Jump to content

MaxL_1023

Mathematics Contributor
  • Content Count

    1,494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Rodrigopine in [NA] RUST Recruiting Seamen for Ships   
    The only issue with Divisioning with RUST is the requirement that you bring at least one unrestored Civil War Era Ironclad - they are surprisingly useful as enemy captains keep mistaking them for already-destroyed vessels. 
     
  2. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Rapicas in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  3. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from sohojacques in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  4. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from canadiantrex in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  5. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Epic in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  6. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Errants in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  7. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Kramburglar in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  8. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from TAdoo87 in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  9. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from CraBeatOff in Does wg manipulate the mm in ways other than they admit to?   
    Holy crap guys:
    1. By default, a forced 3-5-7 system will make top-tier platoons less likely. In a 3-man platoon (tier 8 for example) the following is true:
    There is one combination which gives you top tier (3 of you, 5, 7)
    There are 5 choose 3 (10) combinations of positioning where you end up as middle tier
    There are 7 choose 3 (35) combinations where you end up as bottom tier!
    By grouping 3 tanks of the same tier, you are either forcing the creation of a match which is basically just for you, or getting shoved into a match where you are not top tier. 
    I am not sure how rigid 3-5-7 is (being retired at all) but a fundamental mathematical property of fixed matchmaking is to reduce the ability to form top-tier groupings. 3-man unicum platoons were probably bad for the game as a whole anyways - people playing against you get stomped most of the time, and the people on your team barely get a chance to do anything. Forcing these guys down the list gives average players a chance more often, while not affecting solo players at all. It is specifically a nerf against super-platoons, which I admit we used to run regularly often using a broken FOTM mechanic (3x M4 derp anyone?) which reduced the overall quality of gameplay. 
    2. Confirmation Bias up the Wazoo. You notice when you leave a tank at 1hp or bounce due to a low pen roll, but unless you are bad enough to shoot at something you shouldn't be penetrating anyways the favorable effects of RNG will not even be noticed. Unicums will almost never hit a piece of armor they have a less than 50% chance of penetrating - they will aim somewhere else. HIgh rolls are overkill and not noticed - low rolls are. 
    The mere fact that better players are actually aiming makes any RNG a hindrance since it can only make you miss where you wanted to aim - positive RNG only works for badly aimed shots by definition. 
    3. WG does not have to manipulate anything on the back end to cause these effects. They are fundamental properties of the known game engine which need no additional explanation. If there was beneficial RNG changes for bad (or good) players, they would not be that hard to identify in any sort of controlled testing. Since they have not been proven after years and millions of games, the most likely result is the null hypothesis, or "working as intended."
    Basically, this is WOTLABS, not INFOWOT. Conspiracy theories need to go back to reddit where they belong. 
     
