The Next Generation

[MaxL_1023 1,295]

For the last few months I have found myself more or less continuously in a teaching/mentoring role. I rarely get to play with dark purple overalls - those who have been good enough for long enough to demonstrate mastery of the game. Instead, I find myself playing with the prospects. Players with Teal-Purple+ recent (padded to varying degrees) who still show up as greens or blues. Most of these players seem to want to learn and get better. I want to help them get better. However, I am running into one issue:

 

I just might be terrible at it. 

 

Half of my tactics are unconscious - half the time I know what I am going to do before the battle starts. As opposed to read and react, I go where I want and force the enemy team to fight on my terms. The issue with this is it requires a lot more mechanical, short term and spatial skill then you usually have acquired by the time you reach the level I end up teaching. Being out of position by 3 meters or angled 5 degrees the wrong way makes the difference between hard carry and full potato. 

 

When it does come to strategy, reacting and anticipation, I have a hard time understanding another point of view due in part to the nature of my thought process. I see someone do something which I consider incorrect, and have no idea why they did it. When I ask and they tell me, half the time my first thought is "what the fuck" because to me, it is usually obvious why it didn't work. The problem is, I learned that over thousands of battles. I am trying to teach it to them in a few tens or a couple hundred at most. 

 

The crux of the matter is, I want to get better at mentoring. If I make my platoon mates better over time, we all win more, learn more and enjoy ourselves more. There are also more elite players around which can pass knowledge down to yet more aspiring unicums. I have created this thread to discuss mentoring, teaching and the general process of development into elite players. What do you think works? What doesn't? How do players vary in their learning curves or thought processes? Anecdotes, advice, debates (but no debauchery) and general ideas are welcome. 

 

Passing on our skill is central to this community. I want to figure out how to do it more effectively, enjoyably and for anyone interested to benefit from whatever scraps I have picked up over 3 years of tanking. 

 

P.S: Posts from both mentors and people currently being mentored are welcome. I want to hear from both sides - I may be missing something that is obvious to an up-and-comer.

 

Thanks for your feedback,

 

MaxL_1023

[Deusmortis 4,618]

First of all, it's been ages since anyone tried to correct anything I've done.  Sometimes, it's difficult to see your own mistakes.  Simply asking "Why did you do that?" forces me to evaluate the choice.

 

Second, I'd strongly recommend voice comms if you want to teach.  People aren't always watching the chat window while they're focused on the battle.  It's kind of hard to type while controlling your vehicle as well.  Speaking allows you to give constant guidance, and correct small errors before they compound into large errors. 

 

Third, and this may be the most difficult for you, is to realize that many people have played the game a long time, and have years of experience telling them how to play.  It may be wrong.  It may simply be different.  Regardless, there are no mind readers in the game.  At the very least, state immediate goals.  "We need to win B9 corner" or some such. 

 

Lastly (for now), review often.  Is your student doing well?  Say so.  Even good players could use some confirmation that they made the right choice.  Bad play?  Review it immediately, or after the battle at the very latest.  Long silences don't help much. 

 

 

Last +1, I find it good to have students identify areas they think they need help in. 

[Luna 3,443]

_Dia helped me out, basically by telling me that if I ever wanted to get good at the game I had to start really paying attention to everything I was doing wrong. We platooned for a while, I watched his replays, he said he would watch mine but he never did (rip). I was already pretty good at normal gameplay, it was the strategic stuff that he helped me with most.

[Pitch_Black 157]

Your solo replays in youtube with commentary would be a great tool and reach far more.

 

Hell, i'd take just replays.

 

You can't mentor us all, but you can reach vastly more with your replays posted or youtubed. Overwolf does it fairly easily, and fairly well.

[_Dia 2,082]

Mentoring while platooning doesn't really work a lot of the time. People develop different playstyles, and both parties are usually trying to focus on both the game and the mentor/one being mentored/etc. It's also a lot harder to spot mistakes. 

 

I think a really cool idea would be if WG implemented some sort of system where you could spectate from another players point of view, down to the exact mouse movements. It would push aside the need for uploading replays. Limit of 2-3 people spectating any other given person. 

