Actually mentally unhinged take.
okay, then tell me how that is anything even remotely balanced. IKV 103 at 8.0? That’s just 100% the realism route and 0% the balance route. instead of 75% balance 25% realism you went “f*ck balance entirely and this tank in particular”
Fucking nonce stop talking about off topic concent or the Spanish authoristies wiill figure it out
APHE spanmmers outr.
How can they know if it’s fun or not, when they haven’t even tested it. Maybe they would like it. Maybe increased time to kill would be actually more fun and one shotting would be more rewarding.
Voting no for this reason is irrational fear. You’re so scared that you don’t even want to hear about it.
This is probably the worst reasoning I have ever heard. There are only 2 reasons why you would think this way.
You’re consumed by the snail
You focus so much on the grind, that you want changes that would improve the grind, even if they destroy the goal of the grind. Kind of like making money and forgetting how to spend it and have fun with it.
You’re incredibly selfish
You just want to get to higher tiers asap, where there is no APHE. You don’t care how these changes will impact gameplay at lower BRs, all you care about is how quickly you will be able to get through them.
You’ve just lost your credibility by admitting you’re biased. On top of that you see nothing wrong with it.
It’s morally understandable, but unacceptable as an argument. The only thing you prove is that the poll is compromised by personal biases and thus invalid.
IKV 103 at 8.0 would definitely not mean that. I won’t say why to not start an off-topic argument.
How can they know if it’s fun or not, when they haven’t even tested it. Maybe they would like it. Maybe increased time to kill would be actually more fun and one shotting would be more rewarding.
Voting no for this reason is irrational fear. You’re so scared that you don’t even want to hear about it.
Gaijin has made it pretty clear what the change will do. It’s not rocket science to make an educated assumption on how this will affect gameplay.
They’ve also made it extremely clear that this will take up a lot of development time (especially considering things like Volumetric and Hot Tracks, where many vehicles still lack one or the other). If there is a good chance that someone feels that they will not like this change in the end, why would they vote for a test? All that would be is just a waste of development time and frankly there are definitely other issues that I would rather have priority.
You’ve just lost your credibility by admitting you’re biased. On top of that you see nothing wrong with it.
It’s morally understandable, but unacceptable as an argument. The only thing you prove is that the poll is compromised by personal biases and thus invalid
They’re not even making an arguement here, they’re purely stating that their decision is influenced by some pre-existing bias (which is not a bad thing). Even you have made your decision on your own pre-existing biases.
Did you even read? He said he really likes 3.7-6.7 and doesn’t want Gaijin to F up the balance and make a bunch of vehicles unplayable.
Everyone is biased. Everyone can tell what you want and why. You’re not this passionate about this because you are just a passive observer. You have skin in the game, as it were.
Because they voted no. Either for the reasons I listed or their own. But insulting them because the vote isn’t going how you want it is childish at least.
It’s not a focus or obsession, but a realization of what War Thunder is; a F2P game that utilizes an inconvenient progression method as to incentivize players to spend money. And I can’t imagine wanting to play top tier but yet can’t afford premium time or a $75 Abrams. Enjoy the couple hundred hours to get there. Seeing people advocating for something that has any potential to increase the grind for anyone because your TTK has gone up is very selfish of me. Man, I’m just the worst aren’t I.
And I’m not racing to the top. I’ve been there. It’s not fun. Hence even the mentioning of the Abrams armor issue (the thing might as well be tissue paper) and why I said what range I enjoy. You must not have read that part but that’s okay, I forgive you.
Whether you think I’m a credible person or not, honesty…and respectfully, I don’t care. I mentioned why I voted no, which you can disagree with and it sounds like you do (which is fine). And pointed out a sort of disingenuous behavior to absolutely insult those who didn’t vote alongside how you did. Welcome to voting on literally anything. People will do it with as much or as little knowledge, comprehension, bias (personal or not) you could ever imagine.
You can make an educated guess, but that guess may be wrong. That’s what tests are for.
How is that not a bad thing?! Imagine that Gaijin is biased and purposefully makes one nation better than the others. Bias IS bad when discussing changes that impact balance. If your personal bias is one of the reasons you voted for a given option, it’s bad.
He also based his decision about changes that will impact the balance of these tiers on grind difficulty…
Grind is not a thing that you change through gameplay changes, you change grind by changing the RP cost, SL cost and rewards from battles.
That’s why I think it shouldn’t have been a vote. I try my best to not be biased, but everyone is subconsciously susceptible to personal biases. Most don’t even try.
Tell me, I’m really curious what you think.
I don’t understand.
You can make an educated guess, but that guess may be wrong. That’s what tests are for.
you have ignored the part where they claim it will take significant development time. Why would I vote for a test, that I do not want to see in the game, they develop it, then I just vote no again anyway. Its a big waste
How is that not a bad thing?!
because everyone is inherently biased, including you. The rest of this argument is a false equivalency and is an argument made in bad faith
“APHE fix would reduce skill.”
Green stars represent modules/crew.