  10. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from monjardin in How to beat other skilled players?   
    Ignore XVM - you will tend to (and obviously have been) giving away more of your personal tactical advantage than gaining. Trying to focus down a skilled player will rarely work - they will expect it, will not give you anything decent to shoot at or will just head somewhere else if you do manage to tilt the area in your favor. The tactics which beat skilled players will beat everybody - map control, vision control, early-game area denial and effective force concentration are very difficult to counter. In some cases, you will be at a vehicle, team, map or skill disadvantage which will lead you to lose by failing to accomplish these objectives. However, if you give these up willingly to try and play "whak'a'purple" you are going to be in for even worse of a steamroll. 
    I always assumed that I had a skill edge over anyone on the enemy team, and tried my best to dictate the battle in the way my vehicle and the map/team composition suggested was optimal. Sometimes it wouldn't work - somebody besides you has to be doing something with their tank. There were a few map/tank/team combinations (especially in a 3 man platoon) where you could basically do it all yourself, but most of those have either been patched out by well-deserved nerfs (M4 derp anyone?) or are rare enough to not affect statistics. 
    TL:DR, uninstall XVM, play better as a result - It worked for me. 
    Note I am retired from tanking (playing WOWS), so if I am dating myself then laugh at the old man yelling at a cloud. 
  11. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from BlackAdder in Stats - WR Question   
    Have you tried to correlate your win rate fluctuations (and potentially DPG and XPG using a finer scale) to a weekly or diurnal cycle? Theoretically, both of these factors will influence the playerbase and therefore the relationship between individual statistics and win rate. The playerbase may not necessarily be worse at any point, but it would not take a huge shift in metagame or population to have the slight effects you are observing. 
    I would personally do a frequency domain decomposition of your moving-average (say 1000 game) win rate, checking if any statistically significant periodicity does exist. It is quite possible that random chance is sufficient to explain everything. 
    You could also just get fatigued and play worse (or more farmer-like) then usual once a week or so, I distinctly remember having days when I played like a shitlord and other days where I would make Kewei complain that I was stealing his damage. 
    Stick with it and it will even out over time - you are well above average already, with nothing to be ashamed of. 
  12. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from sgtbarnes75 in Warship stats (making sense of them)   
    I am not sure how accurate the WTR system is, but it does appear to do some normalization based on ship and tier.
    It has me as a low level smurf, which seems about right. I tend to either play purple or red depending on if I overextend/get torped, often due to being new to the maps.
    It is not complete BS,  but likely worse than WN8 for tanks. Capping and defence will be heavily ship based.
  13. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from BiggieD61 in [NA] RUST Recruiting Seamen for Ships   
    These guys are cool - they were willing to help an old tanks veteran like me adjust to intentionally driving through water.  Even slummed at low tiers when I broke out the ww1 era boats.
    Even if they have no space (or you are a low tier seal like me) join their discord and have good times while driving boats into islands.
  14. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Rodrigopine in [NA] RUST Recruiting Seamen for Ships   
    These guys are cool - they were willing to help an old tanks veteran like me adjust to intentionally driving through water.  Even slummed at low tiers when I broke out the ww1 era boats.
    Even if they have no space (or you are a low tier seal like me) join their discord and have good times while driving boats into islands.
  15. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 reacted to BiggieD61 in So what is up with WOWS?   
    The 4 classes are pretty separate in their performance and how they operate, especially once you get to tier 7-8.  In addition, each nations lines ( some have all four like the US and IJN, others only have 1 or 2 ) have a national flavor to the lines that influence how they play.  For example, German BB's at tier 6 and up develop progressively more powerful secondary guns and develop "turtleback" armor schemes that make them very hard to citadel ( a citadel hit is when an AP round penetrates and detonates in a ships protected area like a boiler room ).  They are brawler BB's that specialize in getting to 8-10 km range and wearing down the opponent.  The IJN BB lines are better at long range fire, when they get in a brawl their HP melts quickly, so they are better at staying at 13-15 km.
    Flamu is the best non-CV youtuber in my estimation, and he has a bunch of low tier videos that you will find useful.  Notser and iChase are US youtubers  that are somewhat popular, but I find Flamu to be the most informative and consistently correct about the meta.
    Here is an example from his collection of low tier guides to get you started.: 
     
  16. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from yuryi in IS-7 Exculpation Thread   
    The key with the IS-7 is to not angle, at all. People think that ~20 degrees of side angle helps protect their LFP from fire, but the loss in protection to the facing side of the UFP more then negates this advantage. ~20 degrees of side angle only adds about 3.5% to your effective armor strength against AP ( 6.4% against HEAT) while reducing a side angle from ~50 degrees to ~30 degrees (a reasonable approximation of the IS-7s side angle) reduces the effective strength there by almost 40% (relative to flat thickness, 25% relative to total thickness) against HEAT, slightly less against AP. You go from ~300 effective to ~240 effective on the facing side with only a 20 degree deviation. That makes a huge difference against most T10 AP and T9 APCR.
     
    The IS-7 is supposed to hull down behind tiny pieces of rubble, blast anything in front of it, then advance to the next location. Knife fight at 20 meters - taller tanks will not be able to hit your LFP and your UFP is still effective dead on due to the high contribution from side angle to the thickness. You are not really intended to trade shots so much as to put the enemy team in disarray by spearheading the rush. Very few tanks (and not all TDs) have the firepower to deal with an IS-7 at close range - hull down not even HEAT or T10 TD APCR is incabaple of bouncing.
     
    It is similar to the E-100 in that respect, however the execution is somewhat different. You want to sidescrape in the E-100 - the IS-7 is supposed to attack from the side, using enemy tanks for cover against others and exploiting the extreme difficulty of hitting the IS-7s weakspots at close range while higher DPM teammates tear into the now unprotected sides of enemy tanks.
     
    Basically, the IS-7 is a sledgehammer. Hit hard, hit fast, and make them regret engaging you.
  17. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from AirG in Purple Poaster PSA: Quality over Quantity   
    Hello everyone, this is MaxL_1023. I am one of the moderators of this section, and therefore have been partially responsible for determining the content of this subforum. Recently, I have noticed a lot of questions being asked in this section pertaining to general tanking, tank selection, or "what should I do next." I understand that you want advice, however the purpose of this forum isn't to answer such questions. There are not that many "purple poasters" and starting a thread invites responses from both ourselves and the community which we have to moderate and prune to maintain a high level of post quality. 
     
