Jump to content
Xen

Manual Adjustment of Special Tanks

  

70 members have voted

  1. 1. Have read and understood Xen's post prior to casting your vote?

  2. 2. Do you approve of the countermeasure (manual adjustment) as proposed by Xen?

  3. 3. Do you approve of Xen's definition of what kind of tanks shall be eligible for manual adjustment?

    • Yes, fully.
    • Yes, partly (please elaborate).
    • No, not at all (please elaborate).


Recommended Posts

Just so people know what they are voting on, I suggest you post a complete list of the tanks that meet your criteria for manual adjustment by your purple panel.

 

Include tankid per API as names are similar. 

 

If you have the time, you might also comment on each on what's wrong with their expected values so voters can see the scale of the problem.

 

 

...

 

Your response seems suspiciously defensive again. Or maybe I am just misinterpreting.

 

 

As I have stated in the OP, asking us to play our tanks more is definitely not a solution, it is avoiding the fucking problem.

 

24 hours ago I asked you to provide a list from the API of the 'special' tanks you are referring to, that require the manual adjustments you are advocating.

 

Nothing seen so far.

 

Lets see if we can get past that babystep in the next 24 hours

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 hours ago I asked you to provide a list from the API of the 'special' tanks you are referring to, that require the manual adjustments you are advocating.

 

Nothing seen so far.

 

Lets see if we can get past that babystep in the next 24 hours

 

It isn't really a task that requires extraordinary intellect, so why do you wait for me to do it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't really a task that requires extraordinary intellect, so why do you wait for me to do it?

Why should he do it for you? He isn't the one who demands this change and he already has enough work with WN8/9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should he do it for you? He isn't the one who demands this change and he already has enough work with WN8/9.

 

At the end of the day he's the guy who has to deal with all this bullshit anyway since he does the final updates. I'm just a user making a suggestion. Besides, I have no idea where to get the fucking tank IDs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides, I have no idea where to get the fucking tank IDs.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13tbm32fH7kPK9Dxv6937j1C7lSaGkH3yJ_svjgel-WA/edit?usp=sharing hf

 

PS you want the compDescr column

Edited by peregrine
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A quick scan of the list would bring following tanks, without looking at current expected stats, pure rarity and similairity (there might be more, like some tier 2-3 tanks, but havent checked those)
 
1: Type 62, its an much worse wz-131
2: T23E3, Comet / T20 clone + rare + different userbase but what numbers?
3: Object 907, give it obj 140 numbers, closest in terms of hard stats?
4: M60, give it M48?
5: Pz.Kpfw. V/IV (A), no discussion here imo, tanks are 100% copy, so expected stats should be 100% equal
6: M6A2E1 (enough data for this?)
7: T95E2 (reward tank, enough data for this?)
8: Pz.Kpfw. IV hydrostat. ultra rare tank (?) enough data for this?, else avg of Panzer 3/4 and Panzer IV, its a mixture of both afterall
9: M4A3E8 Fury, should be equal to E8, its the exact same tank (a bit worse actually)
10: T-34-85M, this tank is not for sale at this moment?, also is there enough data?
11: Object 260 mod. 1945, ultra rare tank + highest skill users, IS7 numbers?
12: VK 72.01 (K), rare tank, a worst copy of E100, stats should be equal to E100 at best?
13: T-55A, at best a T54, stats should be equal, if not a bit lower, certainly not higher
14: T95E6 (what is this?)
 
Nr 5 and 9, Fury and Pnzr V (A) should be made equal, perhaps dump all data together and make new expected values, but there is simply zero justification to give them different numbers.
Many other tanks are also ``of``, and per tank a solution should be ``found`` (but here xen hes solution should be ok)
 
And otherwise, like Deus said, dont include any of the special tanks for WN8, some tanks will still be on the edge, Type 62 is not sold, but its not that rare, so should it be excluded yes no? and if its included, what stats? the real numbers are wrong, since the tank is plain worse as wz-131...
 
I myself would say, ``numbers where possible, manual imput where needed``, and limit it as much possible, so never edit normal tanks or premium tanks which have been in store rof long time
 
ps: and i also like folter hes suggestion, of adjusting population for lights and arty, this would stop punishing arty players and it would end light tank padding, while punishing arty is ofc always good, doing it via WN8 is a bit ``lame``

 

 

 

Had to upvote this one

 

 

 

24 hours ago I asked you to provide a list from the API of the 'special' tanks you are referring to, that require the manual adjustments you are advocating.

 

Nothing seen so far.

 

Lets see if we can get past that babystep in the next 24 hours

There's a start.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a start.

In the world of WN8 there are many starts, the tough part is the finish. Peregrine and GehatkeMolen have provided very helpful inputs to the OP, so now we shall see what the OP will produce as a result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the world of WN8 there are many starts, the tough part is the finish. Peregrine and GehatkeMolen have provided very helpful inputs to the OP, so now we shall see what the OP will produce as a result.

