acc(D*v+1) With D an unknown factor containing dispersion in some form. As we can see, size of aiming circle is directly proportional to accuracy. So an increase in accuracy of 25% will results in 25% better gun handling. This is why the E50/E50M have such amazing gun handling , their dispersion isnt great , but good, but due to the very good accuracy their gun handling is much better than at first glance. The WZ-132-1 has the exact same dispersion values, so you would think the gun handling would bet he same, but no, since it has 33% worse accuracy is will have 33% worse gun handling, which is massive! Thats more than a vstab! Next task is determining the factor D. The only variable left is dispersion, so I tested different tanks with differnt dispersion at the same speed, their accuracy was different, but thats fine, sicne we can normalise for that. These numbers showed that the factor D was proportional to the dispersion values, so D=c*dispersion, with c an unknow constant. Now the formula looks like this: S=Acc(c*d*v+1) Determining c was done by plottign the experminetal result and trying some numbers until the model best fits the experiment. I took c=0.68. The influence of dispersion can be see in this graph: Now we have a formula that gives a perfect description of aiming circle size in function of all variables. Next up is determing a the time it takes fort he circle to shrink, or the actuall aiming time for the tank. Aiming time: We know aiming time is the time it takes fort he circle to shrink by 60% its startign size. So we can write: S1=S2*(4/10)^(t/T) with T=aiming time, S1 size after time t, S2= starting size. Solving this for t we get: t=T*(log(S1/S2)/log(4/10)). We can now determine the time it take from any speed to reach any size we want. To determe the time it takes to fully aim, jsut replace S1 by the accuracy of the gun. Note this time is independant of accuracy! ( which is logical, since it needs to go to a smaller circle but also does it faster, these 2 cancel out) Plotting this for 3 different tank in fucntion of time comming to a stop from a speed of 50 (40 for conway) we get: Influence of equipment/skills etc. Now that we have every formula we need we can quantify the influence of equipment/skills/directives/modules. To do so simply multiply the variable that gets influenced by (1-0,01*improvement in %). Dispersion values only get influenced by vstabs and the smooth ride skill.Other equipment only influences the accuracy value. Note that the same improvement to acc or dispersion results in a bigger improvement in size for what improves acc than what improves dispersion. Vstabs for example do not make the size of the circle shrink by 20%, they make the increase in size less by 20%. Lets take a look at a common dillema:vstabs vs gun laying drive, lets try this on 2 different tanks: We can clearly see what the difference in vstab and gld is, vstab makes the circle smaller, so you start smaller but the decrease is still the same, gld starts at a bigger size but then starts to decrease faster, catching up tot the vstabs. In the BCs case, the time to fully aim is actually lower when equiping gld than when equiping vstabs. Mathmaticly, gld decrease the total time to aim by 10%, whereas vstabs decrease the total time to aim by subtracting 20% *initial size. To know wether vstabs or gld is better depends on the tank and how much you want to aim, you can determine this by pluggin in the numbers and plotting it for each vehicle, sicne i twill be different for each. As general rules however, these apply: · - Bad dispersion + bad aimtime: Vstab better, unless you fully aim from full speed. · - Bad dispersion + good aimtime :Vstab better, unless at high speed when fully aiming. · -Good dispersion + bad aimtime :Vstabs always superior · -Good aimtime + good dispersion :Vstabs always superior Conclusion and TLDR: · - Accuracy has a massive influence on aiming circle size on the move, they are proportional. · - Aiming circle size is proportional to speed/dispersion. · -To determine what gun has better actual gun handling: multply accuracy with dispersion, the lower the numbers the better the gun handling. · - Size of aiming circle= Acc(0.68*d*v+1) · - Time to fully aim = Aiming time*(-log(0.68*d*v+1)/log(4/10)) · - Vstabs is superior to gld in most situations. · - Influencing accuracy gives a better boost than influencing dispersion values. Whats next? Next up I need to investigate how turning the turret and hull effect dipsersion and work with the above formulas. I wil also try to combine this with my previous thread where I determined shot distribution in the aiming circle, then I can plot change to hit a target vs time and determine the optimal time to shoot. I hope you enjoyed the read and that i twill help you determinign how a tank will perform. I hope that youtubers do become aware that accuracy has a massive influence over dispersion, as currently reviews are misleading since they dont know what actually effects gun handling. Spread the word!
  11. 1 point

