Jump to content

breeeze

Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content Count

    1,339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    breeeze reacted to KenadianCSJ in Trump crushed it   
    K. How bout that no politics thing though
  2. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from sahtila in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  3. Downvote
    breeeze reacted to EndlessAgony in Obsidian got fired   
    >Implying SilentShitter wasn't bitching about WG only because he was a stupid cunt, who didn't get a job at WG.
    Oh my sweet summer child...
  4. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from SgtRicko in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  5. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from MesoTroniK in Obsidian got fired   
    Nah, OE were completely incompetent, they definitely had it coming. Looking at the RU cluster it seems like mail.ru devs seem to actually be able to get shit done, so I am slightly hopeful.
  6. Downvote
    breeeze reacted to adztownstike in Conq - hit a brick wall at 2500 DPG   
    Its easy enough to hold 3k dpg just fire gold and be a good player. Just dont assume that you are one and deserve to be able to get 3k dpg its not ez...
    Ps im number 38 on eu by recent dpg with conq at 3044 http://www.dpgwhores.com/tanks/4433/?v=recent&server=eu so i know what im talking about
    Pss i hate this guy and wanna troll him more which is why i posted
  7. Downvote
    breeeze got a reaction from EndlessAgony in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  8. Downvote
    breeeze got a reaction from EndlessAgony in Obsidian got fired   
    Nah, OE were completely incompetent, they definitely had it coming. Looking at the RU cluster it seems like mail.ru devs seem to actually be able to get shit done, so I am slightly hopeful.
  9. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from lordawesome7 in Obsidian got fired   
    Well, obviously I wasn't as deep in the whole process, so I can't tell for any specific things. Like, was B2.0 forced by mailru or was it the idea of OE? Did they really block things like adjusting Chally I armor, nerfing Cent 120 dpm or nerfing the ridiculously tiny and strong 2A5 weakspot? The massive ATGM overbuff in 0.18 is probably what broke most of RSOP members, as it screwed up the mid tiers and tournaments aswell. It's just that from my perspective, from what I've seen (including internally), I can't put all the blame on mailru, yes, they screwed up A LOT and even more than I thought after reading your post, but OE contributed their part aswell. Feel free to correct me on specifics, you can pm me too if there's things you don't want to make public.
     
    I have some limited inside knowledge, but yes, I am assuming quite a bit here. In the end we will probably never know the full truth because OE devs don't feel like getting sued.
  10. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from Monkey in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  11. Downvote
    breeeze got a reaction from TouchFluffyTail in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  12. Downvote
    breeeze got a reaction from thebigpod in Obsidian got fired   
    while I agree mailru screwed up a lot and I know at least some of the things you say are true, it doesn't change that OE just wasn't able to get things done properly. Always technical issues, easily fixable balance issues not being adressed at all, internal feedback being largely ignored etc. IMHO apart from the many technical problems and high tiers the game was in a very decent state around 0.16/0.17, Balance 2.0 is a massive overreaction and adresses problems that never existed, and that is not mailru's fault. Yes, they were a decent bunch of guys that probably only wanted the best for the game, but they were by no means angels.
  13. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from rojo180 in Obsidian got fired   
    This should come as a surprise to nobody, OE just got fired and mail.ru will continue to develop the game. 
    https://aw.my.com/gb/news/general/mycom-adopts-future-work-armored-warfare

  14. Upvote
    breeeze reacted to Folterknecht in [BRAH] It's NOT just a game, brah   
    woman *sigh
     
    Please do as I told you - plug the monitor cable into the back of the motherboard to use the iGPU and report back. Diagnosing a problem works best with a somewhat systematic approach, you 're all over the place.
     
    edit: and pull out the GPU (390 if I remember it right?) before doing so.
  15. Upvote
    breeeze reacted to Spartan96 in Reptile 3Marks the CGC   
    Welcome to my thread of shame/cancer! 

