Jump to content

Zeven

Purple Poaster
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Zeven

  1. Ok, first things first. I apologize for not continuing on this thread. Second, yes, it is dead and I will not be maintaining it. I just have too many projects that I am juggling and have to have some priorities. I do keep up with my social media pretty well though and I do try to get to every question there. So if you want to get answers, tweet them at me or catch me during the Twitch stream! Thanks! I have not really noticed the ammo rack being a problem on the E5 (any more so than any other tank). Sometimes you just get a run of bad luck. At least now there are reusable consumables! My favorite premium 8 at that time was the AMX CDC (for normal MM) and the FCM 50t (for preferred MM). The IS-6 is still pretty good, but it has been crept a bit so it is not quite as beasty as it was in yesteryears. Always be moving laterally, never be driving directly towards/away from there. Do not close the gap any more than you have to in order to be at a range where you can reliably shoot them with your own gun. This is an excellent point that I did not think of (obviously). Thanks for this tip! I like using tank cards because they are color coded and have some information regarding the tanks. You can see a breakdown of that information here:
  2. I spent four years to get a BS in biology and another four years to get a PhD in pharmacology. It depends on how many skills you have. I am one of those people who believe in repairs over camo for most mediums. For the gunner, I get snap shot, but that tends to be after repairs for the Russian mediums (because their dispersion is pretty manageable). For the driver, I like the mobility skills (Clutch Braking and Off-Road Driving). For the loader, absolutely make sure you get Safe Stowage. If you have three skills across your crew, you should respec to Brothers in Arms. Typically, it is better to be slightly more aggressive in the early game to challenge for strategically important areas on the map and then slightly more conservative when holding those areas. If you find yourself becoming unfocused, I always recommend taking a short break. Go, stretch your legs, get a drink, see what is on television. Then come back and play again. I can not recommend any drug therapies to enhance your video game experience...
  3. I had already answered this question to you in PM, but for posterity's sake... Yes, this is something we are interested in. I was thinking more of a strongholds 8's format for a myriad of reasons. I would be willing to set up some prizes myself for both teams. I do need a bit of time though and I was thinking sometime next month-ish (February), schedule willing. Yes, I think my style of play would be fine on the SEA server. Remember, it is not blind aggression that we emphasize as much as "take what the enemy gives you". I am a neuropharmacologist. Woo!
  4. It is pretty dependent on the situation. Getting early intel (especially for free) is always good, imo. You should then look and see what your team behind you is doing. If they are in position to assist you, you can hold the position. If they are not in position (or are sorely outnumbered/overpowered by what you spot), you are better off falling back into a more defensive position or relocating elsewhere entirely (depending on the speed of your tank). The FCM is not a very good front line tank, but it is a relatively quick tank. Once you start to feel the noose tighten around your neck, make sure you can get out or can be saved by your teammates.
  5. I think it is a good idea. However, I do not personally have the free time to oversee such an endeavor. Just keeping up with all of my stream commitments takes a lot of time! Sure, I do not think that it even needs to be "competitive". Having scrimmages makes training callers easier and makes everyone sharper. Nah, I am not really the gambling type. I am more the seafood buffet type... Yeah, we have a lot of content on that topic, I think. Basically, my theory is that you push towards areas of strategic importance, but keep an eye on what your team is doing and react accordingly. If you do not have much support, take a less aggressive position. If you have a lot of support, take a more aggressive position. The relative compositions on the team will also dictate your disposition. There is no easy answer for what to do with a bad dispersion. It really depends on the tank you are in, the map and the team compositions. A lot of the time you just have to do your best with what you have. It is like you are MacGyver and you have to get past the guards and disarm the bomb... with a paperclip and some Jello.
  6. http://na.wargaming.net/clans/1000022736/ So, I have decided to set up the framework for a stream/training clan. For the time being, this will just be a social clan. Once I get a bit more free time, I would like to begin running training sessions and getting everyone up to speed on stronghold play, tournament play and team play in general. Until then, I want this to be a clan where you can hang out and play with other people that also want to improve. We have a TeamSpeak server (zeven.tsservers.com) for us to work with, although I still need to set up the permissions structure for the clan. I am hoping to get that done for everyone this week. There will never be any WN8 or win rate requirements for this clan and it is highly unlikely we will ever engage in clan wars. We might do some clan tournaments down the line and will likely do some strongholds and things like that. The only requirement is to not be a douche. You are free to come and go as you please. If we need to make room on the roster, it will be based upon activity. If you would like to join us, contact me in game, in the forums or in the stream and I will talk to you first. Let us work on improving our gameplay together!