    The "Ask a Purple Poaster" subforum is intended for specific questions addressing issues which can only be answered by players at the very top level. "What should I do here" would apply when "here" is "on ruinberg in an E-100, with X tanks alive facing Y. I am at C8 and 1200 HP, and have 3 people overwatching..." you get the idea. Questions like "how do I play an IS-7" shouldn't be asked here. Instead, there are already subforums set up to gain community feedback for questions such as these. 
     
    They are:
     
    Core Skills and Mechanics Discussion - for questions regarding game mechanics, basic skills, the spotting system, penetration, etc.
     
    Metagame Discussion - for questions regarding the general nature of the game
     
    "I can has tanks related question" - this is where most of your questions should be asked first. General questions about how to play a specific tank class, tier progression, etc should go here.
     
    Vehicle Discussion - there is a full forum dedicated to discussing specific vehicles, their characteristics and how they are normally used. "How to play an IS-7" would go here.
     
    There is a lot of valuable knowledge in our community. It is a resource which many people don't tap. The vast majority of your questions can be adequately answered in one of the above subforums. If your question is not answered satisfactorily there, then ask us Purple Poasters. It is likely that one of us will respond to a question in the main forum anyways - we get around a lot.
     
    Keep up your curiosity,
     
    MaxL_1023
  18. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Gashtag in WN8 and the Colour Scale   
    Player WN8 follows a gamma distribution. There are very few players near 0 (bots and the like), the majority of players near 800-1100 and the population tails off thereafter.
     
    The nature of the distribution means that there are more players with very high WN8 than very low, and the mean WN8 is higher than the median.
     
    The color scale is currently a piecewise linear system based on WN8 calculated by plugging in various ratios of the expected values.
     
    Performance near 1 in everything gives you about ~1565. This is qualified as "very good" because it is higher than the majority of the playerbase - a large majority in fact. Unicums are top 0.1%, average is yellow and represents in this case median performance - the 50% percentile.
     
    This was done specifically to avoid the mean vs median issue - having 60+% of the population below average is counter-intuitive and really does not reflect where they actually stand relative to who they encounter in battle. 
     
    The color scale was not designed for anyone over blue - I would delete the purple categories entirely and cap the scale at 2450 if it wouldn't cause Bulba to collectively shit their pants. WN8 does not work in the 3000+ range anyway.
     
    The reason the expected values are below the tank's HP is because not every tank dies every battle. Assume you win 50% of your games, lose 50% (ignore draws).
     
    - Even if in every win is by destruction, you average at most your HP in damage. Capping wins make this guaranteed to be less. I suspect you average about 85-90% of your HP in damage due to this.
     
    - In the games you lose (half of them) assume you take out 75% of the enemy team's HP. I suspect this is high - a lot of games are not that close. 
     
    The result of this is an average player dealing at most 80% of their HP in damage. 
     
    Matchmaking makes this even lower - when you are high tier the lower team HP balances out your higher relative contribution, but when you are low tier you often die with no damage dealt at all (for an average player). A tier 6 in a tier 8 game usually does a lot less than their HP in damage when they would break even as a tier 8. 
     
    As further evidence compare DD/DR. A DD/DR of 1 is pulling your weight - you are dealing as much damage as you take. As you survive a significant number of battles this means that you always have a DD/DR > 1 if you deal your HP in damage. 
     
    Basically, the bar is lower than you think, the distribution of players make ~1600 WN8 relatively better than you expect, and the color scale is meant for them anyways because the people good enough to break the scale don't need it. 
  19. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from engineered in ⟪WN9⟫ Development   
    I would rather be a consultant as opposed to the main architect - I am better at tearing things down than building them up. 
     
    Also, I am also sick and tired of people with no idea what they are talking about continuously screwing up the development of every metric in existence. 
  20. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from CraBeatOff in A Modest Proposal: Validity Disclaimer for WN8 Publication   
    Based on the sample size of my platoon mates, I find that their skill more closely corresponds to their overall account stats then their recent. It seems odd, but a 2000 overall 3000 recent will tend to be considerably less skilled then a 2800 overall, 3000 recent. I am not sure why, but it does seem to happen.
  21. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Sabrechien in what makes a td player good   
    Tank Destroyers require a more nuanced approach to aggression. If you are too passive, you might farm damage. However, it will often be useless, last stand damage or late game mop up damage. If you are too aggressive, you end up dead due to your lower HP pool. You honestly need to approach every individual tank destroyer differently. Based on the vehicle characteristics, battle tactics are available to leverage its strengths. The lack of a turret (or poor gun handling) makes it more difficult due to the reduced versatility. However, you can still be quite effective in a variety of combat situations. 
     