    The Bond Farm

    It should be no secret that I want to fully outfit my T49 with improved equipment. This means obtaining 14,000 bonds, and with limited ranked battle participation that means a TON of pub battles. The patch that added bonds for medals was a nice bonus (WG really should do a 1 time retroactive medals payout, it'd be like maybe 1-2 pieces for most people...but that is another conversation). @dualmaster333 did some math a while back to check and see if anything except 10s are viable for bonds earning, and sadly the answer is no, not if your goal is to obtain 14,000 of them. Particularly because those same medals are worth much more at tier X. So this means we must play tier X. Since the change to LTs and the advent of 3/5/7 MM platooning 10s has been interesting. You either get to be super king shit (3/5/7), mostly king shit (5/10) or fodder for TDs in a super shitty campy game (15 across). But the problem is, the games where you're super king shit or mostly king shit ... you don't earn bonds. Sure you get 2 for High Caliber, but that's not going to get you to 14,000! And the super shitty campy TD fest at tier X means you aren't going to be winning or earning 400 base XP at what I consider a reasonable rate. And this is all solo, where maybe 35% of your games are straight tier X. So in your dice roll to get a bonds match you're now depending on not having a bad game - odds I just don't like. And finally, I'm realistically only going to play a LT, because cmon...GO FAST I played a whole bunch of solo X LT games to try to estimate my bond's earning rate. Playing well, I was seeing about 2 bonds/game. Simply because I couldn't always get tier X matches - but then I wasn't really always getting bonds from those games, because its fairly hard to win in those paint scratchers (thanks @Kolni for the appellation, ha!). Platooning a pair of derp Sheridans with dualmaster got me just under 4 bonds/game, and while funny, it wasn't particularly fun and yielded 55% win-rate. Plus then WG buffed the Sheridan 105mm gun to make the 152mm completely unjustifiable :-( Bond earning is a bit better in a MT or HT, but see point above. From the derp Sheridan experiment I did observe (and this is old news and well known now) that platooning Xs and particularly LTs forces you heavily into 15 across battles. Generally a good thing for bonds, except you know LTs being sucky at doing damage to get that 400 base XP. So all of this is to say - what platoon combo, including a LT preferably, gets me the highest win-rate in tier X games? This is hardly a new problem of course, as we've been working on finding winning combos for a long time. At various times we've had viable comps like 2x Batchat + 1 Bat arty (remember that @jacg123?), 2x E-100 and 1x WaffleE-100, 3x MAUS, 3x 50B, T-62A and 2x E4, etc etc. So what is the new meta comp? I believe we've hit upon it though, almost by accident. Strv 103B, Light Tank (T-100LT preferred), and Heavy Tank (IS-7 preferred but lots of latitude really, as long as it has some armor to hold). Over the past few weeks I've played approximately 160 games using this combination and estimated bond earnings. Because of the improved win-rate AND forcing MM to spit out 90% 15v15 tier X battles, the bond farm is real. I've averaged about 9 bonds/game! At that rate a full set of equipment is ~1,555 games, as opposed to ~3,500 or ~7,000 in the other scenarios I tested So how much are we winning? I'd put the floor at 70% (worst session), but we've seen 80% in the month of November and so I think its safe to say that 75% is realistic, and that 80% might be sustainable with 3 good players. Here is yesterday's session (not shown assisted damage ~2000 average) A little bit about how to play this set-up - I was explaining it to Illusion yesterday (one of the best players ever on NA!) in that its not a "winning" comp. but that its a "not losing" comp. Basically you're able to lock down the map to the point where its simply very hard for your team to get wiped out. The enemy simply cannot push enough to snowball your team and so you either create a Lanchester's derived advantage somewhere, or else you sit and grind them down. The hardest* and certainly most important role goes to the S-tank because that driver has to make the decisions about whether to support the LT or the HT in the platoon, and has to know their camo and engagements really well, plus he/she isn't allowed to die. But really no one is allowed to die, the whole point is simply to outlast and force-feed your S-tank. @thedivision (fuck why aren't my mentions working) has been my reliable Strv driver through all these battles, so I will ask him to post his thoughts but from my observations of his play and his discussions on TS he really focuses on staying alive, and being patient forcing the enemy into mistakes. He uses my LT vision, or the stalling HT to just annihilate the enemy OR simply deny them the lane. Oh and tracking shots, constant, brutal, punishing tracking shots. He'll got for tracking shot on the first 2-3 shots on any target, at any distance. And it pays off, the enemy just gets helplessly stuck in place eating 4k dpm. And he's not afraid to brawl when the engagement is right - this means little to no arty, guns under 122mm caliber, low flank chances (as the LT driver you can help with this) and hills preferable to "hulldown". He often says he's going to hulldown, but how you do that in a tank that is only hull...I do not quite grok. As we all know, an S-tank that you can't see can lock down half a map or more in many situations, so I guess you need to learn all those situations. The LT role is nothing special, except that you simply need to trust your platoon to live/grind the enemy long enough to make your tank really effective. You just scout a bunch, and then wait for things to open up and do LT things. The T-100LT is best because its the best. Fastest accel, lowest profile, best camo, 0.1+ armor effectiveness, 2800 dpm and fast enough reload to perma-track. The RhmPz or 13 105 are probably the next best as they are the next best scouts. The RhmPz has the very high VR and comfy gun and pen. When you get a mid/long shot you're gonna do more damage than the T-100LT's potato cannon. 13 105 works nicely because its got the high camo, and the burst for end-game. But its fragile and slow compared to the T-100LT and doesn't have the gun handling to hit tracks in close/medium distance like the T-100LT. If you get the first tracking shot in, you can be sure your S-tank is going to be following that up... HT role is an interesting switch from some folk's play style. You're literally just defaulting to denying space, playing defense and in the case of being rushed, doing as much damage as possible. In some cases you're just baiting stuff into the Strv 103B behind you. Its very much a slow-play style. You can push when you have an overwhelming advantage for sure, but the goal is first and foremost to make sure you don't lose the brawl, which means staying alive. Your S-tank and T-100 can bail you out of some shit, and at the very worst, they can ensure that your eventual demise is paid for dearly. That said, with armor and hitpoints and 75% wins you're still going to be surviving 60%+ of the time if you do it right. IS-7 works really well because of the strong armor, deployment speed and hp pool - its best role is naturally the one that compliments this platoon well (hulldown, defensive). We've seen similar success with SuperConq, IS-4, 113, T110E5. The Germans can work also, but are a bit less flexible due to speed. PzVII and VK7201 are pretty good though. Type 5? 215b? No one has tried them. But basically you stay alive - slow play - stall a flank, push if you can safely, otherwise keep falling back into your S-tank or wait while your LT flanks the things. Of note - none of these roles are going to be garnering the high WN8 you'd see solo. High damage losses are rare obviously. And you're not smashing on 8s and out armoring 9s like you might in solo play. And nothing quite gets the WN8 of MTs, but that isn't the point here, the point is to farm the wins to get the bonds. Charge for the community - can this be replicated? Meaning is it the comp or the players? @TheDivision and I have played these 160 games, with a variety of HT drivers @1stTanks, @meirzin and @Illusion, but he and I are constants. Who will test it? We need more data! *This statement may be filtered through my personal biases towards LT play, LT play might be harder, but I have to leave that up to others to decide @TheDivision @1stTanks @Meirzin @Illusion mentions since they broke in the first post
  12. 1 point
    It's that time of the year again folks! Time to chug cookies and eat milk because Santa (hats) is back to spread capitalist ideas! If you're not familiar with what I do every year, I basically draw a santa hat on your avatar for free. This will last until the end of December or until I forget about it! Notes: -I draw them with a mouse. If you're looking for a professional hat, ask someone else. -You can request me to do something else with the avatar, as long as it's Christmas-related. -Please give me a high-res photo of your avatar, otherwise I'm pulling it straight out of your profile. Compilation of last year's hats: https://imgur.com/a/dn0dk Previous year's threads: 2016 2015 2014 [ORIGINAL]
  13. 1 point