  7. Not quite yet. I still do not yet have the extra free time that I was anticipating. If/when we do the training clan thing, it will take up a lot of my time/effort to set up things the way I want (correctly) to have a good framework for those involved. I am hoping to have more information on this by the end of the November. My opinion has always been that if you are not having fun playing a specific video game with your recreational time, you should really find a different video game that you will have fun playing! There is a difference between getting through tedious portions of a game to get to the fun portions (all progression games are grindy to some extent) and playing a game that is just boring throughout. Only you can figure out what the game means to you. I have this thing about free damages. I am not someone who wants people to farm their own team's health to get their damage, but I always want people to recognize when they can get free damage. Free damage is damage that is going to be available regardless (usually when enemies are forced to drive across open areas) and comes with little to no cost to you (they usually do not have the time or positioning to stop). Tasty free damages...
  8. So, at that point, the enemy team had two TD's and one light tank left. Your team had three mediums (including two top tier) and one TD. Their play is going to be to camp with the TD's and have the light tank someplace where he can spot your approach. Flanking is good, but the field approach that you took is the most easily defended side given their composition (as you ended up seeing, the light tank had your position frozen out and you could not approach any further). Your team was still too far back to assist you anyways (the Object 430v2 and T28 prototype were effectively out of the game) and you were running out of time. It is not your "fault", any one of the tanks left on your team could have gone through D6 to light their team and win the game. In my opinion, D6 was absolutely required for your field position to be worthwhile (unless all of their tanks were in camping in A2).
  9. I have had fun so far. The game seems purposefully quicker than WoT in many regards. Faceoffs can be slow (no premium rounds makes armor relevant), but flanking can be devastating, which puts positioning and gap control at a premium. I like how the commander/crew system works and various other quality of life upgrades outside the game itself. Overall, it is definitely still a beta project and many aspects still feel pretty shallow (PvE, crew skills, end game, etc.), but it is a fun change of pace. I am currently enjoying figuring out the playstyle of the different types of tanks. I have played MBT's to tier 6 and am working on a tier 5 AFV right now. I do not follow battalions much, but my impression is that every clan is a social clan. I do not think there are any "hardcore" AW battalion's out there, so find one with some people you know or make one with your friends! You can always join a serious battalion when the end game becomes more serious. I will still be playing WoT and WoWS, but for now I am working on figuring out new AW classes. I enjoy learning new things, so I am having fun playing AW, so AW will be played...
  10. It is still in the works and I should have an answer/proposal within the next couple weeks. I have been very busy in real life lately, so I have not been able to spend as much time as I would like balancing all the administrative work of the stream (YouTube, forums, Twitter, etc.). I have also been trying to crush my learning curve in Armored Warfare (but that is the fun bit)...
  11. I do not think you can really worry too much about how well your teammates are performing in any single match. If you look at just your positioning (and I do not think your team did that well), this was still a winnable game. Going south is fine given the compositions and lack of artillery. I think you traded pretty well there. You need to watch your team the entire time. Your team lost the middle and did not attempt to win the north, so it was all on the south team to trade well and quickly. Going back through the middle from the west is fine, but when the WZ and the PTA were one shot, you inexplicably move about 30m east. This results in two negative things. You do not really gain any meaningful firing solutions (and lose the best one on the two one shot tanks below you). You also expose yourself to additional lanes of fire (especially if any enemy came back through E4). If you remained in that initial position, you could have finished off those two tanks below without significantly increasing your risk (by keeping the entire enemy team in front of you). You can then assess that they were not going to try to put cap pressure on you and deal with the rest. Moving forward put you in a bad position (the same bad position the WZ and PTA were in) by allowing incoming flanking fire, forcing you to move into the ditch and, ultimately, sealing your fate (you will notice their team continued to flank). Great game though! You can respec to Safe Stowage after you get the second full skill (it does nothing for you while it is training up). Having that extra health on your ammo rack is always a good thing on every tank. Pretty much every tank that I have has Safe Stowage on it...
  12. A bigger part of your decision is probably what crew you want to train with the premium tank. That choice often trumps a lot of the other issues. If you are just looking to have fun, any of those four can do. If you are looking to grind credits (because you can use the base AP shells with either), FCM 50t is best (preferred matchmaking) with the AMX CDC coming in second. If you are just looking for a strong carry tank and are ok with firing premium ammunition as needed, the Super Pershing is currently the best of those four with the IS-6 a close second. There is no real difference in the gameplay of the FCM 50t and the AMX CDC (depends if you want to consider matchmaking part of gameplay). They use the exact same gun. The CDC is a little faster (which makes it a better flanker), but can be penetrated by HE pretty easily (arty vulnerable).