     

    ^ Happiest Defeat in 6 years of tanks.


    https://www.mediafire.com/folder/5st6gxtc5nc4p/CGC_replays
    Hall of Three Marks/Cancer: http://imgur.com/a/C024C
    Will be digging out the remaining replays that portrayed the steps from 80%-90% as soon as I can by pass my upload restrictions. And if you'd like to see me doing more stupid things feel free to drop on by my stream https://www.twitch.tv/a_uselessreptile
     
  16. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from EndlessAgony in Sandbox opening again soon   
    Accurate guns were never the problem why AW didn't succeed, it was actually a major advantage vs. WoT to have less RNG on accuracy (although it is true accuracy stacking went a bit overboard). The changes currently on the AW PTS are already causing an outrage on the forums because nobody wants WoT levels of accuracy RNG and most "unicums" would agree too that nerfing accuracy this hard is a horrible idea.
     
  17. Like
    breeeze got a reaction from taugrim in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  18. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from lomach in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  19. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from 8_Hussars in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  20. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from Sapros in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  21. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from xmenxmen2 in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  22. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from CraBeatOff in Guide to 3 Marks of Excellence   
    Some additions and corrections to the math part since I've been playing around with moe data for a bit:
    The "speculative" formula you mentioned is actually correct, it reproduces the numbers accurately every time (feel free to check for yourself). This means the EMA works like this: Each tank starts with EMA=0 and after each game about 1/50th (2/101 to be exact) of the difference between combined damage of that game and the current EMA are added to the EMA. The correct formula is (taken from Crabs thread):
    EMAi = EMAi-1 + K*(DAMAGEi – EMAi-1) • DAMAGEi = (Dealt by player in battle) + ( maximum damage by tracking or by spotting) - (team-damage caused to allies in battle) • k = 2 / (N +1) • N = 100 Some examples: Say you have an EMA of 1000 and get a 2000 combined game, your EMA after that game will be 1000+(2000-1000)*2/101=1019.8=~1020. Or you have an EMA of 4000 and get clicked before getting a shot off, your new EMA will be 4000+(0-4000)*2/101=3920.8=~3921.
    Your current EMA can be checked with Aimdrol's Replay Analyzer, just make sure the "Moving average damage" column is active in the settings and load in your replays. That way you'll know exactly how much you need to do to improve your percentage
    The article also gets one thing very wrong, it says that the moe percentage is just the percentage of that top damage value, but per my findings it actually isn't! There should be a straight line when comparing EMA with MoE percentage, but there isn't. Here's my data for the Skoda T 24

    As you can see it gets a lot flatter above about 80% which is why it's so much slower to improve in the higher percentages.
     
    Another small tip is to keep track of your spotting and tracking damage throughout the game. If you have 3k spotting and no tracking it will be worth going for the damaging shot after all since the tracking won't help your EMA unless you get it above 3k.
  23. Upvote
    breeeze reacted to Madner Kami in Sandbox opening again soon   
    If there is anything WG could take out of AW, it is their accuracy-system: Unless you are aimed in, you derp all over the place. A carefully aimed shot though, should hit where the gun is pointing at. This is also the point, where dispersion and gun-accuracy would finally actually get a meaning unlike they do now, where a fully aimed 88/L71 hits about as much and as often, as a KV2 in full hull- and turret-traverse running down a hill. I know this is an exageration, before someone comes along and tries to be smart, but we all know what I am talking about. Outside of gold-ammo, snapshot-accuracy is one of the primary issues armor has in this game and the dominance of russian hover-meds is a prime example of absolute fail-balance in regard to accuracy, which only gets topped by the IS3.
  24. Upvote
    breeeze reacted to Joyrider216 in The 3-mark Thread   
    Low tiers are actually fun, and on the plus side, guess who I got to kill doing this  

  25. Upvote
    breeeze got a reaction from Smbakeresq in The WZ-111 & if you should be getting one.   
    Holy balls this thing got megabuffed, it craps on all other premium 122s now. Definitely recommend giving it a spin if it's been collecting dust in your garage.
    http://test.tanks.gg/wot/compare#t:wz-111.c:is-6.c:is-5.c:is-3a.c:112
    Best gun handling by far, best mobility by quite a bit, very decent armor now that the lfp isn't made out of used milk cartons anymore, really just the horrible ammo rack is left now.
×
×
  • Create New...