    Need AU Account to borrow pls and ty

    Anyone got an account on AU they aren't using and would be willing to let me use it for a while? Half-tempted to waste some time on this game from time to time and would like to give AU a shot. Aside from that, how's everyone been?
  14. 1 point
    An Object 261 killed my commander, gunner and driver all at the same time after I'd used my kit. Still got a mastery badge in the Object 260.
  15. 1 point
    Not sure what you wanted me to do with this one, so I made two. I liked the Leo 1 better, but nice Zoids m dude.
  16. 1 point
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
    Read the section on what not to do and find the thread on the E25 guy.
  19. 1 point
    Is the new clan wars meta to flip a Maus rather then just a table?
  20. 1 point

    Super Conqueror Appreciation Thread

    The tank is an absolute monster when played to its strengths, however, most players will not be doing that as many just don’t have a clue neither with this tank nor any other tank. I faced one of these this morning in my own super conq. We were both hull down to each other but he decided to just randomly yolo me out of his cover. Got tracked by me twice and had 2/3 of his HP evaporated by TDs sitting about 300 meters away and I took away the rest. Doesn’t matter how OP a tank is supposedly. If you are as dumb as a brick, then no tank will ever seem OP.
  21. 1 point
    A good map tactic always needs a penis! We had the "perfect" speed cap strat. st00pid snipers
  22. 1 point
    On a scale of 1AR to KELLY I think it went about a LANCR.
  23. 1 point
  24. 1 point

    What are an M48A1's weakspots?

