Jump to content


Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MGFranks

  • Rank
    Stats Denier in Relapse

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
  • Interests
    I want to learn to play this game well.
  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

738 profile views
  1. On the tank stats page ( https://wotlabs.net/na/tankStats ), I'm trying to understand the columns "Players", "Average Battles", and "Average Damage". Players is number of different individual players of that tank on a server? Over what timeframe? Average battles is average battles per player? Or per server? Over what timeframe? Average Damage is clear, but again, over what timeframe? Thanks!
  2. Thanks to all who showed interest. I'm proud to say I'm now a Vandal.
  3. Good luck guys, missed seeing your tags on the map.
  4. [repost from The Other Forum, apologies if you've already seen it] Stats: WN8: 1500 recent/1300 overall WR: 55% recent/55% overall Almost 20k battles, 90% solo. ~350 CW battles ~580 TC/SH battles Activity: Usually active 7 days, but sometimes I have to take a day or week off. Pretty rare, though. I probably average 25-26 evenings a month. Due to work schedule only available until 10 PM Eastern on weeknights unless there is strong need for a particular battle. Tanks: 350 fully equipped tanks in hangar. 16 Tier X, all but 1 or 2 CW-viable. Only 30 tanks left to research and they will follow as fast as I can manage. Clan History: 7 months VPG family, 18 months SG family. Reason for leaving: Looking for more CW action. Looking for: Active CW clan, that usually holds land, and is usually in Eastern time zone (19:00-20:00 Prime Time). I prefer the clan to be part of a clan “family” with a progression path, as I’m still looking to grow my ability. I prefer to be in the bottom half of your players by WN8. I expect the clan to be reasonably organized about CW and to have callers. Yes, I know that’s being picky. I also expect most of the better players to not be too snobbish about playing with scrubs like me. About Me: I’m an old guy, generally calm and easy to get along with. I never rage on TS. I do sometimes, when pubs are particularly bad, point this out to them in chat, without cussing. I’m looking for the same sort of experience from my clan. I’m very good at following orders in CW – sometimes too much so. If you tell me to push, I will push, no hesitation. Good platoon leader. Decent SH caller, but not good at developing CW strats. For CW, you can count on me to be there on time, bring fully equipped tanks, and follow orders. No, I won’t be one of your stars, but I’m a solid soldier. I also enjoy strongholds and will help out there. Gameplay criticism accepted and even welcomed if delivered in a civilized way. Heck, I’m usually my own worst critic. Since I am a tank collector, and enjoy playing all tiers (well, I’ve given up Tier I since you can no longer get anything but bottom tier), you will see an even curve of battle counts/tier on my profile. For those that think good players should never play below Tier X, or maybe VIII, well, that’s not me. Looking at my stats, you’ll see that I’m pretty competent up to Tier VIII or IX, but damage in Tier X is low. In some cases that looks worse than it should because I got the Tier X too soon, but hey, the numbers are what they are. I’m getting better. As to all the battles in the PzIIJ, I got that thing a long time ago when you had to jump through hoops to get it from Over There. Back then nobody knew what it was or how to counter it . Playing it was so giggle-tastic I put on about 500 battles the first month. I haven’t touched it much since – the word got out! Basically, I'm at that green/blue stage where I have 4-5k WN8 battles nearly every session - followed by a 145. I pretty much know what to do and and how to do it, but have troubles with consistency. It'll come. Finally, if I say I will do something, I will do it. I keep my commitments. I expect clan leadership to do the same. If this sounds like your clan, and I sound like someone you could use, please reply . Links: WoT profile: http://worldoftanks.com/community/accounts/1004372630-MGFranks/ WOTLabs: http://wotlabs.net/na/player/MGFranks vbaddict: http://www.vbaddict.net/player/mgfranks-na-dc2bccd2719e86b8b144226390019f15 Clantools: https://clantools.us/servers/na/players?id=1004372630
  5. Excellent guide, good job. For my contribution I'll offer guidance on that age-old question: when do I move up? Follow Franks' Rule: your highest tier played should be no more than your recent WN8 / 100, rounded down. So, 438? Tier IV. 767? Tier VII. etc.