  13. I am considering it. There are a lot of logistics to think through. I will update you guys when I know more.
  14. With either gun, that entire line (AMX 50 100, AMX 50 120, AMX 50B) works best as an assaulting support tank. You want to try to work with your strong side as aggressively as possible. For example, when they push a corner, push with them, get your clip out and then fall back behind your team (AMX 50 100 example here). Especially with the 100mm gun (while it has more potential damage, it takes longer to clip out), be aware of where your teammates are. Once you get the 120mm gun, it is better though. Link still does not work for me. In general, pushing to contact takes some time to master and there is always risk involved (as there is always some level of risk with doing anything aggressively). The more intel that you have, the more informed of a decision you can make. You usually do not have that level of intel in random matches, so you go off of what you know about the pubbie meta. Do teams normally deploy tanks to the area you are about to scout? Can you "peek" there without overextending? In my WZ-111 1-4 Erlenberg game, I go through a progression of steps where I always think to myself, "If I turn this corner and I run into 2+ tanks... what is my plan?". Try to have a plan for each step as you push to contact and you will tend to overextend less. It is a little map dependent though because some maps have large gaps between areas you can spot through. So you have to use your better judgement and try to learn from your misreads.
  15. Intelligent and open-minded discussion is fun! I am not defensive with my replies. I personally think that thinking about how you think is important... zevSheep It is hard to say by just looking at stats, really. It does not seem that you are doing that badly in it. The E-50M is a pretty fun tank for random battles but, as Carbon noted the other night, unfortunately a lot of the "balance points" went into giving it armor that is only situationally useful. Maybe post a representative replay? You rushed your first couple clips way too much and should have been able to kill the IS-8 and T34 (or A45), respectively. The northwest was lost before you won the southeast. You absolutely had to go back, but probably should have gone back through the 0 line. You waited too long on the plateau for the AMX 13 90 to spot things that you were not going to be able to shoot anyways. You had an (AFK, functionally anyways) IS-6 in the middle ramp already to spot/occupy anyone else. Clipping out the PTA was fine because of your positioning (he would have been able to shoot you the whole way to reset). If you were on the 0 line, the PTA would have no effect on you. You probably did not really have time to judge whether killing the Patton was going to cost you the game. When in doubt though, get all the resets yourself if you are in a clip tank. You had no fire support there, no one on the plateau to reset. If you got all the resets and did not kill the Patton, they likely would have killed you and you still would have lost the game anyways. Personally, I would rather take that chance to draw them off the cap, but I can't really fault you for that. You can make an argument that the T37 cost you the game, but people generally fixate too much on the "last mistake" and ignore the previous 500 mistakes that the team made that led up to it. I would definitely research the 12.8cm gun first, having that punch really does make a difference. In the interim (assuming you are using the top 10.5cm from the KT), I would use the washers, rammer and vents. When you get the 12.8cm, I would use the washers, rammer and vertical stabilizer. When you get the tracks, I would then use vents, rammer and stabilizer. There is not much value in putting a gun laying drive on the E75. You will gain better performance using the vertical stabilizer.