I rarely get to play with dark purple overalls - those who have been good enough for long enough to demonstrate mastery of the game. 

 

Just wondering. Do you really weigh overall more than recent? A degree of mastery of the game for a person's entire tanking career or in a person's last X000 battles is still a degree of mastery nonetheless. I know it can be padded but it's not exactly easy for blues to get to purple, especially once they hit ~12,000+ battles. 

[Garbad 10,517]

I rarely get to play with dark purple overalls

That's because you play a lot of stupid tanks in an early time zone and won't get on ts.  And there are like a grand total of 4 supercums in our time zone.

[MaxL_1023 1,295]

I almost always notice a significant performance gap between a 3200 recent/2100 overall and 3200 recent/3000 overall. Based on the 1000 battle sample, you would expect them to be playing better. However, I suspect it is because WN8 at this level isn't capturing elements of gameplay which generally develop after the ability to deal damage and kills. 

 

Also, almost no blue with more then 12000 battles is suddenly going to start playing at dark purple overall without some degree of padding involved. The skill gap between a blue and a dark purple is wider then between a blue and a yellow - this kind of stat line suggests either padding or that they have learned more in the last 1000 games then the 10000 before that.

 

I also don't think I play with many dark purple recents either now that I think about it. 

That's because you play a lot of stupid tanks in an early time zone and won't get on ts.  And there are like a grand total of 4 supercums in our time zone.

 

I need to buy equipment for TS to work. I probably will once my graduate funding comes through (it is a living expenses allowance). 

 

My time zone is 1:30 AHEAD of EST - when you send out invites it is already 10PM a lot of the time. I play until almost 1AM as it is, and am awake until after 2AM. I am a night person, otherwise it would be worse. 

 

Also, what are stupid tanks? I see you send out 7 and pref 8s, are they somehow worse then 9s?

[Ollie Tabooger 614]

 

Also, almost no blue with more then 12000 battles is suddenly going to start playing at dark purple overall without some degree of padding involved. The skill gap between a blue and a dark purple is wider then between a blue and a yellow - this kind of stat line suggests either padding or that they have learned more in the last 1000 games then the 10000 before that.

Believe it or not, Dia's actually been at purple recent for a long time now; he was mid-light purple in the WN7 days. He just had a bad overall before that because he took a while to learn. That brings me to my next point, learning potential most certainly does NOT scale linearly with skill. If you can't identify what it is that you're doing wrong because you're not yet at a level where you can recognize your mistake(s), how can you learn from it? It's like asking someone to read from an encrypted document without telling them how to decipher it. You may learn stuff at a constantly advancing rate, but I feel that for most of us, we gather understanding in "chunks": we try out something new, incorporate it into our game-play, then as we begin to understand the reasoning behind it, we unlock a new "level" of play.

[Kilpanic 471]

As a grateful recipient of your mentoring, I'd like to point out a couple of things. 

 

1. Not everyone is capable of playing at your level. What works for you necessarily won't work for most people. 

2. There's more than one way to skin a cat. I will happily admit that your way is always the best way, but there are less reliable ways to accomplish the same goals a generous percentage of the time. 

3. These 'less reliable ways' are often more accessible to less rawly-skilled players. 

 

I've loved and hated playing with you, Max, and had to come to the sad conclusion that I am a *worse* player when we are platooned together, because I'm constantly trying to support you to do things that I don't understand, and as a result potato far too often. I think that voice comms would really help you get your ideas across to platoon mates (if they can get past the Newfie dialect)  

[Shinma 296]

Without getting into the various recent/overall point of this, I thought I'd offer my experiences in mentoring and what's worked/not worked. 

 

 

Welp, let me back up a small bit, and go with the being mentored for playstyle. For a specific/waifu tank, in my case my batchat, Kato would run two man plats with me, but off comms, which was actually a whole lot more helpful in the long run. Besides giving practical demonstration of certain levels of aggression/positioning and whatnot it also ensures that the person develops their own situational awareness and isn't spoonfed. It also gives them the opportunity when they diaf to watch how you're reacting differently. 