  6. Well-written, and well-thought-out. I don't agree with all of it, nor necessarily that there is a basic problem to be solved here, but props all the same. So is it basically just: the current system is pay-to-win have an advantage and that's bad? If so, what's the incentive to pay (= generate income for WG)? One thing not answered: how do you compensate members who already have a lot of money sunk into equipment? Just silver? Not sure that will go down well. If equipment becomes less OP, that makes crew skills even more OP than they already are. So let's cut the crew skill rank-up substantially. Maybe make each skill cost the same as the first skill. For me, a not-very-good player, 1st skill on a gold-trained crew takes 125-150 battles. 500 battles on a tank gets 4 skills? That seems not unreasonable. And then maybe cut the skill slots to 4 per crewmember. This puts a maxed-out crew in reasonable reach.
  7. I'm a relatively new player, started in March of 2013. The bug bit deep on the very first day. I tend to get into things rather intensely so I was on the forums that first weekend, I think, and soaking up whatever I could. One handicap, perhaps, is that I had never played a PC game or a MMO game before. My previous experience was playing Forza on the Xbox. So a lot of the interpersonal dynamics were new to me, not to mention that I'm an asocial introvert. Humans are hard. Anyways, I'd been playing about a month when I decided I was tired of the team-less nature of pub "teams". I wanted more coordination and joining a clan and platooning seemed a good first move. As usual for me I did a lot of research before applying. I wanted a clan that played Eastern time zone, that had a good reputation for behavior, that seemed mature and stable, and where I could sneak in at the bottom. I wanted it to be part of a landholding clan family. In other words, the best clan I could possibly qualify for after a month and 500 or so games. I settled on the VPG group and for some reason they took me on in VPG-R. I'm a tank collector, so when Campaign 1 came around I *really* wanted that M-60. Since the initial parts of Campaign 1 were low tiers I could play even though I didn't have a Tier X yet. In order to do that I wrangled a transfer to VPG-S and then VPG main. I still had only a few thousand battles when I went to VPG main. I owe those folks a lot for being willing to take a chance on me. I believe in paying it back, so I was willing to take on some duties. There was some clan turmoil going on for various reasons over the next few months, so I ended up having the opportunity to be be recruiter, then lead recruiter, website helper, and finally DC. It was all very educational and again, I appreciate the opportunity. When it got to be time for Campaign 2 it became clear to me that VPG wasn't going to be competitive and I started looking around, wanting to "move up" to a clan that had a good chance at the campaign tank. I became very good friends with wotcs. Again, I wanted the very best clan I could get into with my relatively weak stats. In perusing the wotcs records it became apparent to me that SG "does more with less" and I was fortunate enough to be taken on there. I wouldn't have had a chance in any other top-30 clan. And, sure enough, I came very close to getting the VK, only missing by about 300 positions (drat!). If I hadn't made it into SG I would have just worked my way down the list of likely candidates on wotcs, sorted by ranking, until I found the best clan that would take me. VPG is ranked somewhere in the 90s-100s, so still a darn good clan in the overall scheme of things. I think I would have had multiple choices at the 40-60 range, so even that would have been a good step up. SG has turned out to be an even better fit than I expected. The atmosphere is very calm and civilized. For a person with a low tolerance for humanity like me, that's a major plus. Thanks to all my SG officers and clanmates.
  8. This is just based on my understanding from mucking around with .xc files "by hand" for some while now. I make no claims to being an expert. Originally XVM used a single config file. Then a few versions back they felt it was getting unwieldy so they broke it out into separate files. But the key is, XVM doesn't care. You can use a single file, and some mod packs still do. Or you can use multiple files. You can even break the files up differently from the way SirMax does. The key is this: XVM looks in folder \xvm\configs for a file named xvm.xc. That is the starting point, and I imagine it's hardcoded into xvm itself. It starts parsing xvm.xc looking for the sections it wants. If it finds the section, with the appropriate values, right there in xvm.xc, great, it uses that. An example of this approach is in Rexxie's mod pack. If you look at xvm.xc in his mod pack it's a giant file and all the entries are just right inside it. My guess is that's because it was prepared with one of those XVM editor tools. I think, but am not sure, that all of those just deal with everything in a single file. But at any point, a section entry can be a redirect to a section in a different file. So, if you look in the current \xvm\configs\xvm.xc, it just says: ${"@Default/@xvm.xc":"."