 

So, you want me to put a shitload of effort into something that you will disregard anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the world of WN8 there are many starts, the tough part is the finish. Peregrine and GehatkeMolen have provided very helpful inputs to the OP, so now we shall see what the OP will produce as a result.

And why can't that list be used? Why should Xen have to go through and spend that much time doing it if somebody else already did? I'm confident that if he went through and did it he'd have a very similar list to that of GehatkeMolen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ID's of tanks certainly in question:

 

15617 - Obj 907 

58369 - Obj 260

15905 - M60

60945 - T 55A

11809 - T23E3

54033 - Pz.Kpfw. V/IV Alpha

58641 - VK 72.01 (K)

56609 - T28 Concept

60689 - StuG IV

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stay on topic. There doesn't need to be a comprehensive list of tanks which needs adjustment until we can figure out how we can adjust them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stay on topic. There doesn't need to be a comprehensive list of tanks which needs adjustment until we can figure out how we can adjust them. 

 

24 hours ago I asked you to provide a list from the API of the 'special' tanks you are referring to, that require the manual adjustments you are advocating.

 

Nothing seen so far.

 

Lets see if we can get past that babystep in the next 24 hours

 

Also, I don't really see what more there is to discuss. The best solution right now to set a value equal to the tank of closest comparison, sitting around talking shit is just wasting time right now, lets get the huge errors minimized and then we can talk about accuracy later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ID's of tanks certainly in question:

 

15617 - Obj 907 

58369 - Obj 260

15905 - M60

60945 - T 55A

11809 - T23E3

54033 - Pz.Kpfw. V/IV Alpha

58641 - VK 72.01 (K)

56609 - T28 Concept

60689 - StuG IV

 

 

to complete PityFools list:

 

58625 - ISU-130

54017 - KV-220
51201 - KV-220 Beta-Test
56097 - M4A3E8 Fury

52513 - M6A2E1

55057 - Pz.Kpfw. IV hydrostat.

53793 - T95E2
55841 - T95E6
      49 - Type 59
    305 - Type 62
 
59665 - Grosstraktor - Krupp
58113 - T-34-85M
 
maybe:
    817 - WZ-111
 
That should be every tank with limited availability.
 
I think most of the low tier premium might suffer from the reverse, in that they are only played by relatively bad players.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, don't act like children. 

 

It is very obvious by now WHICH tanks we have been talking about. Most of us would have been grateful and happy already if only a quick preliminary adjustment had been made to the infamous Object 907. 

I am sure you, who deals with the development of WN8/9 know best and has the fastest access to figure out what the necessary IDs are and what to change.

 

If you sincerely need the community to help, then send out PMs and give some advice how to look for information and help surely will be given. Just please, stop the bickering. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I can see anything useful coming out of this is for me to publish a list of tanks where I have only sparse data, and as a result the WN8 values are currently estimated, or have been calculated but with wider confidence intervals than we'd like.

 

If I took the time to do that - in a new thread in Maths Corner - can we all start over and have a rational debate over what the values are / should be for each? Let it run for a while and see if we can get some consensus? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So why exactly did we take the time and effort to compile the list?

 

edit:

and no, sparse data is only half the problem. We have highly biased populations for the campaign reward tanks, the IM reward tanks ( esp the latter ones), old premiums, preorder tanks and tanks with limited availability like bundled tanks.

Edited by peregrine
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I can see anything useful coming out of this is for me to publish a list of tanks where I have only sparse data, and as a result the WN8 values are currently estimated, or have been calculated but with wider confidence intervals than we'd like.

 

If I took the time to do that - in a new thread in Maths Corner - can we all start over and have a rational debate over what the values are / should be for each? Let it run for a while and see if we can get some consensus? 

 

Sounds reasonable. But please make sure it is posted where everyone can actually participate. I realized the other day I couldn't respond to some of the topics, like wn9 development. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I can see anything useful coming out of this is for me to publish a list of tanks where I have only sparse data, and as a result the WN8 values are currently estimated, or have been calculated but with wider confidence intervals than we'd like.

 

If I took the time to do that - in a new thread in Maths Corner - can we all start over and have a rational debate over what the values are / should be for each? Let it run for a while and see if we can get some consensus? 

Edit: Yes go ahead and do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Locking this thread on the basis that all discussions on this topic will now take place here: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I can see anything useful coming out of this is for me to publish a list of tanks where I have only sparse data, and as a result the WN8 values are currently estimated, or have been calculated but with wider confidence intervals than we'd like.

If I took the time to do that - in a new thread in Maths Corner - can we all start over and have a rational debate over what the values are / should be for each? Let it run for a while and see if we can get some consensus?

Seconded. ( ty pity )

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...