Tonight, I witnessed acts of pubbery that amazed me. And not in the usual, "how the hell can a person this dumb manage to power up the computer" way. I actually saw two acts that I feel deserve some praise:
^ That guy right there? Held off three capping mediums on Highway. I rushed back to help. The enemies were all dead before I got there. That overachieving sumbich right there killed an up-tier auto loader, and two other mediums. He didn't battleship. He didn't feed himself to arti. He saved the game, and I didn't even have to help.
This one? Turret trolls like FORAY death blossoms. He ate shots from an E-100, JgPz E-100, a couple KV-4s, and probably 10 or 12 other things I didn't notice. I just reloaded behind him, and made the enemy snack on a T57 clip after they bounced shots off of Mr. "I know how to properly drive a T34" there.
Both of these guys are right around the average level.
We may hate our pubbies at times. We may scold, demean, or make angry posts about them. But let's not forget to applaud their good play as well.
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:
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:
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.
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.
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!
Going off the sheer number of blood red 45%ers dealing 400-1100 damage and the occasional triple Mahou platoon doing a combined 10-12k, I'd say it will end up like the 50b which appears to be doing fine statistically, but in actuality remains broken in the hands of unica and complete garbage in the filthy mitts of the bads.
A friendly dispute? hardly. The way you responded to my second post was unnecessarily vitriolic and passive-aggressive; instead of politely clarifying what you meant, you thought it was a good idea to try to talk down to me as if I'm the retard because apparently the way you write is flawless and anyone who can't understand it must be stupid. Your next post consisted of you keeping up that passive-aggressive undertone while making poor assumptions and incorrect statements about game mechanics and such; and then instead of asking me politely to clarify when you didn't understand the logic behind my advice, you went and denied the advice of someone who is miles better than you and tried to back it up with more flawed logic, while STILL trying to imply that I'm dumb for not accepting your logic.
For future reference, if you don't want to come off as an arrogant twat, don't begin your posts with "uh, that's because..." since this implies that what you're saying should be common knowledge/logic, is undeniably correct, and anyone who doesn't know is a moron.
Not defending him in anyway, but you are nowhere near his level. You may be able to get similar WN8, but try pulling 70% WR solo in lots of different tanks. WN8 has been around long enough that people know how to easily pad it. He used to cry about it all the time cus people would throw WN8 in his face cus theirs was higher, but he still won more. There is no way to pad solo WR without having skill. Honestly, I have to agree with his point as well as many others who think the same way. WR>WN8. All the metrics come and go, and WR is the only constant.
Always thought Garbad brought more to the table than he took away with his baity trolling/fight picking, but I knew him from EVE/Goonswarm and people seemed to have thicker skins in that game..
That said, he was a champion of maximizing WR over dpg, so why are we even talking about damage/wn8 values? I'd like to see any of the top dpg whores play as many games as he did SOLO with as high a WR....it's a lost art. The WR > DPG camp lost it's head when he was banned, unfortunate people couldn't help but get baited into the fights.
The big issue with Garbad is he wasn't able to separate his excellent skill and knowledge of the game from his desire to troll the shit out of people and pick fights.
As a knowledge bank for this game he is one of the best. Able to convey to others what he is doing and how they can emulate his performance. That's something not many high skill players are capable of. Sharing knowledge isn't an easy thing to do.
He just needs to stop trying to poke the anime kids, arty players, etc.
The only thing where you 're at his level is maybe your platoon enhanced WN8. Keep in mind that WoT 2013 was a different game and that WN8 doesn't have an inbuilt "inflation coefficient" despite trying via updadet expect. values (1 point system can't do that for the top 1% or better, when the reference is around 1250 WN8). Comparing 2013 damage numbers with todays is nonsense (for the top 1%). And if you really think you re as good as Garbad was 3-4 years ago (he wasn't the best back then imo) that just shows that you either don't understand WN8 or have an inflated sense when it comes to your accomplishments in this game.
What "I" 'll give you is the fact that you closed the gap be a large amount - no discussion - and therefor your perspective changed quite a bit.
You and I both know that a low HP paper tank with horrific bloom, low VR, and pretty average gun apart from shell velocity is not gonna win 72% solo. None of your stats in it even hint at anything close to 72%, its a fluke that you have such high WR, don't pretend its because of what you're doing in it or because the tank is super duper OP.
[tangent]It's not that the chariot needs buffs, it's that everything else needs nerfs. Everything that wasn't absurd a few years ago is now mediocre at best, and the chariot is no exception. They can keep buffing tanks all they want, but all it's doing is feeding the cycle that continually makes their game less enjoyable.[/tangent]
wat u need to know about ur cum:
Semen is only one percent sperm; the rest is composed of over 200 separate proteins, as well as vitamins and minerals including vitamin C, calcium, chlorine, citric acid, fructose, lactic acid, magnesium, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, vitamin B12, and zinc .
now take ur hands off ur dick and shove it where it belongs