} Which is a redirect that means "start in the folder you're in, look for a folder named @Default, and within that look for a file named @xvm.xc". So it does that, finds @xvm.xc, and starts parsing that. @xvm.xc has some things that are straight entries, such as: "configVersion": "5.0.2", But you'll also see things that are redirects. they look like this: "login": ${"login.xc":"login"}, Which means, "for the section named login, start in the current folder (which is the folder of the file currently being parsed, not where you originally started), find a file named login.xc, and look inside it for a section named login". These redirects can be nested as deep as you want. For example, @xvm.xc redirects to minimap.xc, which redirects to the various minimapLine.xc, minimapCircles.xc, etc. files. Hopefully that at least offers a start into seeing how it all fits together. When I first started with XVM I did it all by hand. there were no editors, or I didn't know about them. Then the editors came along and I started using those. Then they split the files in the new releases and that broke the editors, or rather the editors wouldn't output a file structure that matched what came from XVM. It worked, but was all rearranged. Why did I care? Because with each new release I want to get my tweaks back in as quickly as possible without losing new values from the XVM authors. To do that I use a file compare tool. I use one called Beyond Compare, but there are many. You point it at the old and new *.xc folders and it shows you what's different in each file and lets you copy changes on a line-by-line basis from one file to another. Using this I can quickly evaluate the changes and get my tweaks back where I want them. But, it relies on the basic file layout being the same between the old and new versions; same file names, sections in the same relative locations, etc., so the single-file approach doesn't work for me. My recommendation when you start fooling with this is you create another folder at the same level as @Default. Call it George or Bill or YouRock or whatever. Copy the config setup you want to work with to there and mess with that copy. Make the top xvm.xc point to that folder. When you make a change, and it works, save that whole folder off. Then change the next thing. If you get it borked up, copy your Last Known Good edited folder back over your working folder. Always always keep a pure copy of @Default, and the one you got from a mod pack, if that's your starting point.
  9. There's a guy I know who has several accounts. I asked him about this and this, paraphrased, is what he said: Well, for one thing, competently designed games (and WoT, with all its faults is certainly that) are designed to create more dopamine early in the game progression. They want to get you hooked. So the reinforcements come faster and harder at first. That makes most games more fun at the beginning, if you find that sort of thing fun (and most do). It can be fun to have an account where you can: Just play what you want how you want and not worry about it if you (gasp!) play something that does not maximize your stats Experiment and see how well you can do on crap tanks without screwing your stats Limit to a particular progression style, maybe standard only, no cash ever, or full grind no free xp, or maybe limit to a single nationality and take on a historic persona It's a game. It's play. While going for max stats and battle success is a very valid way to play, there are others that are valid as well.
  10. Well, that would have been fine, if I knew what that was. And a PM would have sufficed for you as well, no? Anyone can answer the OP?
  11. I'm sorry, I've searched for this and can't find it. Someone did a post/thread that laid out a graphic with WN8 colors vs. carry-ability, and talked about the psychology of each group of players. Link would be appreciated.
  12. I'm one of those people. My WR is a lot higher than my WN would "predict". So the question is, why? I know that standard answer is platooning but that's not it in my case. At least 90% of my games are solopub. And I generally play better solo than in a platoon. I don't know. I've looked at my playstyle to try and maybe explain it. My speculation is that I will often do things that I think will win the game, or more often avoid the loss, but that don't result in much DMG/FRG. I'll cover the weak flank. I'll go to the spot that needs covering when no one else does. I'll go back to cover cap when no one else does. None of this said to brag, because I'm not sure it's even smart, just searching for an explanation. Another thing is that I'm (too) conservative in my playstyle. So I don't get a lot of damage in early, when there's a lot of damage to get, but I'm often around to take out weak tanks towards the end. I dunno. I do think it's interesting. And I know I "worry" more about my WR than WN. I try to bring up WN while maintaining WR, but I hate increasing WN if it leads to lower WR (which it can if you don't know wtf you're doing).
  13. I don't believe they're saying that MM looks at your wins/losses at all. It just looks at how many games played are at bottom tier. In theory you're supposed to get 1/3 top tier, 1/3 middle, and 1/3 bottom. That said, it's clearly not the most important factor in MM. So for example if you're on at "prime time" in a normal Tier VIII you're going to be bottom tier a lot because they have to fill out the Tier X battles and there are a lot of Tier X running. Also platoons skew your MM a lot, and platoons all of one type even more so. At least that's what I seem to see.
  14. For those who have played in multiple regions (NA/EU/RU/SEA), what are the differences in player quality? Are particular regions "easier" or "harder"? Which regions have the best pub match players, on average? Which have the worst?
  • Create New...