 

 

Ok, now onto my own experiences mentoring. First off, actual plat mentoring has limitations, by and large because not knowing what area of the student's play is suffering means you in turn can't focus on that section. Where I've found the most success is getting three average replays of said person in said tank, quickly running through and seeing if there's a theme that crops up (IE: Map awareness, positioning, over/underaggressiveness, and so forth). On the most thorough approach, going through and giving a few timestamp referenced instances of mistakes can help demonstrate, though I'd do this written as opposed to verbally, since the person will worry less about trying to explain their decisions. 

 

 

Here's a sample of one I did for someone on 215b play

Murvanka

 

shot on 50m, why you turn to shoot?

 

13:50-13:10 It hasn't cost you yet but look back at your angling, you were giving way too much of a side profile vs. a t10 td that shoots apcr as its prem round. You also won't pen that commander's hatch, but you might get the driver's port.

 

The spot mort is sitting in offers your quintisential 215b spot, almost no hull exposure, turret freedom.

 

Overcorrecting should have cost you, but it was slightly sloppy gun work and rng that let the e100 pen. Unless it's a legit peekaboom, pause for the half second of firing. 

 

12:18 look at your position here, I will be truly amazed if you don't eat shit for it.

 

12:04 No amazement necessary, this was map awareness failing you, not tank specific. 

                                   

If there's two hills like such  

X \__/=====\E

 

X is the worst place to be.that's two firing lanes. 

 

tl;dr You panicked at base (not necessary, but we can get into murv map dynamics later) and took a really,really shitty spot to set up. 

So, run through the next two at 4x and rewind/normal speed to see if the theory is correct. After the feedback, do a doublecheck with the person on their crew skills/loadout (it's funny how often there'll be little setup hickups), and run a plat with them in the future (with or without comms) and you'll have an idea what to look for and be able to help frame suggestions and point out areas where the person can improve. This method seems to yield the best results in my experience.  My entire demeanor is one of a happy-go-lucky axe murderer of sorts, so I wouldn't necessarily emulate my tone. 

[Scout_in_da_house 447]

I barely have any experience mentoring/getting mentored so I'm going to try and to explain my thoughts... 

 

• Not everyone can become a superunicum. I mean, there's a reason why you dark purples are considered best of the best...
  It's easy to play almost any tier/tank with blue/light purple stats but to perform consistently at dark purple levels WITH decent win rates, it's not something you can do without basically knowledge of every little thing in this game.
  
  Before the summer, my WN was 3.5k +, and I felt great about it, I thought I was one of the 'tanking gods'. But, it's only when I started a couple of solo-challenges, and I barely could perform above 61-62% I realized there's a whole other meaning to being unicum.
   
• Different ways to deal with situations.
  I think it's natural for any decent player to think ahead of the game and develop a plan of battle in any situation. Obviously, at this skill level 9/10 of these plans should work. But, does it mean another plan wouldn't?
  
  It's something I've tried to open my mind to during my games of the summer. Don't immediately try to execute your plan or spend time perfecting it, but maybe consider another option. I know this is very situational, but sometimes I like/see people make things much more complicated than they are.
  What I'm trying to say is that IMO being flexible and able to improvise is one of the things that can raise your WR with a % or two. Not everyone is that open minded, or can be that open minded when they already have to think about where they can hull down, which target should I focus, checking the map etc etc...
   
• Which brings me to my last point, which is that this game takes so long to learn. As long as you've got to think of mechanics you simply can't focus on actually winning or trying out new, riskier strats. You can't just turn a teal into a legit dark purple in a couple of days unless he's had thousands of battles experience.

 

Just a couple of thoughts from a light-purple try hard

[Shifty_101st 1,144]

Well, I know for sure I wouldn't be where I am today if it wasn't for hotfranc.  The one Ape who saw a 600 overall pm him after a battle telling him "I hope I did well enough, if I did anything wrong tell me!" then responding with a platoon and 3 months of mentoring.