  16. Paredolia, imo. I am not a statistician (nor am I very good at math), but I have never felt that you could run clear-cut statistics on data like this quite so simply. When looking at sets of games (from simply flipping a coin 100 times to playing 100 rounds of World of Tanks), in order to run statistics based upon some normal distribution, each flip/round has to have the same probability of outcomes. Thus, if you were playing a single tank on a single side of a single map in a single battle tier, then you can begin to look at the differences between the individual choices you make. I am willing to accept the notion that your opponents tanks and choices (and do not forget about those of your teammates!) will balance over a large number of games, but I am unwilling to accept the notion that an A20 BT6 game should have the same statistical weight as an AMX 50 100 BT8 game. What tank you choose to play and what battle tier you get placed in have a HUGE effect on your ability to lead/execute map strategy (see also, WN8). Statistics are a tool and we need to be cautious about having it mislead us and give us confirmation bias. Why do we have superstitions? Usually because we incorrectly identify something as a predictor of success (see baseball rituals or sports in general) and it becomes part of our routine. As stated before, as far as we could tell from that video, the team that lost was not aggressive on the lower ground every single time. Why is that not considered as a potential contributor? Maybe because it is an absence phenomenon? Maybe because we already know what we wanted to see? This is one reason why the scientific method can benefit more from disproving hypotheses rather than proving them. I have never said that I was "right", I have only stated that my play makes sense to me. It is not based upon my feelings (per se). I have offered very little in the way of robust statistical evidence. I have offered strategic advice based upon logic. This is purely derived from what I believe about the NA pubbie meta (slow and cloistered) and the map terrain. Again, I am not saying that taking the Himmelsdorf hill is evil and makes you a bad person. It might be that I am wrong and that it is the "correct" play. I am simply asking that we take a critical look at why (and how) we come to the conclusions that we do. Here is a singular example (http://www.twitch.tv/zeven_na/v/8369127?t=2h52m12s). I almost always say on Redshire that playing the east is not a good strategic decision for many reasons that I try to outline in the stream. All of our high tier and good players go east... and camp... and die. They play cloistered and slow. Something made them think that this was a good idea as someone says "lets push east". I just have yet to hear the strategic reason for why this is a winning play (note, I do not consider "I am relatively safe and can shoot people who charge into me" to be a sufficiently winning play). Hm, it should work out-of-the-box (the functionality should be in the playersPanel.xc, but if you are using my config, it should already be "on"). The only XVM functionality that needs to be activated if you are using the mod pack are the statistics (done via their official web site). If you downloaded the full mod pack, just make sure you backup and delete your old mods before installing it (perhaps there is some sort of conflict?).
  17. 19 is somewhat of a small sample size, but I am fine with taking his *opinion* that the Himmelsdorf hill is important to winning. I just do not agree with it. See above statistics regarding encounter versus standard on Himmelsdorf and Mines. I think you misunderstand me. I do not advocate cap fast on encounter modes. I advocate being able to put cap pressure on the opposing team to force them into disadvantageous positions (while simultaneously being able to prevent yourself from having to be put in such disadvantageous positions). TD's at the back of Himmelsdorf is not enough to stop you from pushing as the back of Himmelsdorf is wide open and, once lit, they are subject to fire from down the map. My XVM config is the config *only*, you still need to install XVM from the official site (http://www.modxvm.com). Once XVM is installed, my config can be put into the correct folder to modify the XVM appearance.
  18. tl;dr People try to reduce complex probabilities into coin flip outcomes and that can *potentially* cause them to misinterpret what is actually happening. Correlation is necessary, but not sufficient to prove causation. Ice cream sales increase during the summer and ebb during the winter. Drowning accidents increase during the summer and ebb during the winter. In fact, you can look at individual days throughout the year and see a correlation between ice cream sales and drowning accidents. Are people drowning in their ice cream? Probably not. The more likely scenario is that there is a common causality for both, probably an increase in temperature. I am not saying that this is the case with the hill on Himmelsdorf, but I am merely pointing out that we need to be open to the possibility. Power is always a factor even with (essentially) binary outcomes (http://www.statisticsdonewrong.com/power.html). You need to be careful when looking at any statistics (you can get statistics to say anything you want, 19% of all people know that...) because even with an unrigged coin it is difficult to tell whether it is rigged or not based upon a small sample size (or a large p value). 15 of 19 is almost 79% though! If you were flipping an unrigged coin, those odds would be equivalent to like a 1-in-100 outcome! We need to keep in mind that we are not flipping a coin though and that we (and our teammates and our opponents) are dynamically affecting the outcome. We need to consider our own base win rate, how well we play the areas that we commit to and what our teams actually do in the games we win/lose. For example, from the heat maps that we were able to see in all of those 19 games it seemed like the losing team did not advance/play much on the lower ground. The hills on Himmelsdorf and Mines both offer some strategic value, so why do I go to one and not the other? If you watch me, I play against the meta sometimes and against the map sometimes. Pubbie meta is to take hills. I think playing the lower (and faster to get to) areas aggressively wins games as long as you can win the strategic points. Driving up the hill on Himmelsdorf takes time (even in faster tanks). There are only two circuitous exits off the hill and it takes time to get up and it takes time to get down. Controlling the Himmelsdorf hill gives you limited firing lanes on the rest of the map. Driving up the hill on Mines takes very little time. There is only one entrance, but you can exit almost anywhere. Controlling the Mines hill gives you good firing lanes on most of the rest of the map and sufficiently protected positions for flanking fire on enemies trying to circumnavigate the hill and surrounding areas as well as into the bases. Simply calling something a hill and saying that you must take it because... hill, is like calling a puddle on the street a body of water and trying to jet ski in it. There needs to be more nuance to our definitions and rationale for doing things in situations with a number of complex variables. Let us assume that what he says is true though (I will not deny the possibility). We will pull some numbers from vbaddict... for science! I have played 346 games on standard Himmelsdorfs with a win rate of 65% and 69 games on encounter Himmelsdorfs with a win rate of 65%. I have played 172 games on standard Mines with a win rate of 69% and 49 games on encounter Mines with a win rate of 71%. I pretty exclusively play hill on Mines and not-hill on Himmelsdorf. There is no difference in my win rate between standard and encounter modes on either map. If the hill is so important, would I not be punished significantly for not taking it (and alternatively rewarded significantly for taking it)? There is about a 2% win differential (from my average) either way for Himmelsdorf and Mines. Is this significant? Maybe. Is this due to where I choose to focus? Maybe. Is this due to pubbie meta (or their aggressiveness on any flank)? Maybe. Does ice cream cause drowning? Maybe. It is difficult for me to rule out my positioning, but it is easy for me to outline my rationale. As long as my rationale makes sense to me and the statistics do not significantly contradict me, I need more evidence to suggest that I change my behavior.