    If you are having trouble with a specific vehicle, I can help - I have driven every T.D over tier 5 in the game (except JT88, E-25 and AT 15A). 
     
    P.S: If it is the 183, 122-44 or Hellcat I already have guides up in the articles section.
  22. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Monkey in Maus - Not so bad after all by precambrian   
    The tracks of the Maus should be 75-80mm - they are a meter wide ffs.
  23. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from cccdfern in What is "Chai Sniping"   
    It is basically engagement from outside of spotting range.  Sniping in its purest form is abusing the draw area to deal damage to enemies your team spots. Chai sniping takes this one step further, and is "sniping" in vehicles which are better off on the front line during situations where they are needed. 
     
    Think someone in an E-50 sitting on the Mines Ridge, or a T110E3 sitting at A1 on Redshire. 
  24. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from dudixy in IS-7 Exculpation Thread   
    The key with the IS-7 is to not angle, at all. People think that ~20 degrees of side angle helps protect their LFP from fire, but the loss in protection to the facing side of the UFP more then negates this advantage. ~20 degrees of side angle only adds about 3.5% to your effective armor strength against AP ( 6.4% against HEAT) while reducing a side angle from ~50 degrees to ~30 degrees (a reasonable approximation of the IS-7s side angle) reduces the effective strength there by almost 40% (relative to flat thickness, 25% relative to total thickness) against HEAT, slightly less against AP. You go from ~300 effective to ~240 effective on the facing side with only a 20 degree deviation. That makes a huge difference against most T10 AP and T9 APCR.
     
    The IS-7 is supposed to hull down behind tiny pieces of rubble, blast anything in front of it, then advance to the next location. Knife fight at 20 meters - taller tanks will not be able to hit your LFP and your UFP is still effective dead on due to the high contribution from side angle to the thickness. You are not really intended to trade shots so much as to put the enemy team in disarray by spearheading the rush. Very few tanks (and not all TDs) have the firepower to deal with an IS-7 at close range - hull down not even HEAT or T10 TD APCR is incabaple of bouncing.
     
    It is similar to the E-100 in that respect, however the execution is somewhat different. You want to sidescrape in the E-100 - the IS-7 is supposed to attack from the side, using enemy tanks for cover against others and exploiting the extreme difficulty of hitting the IS-7s weakspots at close range while higher DPM teammates tear into the now unprotected sides of enemy tanks.
     
    Basically, the IS-7 is a sledgehammer. Hit hard, hit fast, and make them regret engaging you.
  25. Upvote
    MaxL_1023 got a reaction from Goldflag in Purple Poaster PSA: Quality over Quantity   
    Hello everyone, this is MaxL_1023. I am one of the moderators of this section, and therefore have been partially responsible for determining the content of this subforum. Recently, I have noticed a lot of questions being asked in this section pertaining to general tanking, tank selection, or "what should I do next." I understand that you want advice, however the purpose of this forum isn't to answer such questions. There are not that many "purple poasters" and starting a thread invites responses from both ourselves and the community which we have to moderate and prune to maintain a high level of post quality. 
     
    The "Ask a Purple Poaster" subforum is intended for specific questions addressing issues which can only be answered by players at the very top level. "What should I do here" would apply when "here" is "on ruinberg in an E-100, with X tanks alive facing Y. I am at C8 and 1200 HP, and have 3 people overwatching..." you get the idea. Questions like "how do I play an IS-7" shouldn't be asked here. Instead, there are already subforums set up to gain community feedback for questions such as these. 
     
    They are:
     
    Core Skills and Mechanics Discussion - for questions regarding game mechanics, basic skills, the spotting system, penetration, etc.
     
    Metagame Discussion - for questions regarding the general nature of the game
     
    "I can has tanks related question" - this is where most of your questions should be asked first. General questions about how to play a specific tank class, tier progression, etc should go here.
     
    Vehicle Discussion - there is a full forum dedicated to discussing specific vehicles, their characteristics and how they are normally used. "How to play an IS-7" would go here.
     
    There is a lot of valuable knowledge in our community. It is a resource which many people don't tap. The vast majority of your questions can be adequately answered in one of the above subforums. If your question is not answered satisfactorily there, then ask us Purple Poasters. It is likely that one of us will respond to a question in the main forum anyways - we get around a lot.
     
    Keep up your curiosity,
     
    MaxL_1023
×
×
  • Create New...