 

Basically, I had no idea what I was doing.  All I knew was that Purples were pros and -G-'s were Gods at that time, and I was a pubbie with no clue how to get better.  Basically it came down to a ton of platooning with hotfranc and 2 other -G- members ever (Yankee and BigCheese, and only once apiece).  All the better players I platooned with taught me the basics, and gave me directions to start down a clear path to get better, but ALL the unicums and wn8 recent unicums I've platooned with let me figure the rest out on my own.  Because you can't force a playstyle on someone, you need them to build it for themselves.  And that must be the hardest part, is letting them learn themselves after they have the basics down, so they can do what you described max, and already know what they are going to do 20 seconds into the battle count down.

 

Anyway, that's my 2 cents

[Deathpig_Jones 378]

I've had a grand total of 1 game where I've platooned with someone who has corrected me.  I desperately wish I had more opportunities to learn.  

 

On the other side, I've helped (and tried to help) a lot of people, and what I've found is that your problem isn't actually your problem-- your problem is that you are dealing with people who don't want to learn.  They may *say* they want to learn, but when push comes to shove they don't want to listen to why they are wrong.  The only way I've found to make headway in that situation is to go completely Socratic and lead them to the answer I'm trying to provide by asking them a bunch of questions until they arrive at the conclusion.

 

 

And Dia, within a certain battle count range I've found that overall is INCREDIBLY more predictive of actual ability than recent.  It's less predictive if the person has a high battle count (just because it gets too hard to move the overall up), up to 15ishk (give or take) battles?  Absolutely.  I am almost NEVER surprised by what someone does given their overall in XVM.

[Zonneschimmel 29]

 The skill gap between a blue and a dark purple is wider then between a blue and a yellow - this kind of stat line suggests either padding or that they have learned more in the last 1000 games then the 10000 before that.

 

[Anwindo 14]

1) half the time I know what I am going to do before the battle starts.

 

2) Being out of position by 3 meters or angled 5 degrees the wrong way makes the difference between hard carry and full potato. 

 

3) When it does come to strategy, reacting and anticipation, I have a hard time understanding another point of view due in part to the nature of my thought process. I see someone do something which I consider incorrect, and have  no idea why they did it. When I ask and they tell me, half the time my first thought is "what the fuck" because to me, it is usually obvious why it didn't work. The problem is, I learned that over thousands of battles. I am trying to teach  it to them in a few tens or a couple hundred at most. 

1) Can you elaborate on this, please. While the map is loading I see the different tank setups on both teams and make a plan on what to do to counter their advantage / on how to leverage my teams advantage (for example: a position / more medium tanks or more heavies). I will not have a finished plan yet though,but  I finish it including my spawn position / team spawnpoint. On maps like for example Erlenberg I will wait for the countdown to finish and watch where my team deploys and include that info into making my plan. Does this cover your way of making a plan "right away before battle starts" or is there more to it?

 

2) You definitely need voice comms for that, whenever I try helping my toonmates out with this, it simply costs too much time and gets me sometimes killed because I focus too much on the typing... RIP me. Maybe the only real option is to show your toonmate the right position in a training room, but that stuff is time consuming.

 

3) I will usually lay out the general plan to my toonmates (when tooning with people below my own overall rating I will lead in most cases): That includes telling them where everyone goes to - that always includes using the word "please" - and also telling them what I expect the enemy to do/what we will do to counter it. So usually I will spam my teammates with the plan details at 15 seconds countdown left and usually that works out pretty good.

When I platoon with people clearly better than me, I like to have the same kind of guidance. If there is no communication it will be just 2/3 toonmates doing their own thing, which might be alright too in some battles, I prefer communication though.

 

1) Second, I'd strongly recommend voice comms if you want to teach.  People aren't always watching the chat window while they're focused on the battle.  It's kind of hard to type while controlling your vehicle as well.  Speaking allows you to give constant guidance, and correct small errors before they compound into large errors. 

 

2) Third, and this may be the most difficult for you, is to realize that many people have played the game a long time, and have years of experience telling them how to play.  It may be wrong.  It may simply be different.  Regardless, there are no mind readers in the game.