  25. 1 point
    Original article by @rocketbrainsurgeon We hear it all the time: "THIS TEAM SUCKS SO BAD" "I can't win with you clowns" "Why do I always get the bad teams?!" The people saying these things are typically, but not always, poor players. Better players do cry out in frustration sometimes, but more often than not they are doing what they do best: carrying the team to victory despite the efforts of their teammates. Let's meet a typical teammate, BOB: BOB works pretty hard at failing and according to his win percentage, he "succeeds" at it most of the time. Here's just a small list of the ways BOB is going to fail you: Gets single digit frame-rates because his computer is awful 500ms ping because he's torrenting a whole lot of porn in the background Is high or drunk Gets distracted by his wife/kids/job, so he's AFK most of the time Uses the start of the game to go and grab a drink or go to the bathroom, rather than do it between games Has no theoretical knowledge whatsoever of the game, yet believes he's an expert Believes he can't make a difference on his own The outrageous caricature of a drunken, porn addicted, hill-billy aside, it's actually the last two that are the most detrimental to BOB being actually good at the game. These two beliefs are what holds the vast majority of people in mediocrity. Yes, even you. Remember the statement above: "Why do I always get the bad teams?". If you've ever said this statement, you're part of the problem! You're denying your involvement in the outcome, instead of trying to change the outcome. Because we all get the same garbage teams, over and over again. Sure, some of the teams will be better than others. But over time, the good and bad teams even out for everyone. Unless you're talking about small sample sizes, luck has absolutely nothing to do with it. Let's look at the myths surrounding team games. One person can't make a difference. All of recorded history disagrees with this statement, on every level. Singular people have and continue to change human history on a consistent basis. Whereas they are struggling against hundreds of thousands or millions or billions of other people to create a difference, someone in a game has to struggle with far fewer: often 5-15 opponents. How do you make a difference? By contributing more than the next guy. Everyone would say the team with more players has an advantage (everything else being equal), so create that advantage! If the game is 15 vs 15, but you contribute as much as 3 players on your own, the game is actually 17 vs 15 because you contribute as much as three people. Will you win every time? No, but you have a very good chance each game. I always get the bad teams. Flip a coin 10 times. Theoretically, it'll come up with 5 heads and 5 tails. Realistically, it'll come out something like 6-4 / 7-3 / 4-6 / etc. That's just how statistics and variance work. The more times you flip the coin (this is called "sample size"), the more likely the percentage will move towards 50/50 heads/tails. This is known as the law of large numbers. Heads is getting a good team, tails is getting a bad team. Sometimes you will definitely get screwed with the bad teams, sometimes for many games in a row. Sometimes you'll get rewarded with good teams the same way. You don't remember the good stretches because humans see losses as twice as powerful psychologically than wins. Good teamwork wins over a group of talented individuals. Take 5 NBA players and 5 college basketball players. The college guys can plan beforehand, have a coach, make plays, talk, etc. They can use everything at their disposal to coordinate. The NBA players can't talk, gesture, or even meet beforehand. Now have them play a game against each other. It won't even be a contest: the NBA players will completely annihilate the "team" of college players. What people commonly fail to realize is that there is communication going on all the time: the talented individual is constantly re-evaluating the situation and doesn't need explicit prodding to be productive. That's a large part of what makes them talented: recognizing the situation at all times and responding accordingly. Poor players often suffer from a severe lack of game awareness. How to be on the favored team, all the time, every time The first step is to believe that you can make a difference, and the next step is learning how to make that difference. Study up on the game, ask questions, try different things to see what works. If the average number of points scored is X, you'd better be putting in 2X or 3X. Always rate your performance as "Needs Improvement". And whatever you do, don't blame the loss on your team. There were steps you could have taken to turn that game around.
  26. 1 point

    Artillery Rebalance - Suggested by SS

    And that's why greens shouldn't write balance articles -- he doesn't even make a pretense at understanding or fixing the problem, or even to consider the effects of his change. Its just a random change, with no goal, method, or clue. He really should stick to translating.
  • Create New...