A_Lethal1

Thanks, I did not realize that I could do so. One of the reasons I came up with this is I have been finding that I have been judging people based on their colour in the count down, yet have played better ( even carrying) or worse (Hvy tanks going valley on Lakeville encounter) then their colour would indicate. Post game I looked at their stats in detail and found the play well in a certain class or worse indifferent to their Win rate. The other reason is that pre-battle is very toxic. I have had players on my team tell others to uninstall because of that colour. It also apparently lead

The stats we are given at the start of a match is our team & enemy teams Wn8, Number of games played (measured in thousands) & WIN rate. Yes Wn8 & Win rate are useful, but they are also 'Historical' and not recent (I understand we can't display them however) Number of games just tells us how many games they have played, but doesn't break it down by class, tier or tank. My argument is that this should be done for that particular tank. itself . 1) Win rate with that particular tank 2) Number of games with that tank (60% with 10 dames vs 60% of 180 games tells

I don't think so its just suppose to be similar to Normandy. They also have a windmill on it.

The 6 lber on it is good though slow firing and not at all historical, If it was given a higher ROF it would rival the Matilda in popularity with its doing more damage per minute.

All British guns suck look at the QF 6 lber. the main mid tier gun. The Russian 57mm fires faster, penetrates more, vastly superior accuracy and does 12% more damage then any 6 lber. Perhaps because the Stalinist T-34 is an Iconic tank on RU servers.

Throwing in another variable. When a match has artillery in it does scouting aggressively discourage camping? Does passive scouting encourage camping in those matches with artillery. I am thinking that there may be a correlation between both the number of scouts and how they are played with artillery in a match.

I am surprised that they made it a WW2 era game. The ships in the early decades had a lot of variety from B and BB as well as Heavy cruisers, Armoured cruisers, Light cruisers ands Scout cruiser as well as Destroyers, Destroyer Leaders and Destroyer Escorts. There wouldn't be any cry of sky cancer towards artillery Carriers either. Then once they had a fan base increase the era range

Thank you both it is now working! +1 to you both

I wasn't sure to put this, but I need help. I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I had to reload WOT due to a virus on my side. Anyway after downloading it again I tried to add XVM. I followed the instructions and downloaded iit to my WOT folder. Yet it is not working and my activation is still counting down. I tried everything my tiny pin head could think of, so any help at all would be appreciated.

My math may be off, but according to my calculations If a players play N number of games with a win rate of 40% and then plays an equal number (n x 2) win a win rate 50%. His win rate will be 45%. If he then plays (n x 3) at 50% his win rate will be 46.6 (rounded up to 47%). Yet this player has spent 2/3 of his games at 50%. If we take this to 4 times the number of games played at 50% his win rate is 48% even though 80% of his games are at 50%! Yes his recent win rate is a constant 50%, but this doesn't show in the xvm stats at the beginning of the game just his lower stats. While t

<Double post >

Could that be done so that we can see what the statistics for tanks we currently have as opposed yo all the tanks we have ever played, but sold?

I have 517 games as of this posting. I have had XVM since I started this account. All my battles are listed on the 60 day, 30 days etc. My Win rate is 46.62 and my Wn8 is 649. However my 60 day report gives me 47.24 and a Wn8 of 487 30 day report gives me 48.7 and a Wn8 of 488 7 day report gives me 55.56 and a Wn8 of 597 24 hr report gives me 66.67 and a Wn8 of 627 What I don't understand is I have never had a Win rate that low, nor a Win8 that high. Also my average damage has never been that low! I a