 

1) Platooning with people who tunnelvision too much and therefore don't read chat in critical situations are giving me headaches. I myself check chat every 5 seconds at least, same as minimap and my surroundings. I have a hard time dealing with people who don't do that, because neglecting chat destroys our communication. With voice comms there is the "problem" that people tend to feel like they have to talk, for example grunting or shouting "omg fucking arty" when they get killed or even shouting a lot in general when there is annoying stuff happening in the game. I really don't like that part, I enjoy the tactical options it makes possible though.

 

2) I think that depends on the character of the person you are dealing with. If a better player tells me how to approach a situation differently I will generally listen and try to do it (got my 3 years tanking experience). The people that tend not to follow these calls are usually pretty stubborn anyway, so the problem lies within the human and you can't really do much about that as the mentor.

[Garbad 10,517]

Also, what are stupid tanks? I see you send out 7 and pref 8s, are they somehow worse then 9s?

STA.  AT15.  etc.  I actually rage sold my 7 last night anyhow.  Limited 8, stronks, and 8/9/10 for me from here out.

[Getsome 431]

You can teach a player to be better, or you can teach a player how to get better.  One of these is more practical than the other.

 

/I think that makes sense...

 

When folk show up in my casual clan, I try to suggest that we spend some time (20 mins or so) with them in a tier 4, and me in a KV variant.  I reference tank inspector, and show them camo mechanics and spotting range exploitation, and we do a bit of sidescraping.  We talk briefly about RNG and why arty is shit, and then I mostly ignore them for a few months.

 

Most of them now have 1k+ WN8.  All I had to do was show them the metagame, "How to not do the same stupid shit twice," and they play that game out on their own whenever it pops up.  Nothing teaches like experience.

[Fluffenthumper 12]

I really think that when you are looking at the range from blue to purple to dark purple you start dealing with a certain required level of natural affinity for this type of game.

 

By the point of blue, the player generally can control a tank about as well as it can be controlled for the most part.  Or at least they are close.  The problem becomes their ability to make quick assessments and act pro-actively, not re-actively.  Situational awareness.  The ability to play for a while without losing emotional control and going tilt.  These types of things.  Some people are wired better than others to be business managers, or scientists, or artists.  Likewise, some people are just wired to be better at video games.  That limit might be blue for one person, or light purple for another.  It might be higher than someone thinks it is.  But it is there, nonetheless.

 

I'm not sure I believe that can be taught.  There's a reason that some players have such an easy time doing it, and others work so hard only to ever come close.

 

Improvement is always possible, but I just don't think you can teach something like natural affinity for video games.

 

You can teach positions, and how to be aggressive, etc.  But don't blame yourself when you run into a wall trying to teach people who just can't seem to go that last 10%.

[Trobs 670]

STA.  AT15.  etc.  I actually rage sold my 7 last night anyhow.  Limited 8, stronks, and 8/9/10 for me from here out.

 

STA is pretty terrible. i don't know how people enjoy it. It's like the IP but without any armor at all and I swear it's slower.

 

 

 

I feel like a bit of an oddity. I don't stat pad at all, I play what might be considered padding tanks (I'm seriously terrible with the T62a), but I don't pad. It isn't in my nature to sit back. I want to be in the front guiding the flow of the battle with my positioning and firepower. Maybe it makes me a bad unicum for not wanting to push my stats up higher, but I want to win more than get deeper purple.

[MaxL_1023 1,295]

STA.  AT15.  etc.  I actually rage sold my 7 last night anyhow.  Limited 8, stronks, and 8/9/10 for me from here out.

Thankfully I have the STB unlocked. No more shit map grinds!

Also thanks everyone for the feed back. I will elaborate on my thought process later today.

[SlyGambit 163]

I've had a couple people give me brief lessons. Less mentoring than tips and tricks.  I've thought about what I'd want out of a mentor along with the realization that it's unlikely I'll find one due to my schedule and the commitment it would take from the other person to do it the right way.   

 

I'd want them to start by identying any serious gaps in basic play. Focus initially on the basic stuff like bad hull down positions, sidescraping, bush sniping, target selection, ammo selection, etc. The more I've watched purples play on streams the more I realize that the reason they're able to produce more consistent results is because they have a better understanding of the mechanics. Any dark purple will be able to improve the play of any blue/green/teal regardless of playstyle just by spending some time on mechanics.  This isn't really 'mentoring' but it's the best way to start the process.