  19. I do have ATS installed, so my tank/crew information is uploaded into the database (http://www.vbaddict.net/tanks/zeven-na-cc7bbfb9e08f786b5050548ad562ff72). Hm, not sure, it seems to work for me (http://www.vbaddict.net/clan/worldoftanks.com/1000002392/clan-guerrillas). Maybe it was a temporary issue? A lot of that is simply experience in playing the maps, in my opinion. There are a lot of maps in the game and they are not really symmetrical and there are typically a number of important strategic areas on each. Add to this the pubbie meta and team skill levels and there is a lot to account for. One of the things I try to emphasize in the stream is that there is never any singular "good plan", you have to take a large number of variables into account to do the (perceived) "right thing". Leading from the front is not easy and it is a skill set that you will develop. Just be sure to learn from your feedback. As I have said in the stream, I think people learn much faster by being aggressive and then scaling back as they get killed, just be sure that you do the scaling back part too. "I went to position A and bullied, then I went to position B and bullied and then I went to position C and got bullied. What happened at each position? Ok, note to self, do A and then B and then avoid C next time!" Sure, go ahead and post a representative sample of wotreplays links or something and I will try to get some time to check them out.
  20. Sometimes you fail early because you made a tactical mistake. Sometimes it is because you misread the map (a lot of taking strategic areas on the map is an educated gamble depending on team compositions and early intelligence). Sometimes it is because your team is in position to help you... but doesn't. I do not think you want to emphasize "avoiding bad games" per se, but rather think about why you had the bad game. If you had a bad game while trying to do the right thing, that is ok. If you had a bad game because you made a mistake, then that is something that can be corrected. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. If you want to use WN8 as a metric, that is a pretty consistently good performance. You had a total of 4 games below 1000 (16%) and 13 games above 3000 (52%). Using average WN8 as a metric, you can do that because WN8 scales absurdly high in individual games. However, I do not personally think that one 11,800 WN8 win should "cancel out" two 100 WN8 losses when we evaluate our play. Yeah, we averaged 4000 WN8... but we also only won 1 of 3 games and contributed basically nothing in the losses. I had a similar discussion with MaxL on the official forums as to what I believe is the relationship between WN8 and winning (http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/388151-the-truth-behind-losing-streaks/page__st__20__pid__7812858#entry7812858). There is a supposition amongst a lot of "purples" that you will get more WN8 in losses than in wins. I have never really believed or seen that and I think it is due to style of play. I theorize that the more aggressive players will have higher WN8 in wins and the more passive players will have higher WN8 in losses. Interestingly (and I think this is what most people miss), you do not necessarily win more by being aggressive instead of passive in random battles... BUT this is completely flipped in organized play. In my opinion, the difference is that I generally create for my team instead of using them. Lead from the front, learn to be a better teammate and you will be a better player in organized play (in my opinion!). I think the first part here is often overlooked. Is your team mismatched in composition for the map or skill level or both? Take that risky gamble to take a strategic position that will allow your team some advantage to have a chance to win. I would wager that the outcome of most random battles can be distilled down more to team positioning rather than skill. I would favor a worse player in a good position over a better player in a bad position. I have talked about this in the stream here and there. Sometimes you need to take bigger gambles when the odds are set against you. However, as noted above, you need to understand what it is that you are really evaluating. If you have a bad skill team and they are all in bad positions, you have to gamble to make something happen. If you have a bad skill team and they are all in good positions (this happens rarely, they are bad for a reason; but hey, broken clock, yada yada yada), you can let it play out a bit and monitor the situation.
  21. For random battles (consider that I mostly play solo), I would run optics, rammer and vents for most heavies with good gun handling. For me, the decision is really dependent on your "typical" range of engagement in the tank. The closer the engagement, the less that a vertical stabilizer actually helps you in most cases. Note that this is if the heavy tank already has good/decent gun handling. If you are in an E100 or something, you would be better off with a vertical stabilizer even at point blank range. Again, this answer is for random battles (if you are running a dpm medium in CW, you would run food and vents). If you want more DPM on a medium, run food. You can drop vents at any point for anything else as the dpm increase is marginal. Always run optics in mediums in random battles. If you have a 420m base with recon and situational awareness, you are basically at maximum detection range, but you still have to take camo into account. Having greater than "maximum" view range allows you to cut through tank and foliage camo. Vision control allows you to define when and where the encounters occur (it is a huge advantage to be able to spot someone when they cannot detect you).
  22. Ok, I have not had time to completely read these recent posts yet, so I will have to catch up on the text a bit and comment later, but here are some of the numbers. Below are the results from my last 25 non-artillery games (WN8, win/loss, survival). The last ten games were platooned (go Tag Team Thursday!). 2267 W Y 861 W N 2848 W Y 8956 W Y 1821 W Y 4668 W Y 3757 W N 859 L N 2769 W N 3880 L N 1714 W Y 3859 L N 4282 W Y 10353 W Y 2362 W Y 324 W Y 3102 W Y 4056 W N 3640 W N 1595 W N 5272 W Y 5145 L N 3475 L N 2448 W Y 4832 L N
  23. I think you did fine in that game in terms of your positioning/aggression. Your team needed to suppress the 6 line, but the Object 704 is not the tank to do that. Your gun was pretty active throughout, so that is what is most important. Yeah, I think that is reasonable. It was going to be really tough for him to beat that AMX 50B though. He had like 700 health left and the 50B was still at full health. It is generally difficult to ambush another clip tank when they have a health advantage (you have to kite them and the 50B has the speed to make that difficult). He had to hope that the 183 was low enough on health that he could kill him in two shots. If we take anything away from this though, it should be that this highlights the reason why ammo is so precious in the Bat Chat. If he spent less time taking shots from the abbey at the start of the game, he would have had a better chance to win at the end. It is one of those things where if he was in an Object 140, those shots are totally fine, but in a Bat Chat you have to think... eh, maybe shooting from this range into that level of cover is not the best use of my ammo. It is hard to say without actually seeing you play, but if you feel you are really being hung out to dry, I would recommend identifying when your team is not supporting you and then dialing it back a little bit in those matches, especially in more fragile tanks. You can generally tell this by dispersion within the first 30 seconds or so of the match. As you start heading out to your strategically important position on the map, look at who is following you and figure out if you have enough assets to justify an aggressive position. Your recent stats suggest that you are doing pretty well though, so it might just simply be a perception bias. 61% win rate on 38% survival is about right for your experience level (depending on what tanks you are playing). Try coming by for Tag Team Thursday or sending me a representative replay. For the most part, this is true, "lower" tier games tend to be more chaotic because less experienced players are generally more focused on their local play rather than the map itself. However, this really cuts both ways because you can usually bully people and they will walk into it or not reposition out of it (which is why people complain about "seal clubbers"). In any case, you still need to watch your teammates as closely as you watch the enemy...
  24. It only affects the firing distance or arc if you are at maximum gun elevation/depression. Otherwise, the arc is always calculated the same regardless of your pitch (as far as I can tell). I have never seen a "more useful" shot at a higher pitch (I think it has something to do with the way WG calculates the "ceiling"), but you can use a lower pitch to shoot people at lower elevations or to shotgun people (because the gun depression on artillery sucks).
  25. It usually takes people a little bit to get used to playing at tier 10. Usually it is an issue of not bullying enough. When you are always the top tier, you should always be looking for opportunities to bully. You have not played that many games yet though, so it might just be a period of adjustment. With the IS-7, look to use your speed to take strategic locations. The armor is pretty solid/trolly and the gun is decent at short-mid ranges. Yeah, I always found it inconvenient that they decided not to append a score screen to the replay in some fashion. I use a website. I like using http://wotreplays.com, but there are a number of similar sites out there.
×
×
  • Create New...