 

In order to successfully mentor someone instead of just helping them out you need to have similar playstyles. Look through some popular tanks at the same tier and make sure that you and the prospect like the same tanks. That'll tell you that you have close enough mindsets that you're probably going to be compatible. IE. Cromwell/E8. IS3 or T32. IS7 or E100. T57 or 50b. T62a or 140. Batchat or Leo. If you don't have similar mindsets I just don't think they're going to pick up on the things your'e talking about that are just intuitive to you and not teachable. They still might not be able to even if you share a similar mindset but it would seem more likely that they'll have the same learned intuition on actions to take at the start of battles and in the middle of engagements. You aren't going to be able to change the way someone plays this game with just a few hours of help but you can make their style of play work better.

 

Platooning by itself, in my experience, is not that helpful. I really think that live replay reviews with comms are the best way to help identify and fix both mechanical issues and decision making throughout the course of a battle. Just like pro football players sit down together the Monday after a game and watch tape you need to sit down after a battle and walk through to find anything that can be corrected. But platooning is a lot more fun.

[TheMarine0341 4,973]

Speaking strictly from a coaches (wrestling) and instructor (firearms), its one thing to know what to do:

Go here: shoot there: etc

 

versus WHY you're going to that position with tank X:

the camo permits you to get shots while unseen, able to go hull down in your medium much easier, etc: Why is this spot, why is this deployment, why this area, etc: is valuable. 

[Dlur 2,350]

I've platooned with you a fair bit.  I think that I've learned quite a bit from you.  One of the first things I learned was to not try to do what you're doing.  I am fully aware that I don't possess and am unlikely to possess the fine/twitch motor skills to brawl the way you do or be as aggressive as you are. I don't react fast enough.  I can't track as many objects (enemy tanks) as you can and I can't keep my hull angled in relation to multiple opponents the way you can.  World of Tanks is actually the first graphical computer game I've played.  Before this I played MUDs for decades.  I was "deep purple" at DurisMud (full PvP pkill MUD).  I can type fast, and I can read faster.  But so far that hasn't really translated into ability in WoT.

 

The 2nd thing I learned was to not camp and snipe.  I learned that I can be aggressive, or at least support your aggression and help with area denial by being in the right position.  It doesn't work every time for me depending on the tanks we're playing and who else is in the platoon.  But I've learned the value of area denial, early damage, early aggression, and multiplying our forces and taking out isolated enemies.

 

I've also learned that I make a lot of mistakes.  Often times they aren't huge glaring errors, but just a combination of a bunch of small things that add up.  I mean, I know I'm making errors in my gameplay or strategy because I'm not winning 80% of my games, but it's often difficult for me to see my own faults.  

 

I've also learned that when I do make an error and we lose the match the error was made in that you will speak up, and it will be blunt and perhaps unpleasant.  I do wish you'd point out some of the smaller things even when we do win.  Maybe even point out when someone does something well every now and then.  I've also learned that when I get a couple talking-tos in a platoon session I'm probably better off dropping out of the platoon, reflecting on how to do better next time, and then going to do something else for a while.  Once I fuck up a few times it seems to just keep happening and I find it difficult to break out of that sometimes so it's easier to just take a break.

 

At the end of the day I'm not sure why I ever added you to my friends list in the first place.  Probably because other players who I admired for their very strong gameplay spoke highly of you and said that the MaxL method of becoming a unicum is what worked best for them (ie being yelled at so many times for every fuckup they made that they worked hard to stop fucking up so they didn't get yelled at, as much...basically attempting to achieve wnMAX).  I accidentally sent out a mass platoon invite one day to my whole friend list and you accepted.  I was surprised because I was pretty sure you'd quit the game (just came back it turns out) and I was also a bit scared.  But regardless I'm glad, and I think I'm a better player for having met you even if I'm still not as good as I could be or as good as you might think I should be

[MaxL_1023 1,295]

I have been trying to reduce the venom of my complaints - the reason I quit for a year was because I felt my emotional health was starting to be compromised. Back at that point, half of my games were in ultra platoons with 3 dark purples - we were unhappy if we did not have a night at 90% WR. 

 

At some point I will get voice comms set up - at that point I should be able to help more effectively. 

 

I don't like reviewing replays because I have noticed that very few players can effectively learn from it. They try to gulp down a large amount of "skill" at once, then in a pressure situation it overwhelms them. I find the best way to learn is by bits and pieces through experience. 

 

I will try to complement more - I admit I am a bit jaded because I instinctively hold everyone to an "infinite standard." I expect to carry every game, and am angry when I don't. It is not as bad as a year ago (why I can play again) but I need to remember that it took a lot of work to get to that point.

 

I was pretty damn bad when I started playing tanks - sometimes I forget just how bad I was. I honestly am not sure when I reached unicum status, but I know that I never got invites from the server top until I was getting close enough to have tanks with similar levels of play. Chances are a lot of you are better then I give you credit for. 

[Deusmortis 4,618]

 

I've loved and hated playing with you, Max, and had to come to the sad conclusion that I am a *worse* player when we are platooned together, because I'm constantly trying to support you to do things that I don't understand, and as a result potato far too often. I think that voice comms would really help you get your ideas across to platoon mates (if they can get past the Newfie dialect)

 

You're not alone in that assessment.  I feel like I'm attempting a completely alien play style, and tend to do poorly personally.  We still win 80%+, so I suppose I'm not dragging the team down, but my numbers fall below what I would consider acceptable for myself.  

 

Of course, I've plateaued at my current style of play (my recent and overall are effectively the same), so I'll need to learn these new methods if I want to advance.

 

 

 

1) Platooning with people who tunnelvision too much and therefore don't read chat in critical situations are giving me headaches. I myself check chat every 5 seconds at least, same as minimap and my surroundings. I have a hard time dealing with people who don't do that, because neglecting chat destroys our communication. With voice comms there is the "problem" that people tend to feel like they have to talk, for example grunting or shouting "omg fucking arty" when they get killed or even shouting a lot in general when there is annoying stuff happening in the game. I really don't like that part, I enjoy the tactical options it makes possible though.

 

2) I think that depends on the character of the person you are dealing with. If a better player tells me how to approach a situation differently I will generally listen and try to do it (got my 3 years tanking experience). The people that tend not to follow these calls are usually pretty stubborn anyway, so the problem lies within the human and you can't really do much about that as the mentor.

 

1.  I can understand that point.  My issue, however, lies in my approach to the game for the last 4 years.  I barely platoon.  Easily 95% solo throughout live.  Even recently, when I've been deliberately seeking more platoons, VBA still reports my solo rate is over 80%.  As a result, most of what I see in chat is mindless pubbie drivel.  Watching chat has never been a priority, and is the first thing to fade from my attention when I'm trying to effectively angle my heavy against 4 enemies.  

 

2.  I tend to listen too.  It was late at night when I made that post, and didn't get my meaning across with this point.  People are going to do things differently than you expect.  Maybe they don't see what you see.  Maybe they have a different plan.  Maybe that plan is good, maybe it is shit.  You can't simply expect someone to play the exact way you expect.  I'll gladly follow guidance, just don't be surprised if I read and react to a situation differently without that guidance.

[Dlur 2,350]

I get the venom part sort of.  I mean, I'm in IT so to me 99.9999% of the people I work with are fucking idiots because they don't get technology, security, or basic problem solving the way I do.  But in reality they aren't really fucking idiots.  I mean you generally don't become a C-level employee by being a complete and total moron.  They just aren't good at IT.  So it's important to my sanity to put the shortcomings of pretty much everyone around me as it relates to technology not as character flaws and baseline mental retardation requiring an emotional response, but rather they just aren't great at one subject area.  Their shortcomings in technology not only provide me with a great job at great pay because they are incapable of doing it, but also provides me with opportunities to excel by teaching and relating to others through various means.  And a teaching method or way to relate and speak on common terms that works well with one person might not even apply to another person.  So I need to learn their language and figure out how to translate what I'm saying into something meaningful to them.