Red stars are where you shoot to get closer to killing the tank (crew/ammo rack)
This is so backwards. The main goal of this change is to improve realism, effects on grind can be adjusted for. Grind is simply irrelevant to this discussion.
Because it’s a major change.
When you go to work you don’t go back and double check if you watered the plants, but you do go back and double check if you turned off the iron.
On top of that they will implement 2 major changes anyway, so it’s worth testing what will be the effect of the 3rd change. Maybe the 3rd change is necessary to not brake the game? You simply don’t know without testing.
That’s true, but it’s not a justification. Try to steal something and then tell the judge that others steal too.
This works only when the end justifies the means. Bias is not a worthy end.
I try my best not to be.
You can believe whatever you want.
This is so backwards. The main goal of this change is to improve realism, effects on grind can be adjusted for. Grind is simply irrelevant to this discussion.
Its a change to the game, which would effect gameplay. Every aspect that this changes is infact relevant to the discussion. Just because you believe that realism > every other aspect of the game does not make their train of thought backwards, maybe you reconsider your bias towards that.
Because it’s a major change.
And I, along with >50% of the community, do not want this change. We have no care for the ultimate result, so doing a test is not a valuable use of the dev’s time (in our opinion)
That’s true, but it’s not a justification. Try to steal something and then tell the judge that others steal too.
This works only when the end justifies the means. Bias is not a worthy end.
I beg you to stop making fallacies
I try my best not to be.
You can believe whatever you want.
I believe you’re not doing a good job and that you trying your best is just ignoring that they exist in the first place
But this is operating under the assumption or premise that Gaijin will indeed address those things post implementation. And yet, we have nothing to go off of even remotely indicating they will. Because again, look at their track record for things that happened/were introduced in just the last 12 months of this ten plus year old game. And it’s no irrelevant to me. It’s my reason why I said no. Please reread my first point, I’m against the entire change. You can disagree with that. That’s fine.
That I don’t want. And I’m being given an option to reduce time spent on it. So I voted accordingly.
I believe gameplay > grind and realism > grind.
In fact grind is one of the least important aspects to 99% of the changes you could come up with. The whole purpose of grind is to annoy you into spending money. Grind is a completely artificial issue that should be pretty much always negotiated with Gaijin separately.
It’s also not the kind of bias I was talking about, you either didn’t understand or don’t care.
You skipped this:
What fallacy did I make? Be specific.
I think that at least here:
there is nothing fallacious. Maybe you mean this:
but I believe it’s not fallacious either.
Because it will marginally impact grind. 99% of people didn’t even think of that, you’re the first person I see even mentioning this.
Gaijin would need to cross some kind of a line for players to boycott the game again. That’s the only realistic way the grind will be reduced.
You also skipped this:
In fact grind is one of the least important aspects to 99% of the changes you could come up with. The whole purpose of grind is to annoy you into spending money. Grind is a completely artificial issue that should be pretty much always negotiated with Gaijin separately.
Thats your opinion.
It’s also not the kind of bias I was talking about, you either didn’t understand or don’t care.
its still your bias towards people who voted for that specific reason, that doesn’t change anything
You skipped this:
I didn’t, its included in my statement, and does not affect the way I am voting. You can disagree, but that does not make me or anyone else’s opinion mean less.
but I believe it’s not fallacious either.
Except it will. If realism is going to mean I need to put more rounds on a target because the fragmentation system has completely changed, in this case a nerf, then I don’t want it. I think the current system works fine. I don’t want or support anything that will increase time-to-kill, result in more assists than kills, or increase the likelihood of kill stealing. I especially don’t want any ground work laid to justify the severe damage mechanic being added because, it is in my opinion, that would be used as a reason why. I just don’t want it.
Again, I don’t want this change. Two changes are being forced regardless of that. But I al being given the option to vote on a third change. Which is undeniably a nerf. I do not want that. I do not want Gaijin to spend time on it. So I voted no. Along with 52% of others.
Call me cynical, call me pessimistic, but if I’m being honest; I have a sinking feeling Gaijin is going to go through with the test anyways despite “no” being in the lead at the moment.
This is a game, therefore entertainment, therefore all opinions are subjective and everyone is biased, because different people find different things enjoyable and have different priorities.
You are biased too, don’t even pretend that you aren’t.
You didn’t understand. In this matter realism is a preference.
Imagine that for some reason there is a vote to save apples or oranges. For some reason you can only have one of them, keeping both is impossible.
If you vote to save apples, because you like apples more, then that’s a preference.
If you vote to save apples, because you are selling apples and not saving them would kill your business, then that’s bias.
Voting for testing of the APHE change, because of improved realism, is a preference.
Voting against APHE change, because you like reliably killing tanks in one shot with it, is a preference.
Voting against APHE change, because your favourite vehicles would be worse because of it, is bias.
I don’t even know how to fit grind into this comparison, it’s just irrelevant lmao.
So you just don’t care.
It’s not false equivalence, it’s a correctly contructed analogy.
The point was that if you do a bad thing (stealing/biased vote), you can’t justify it by proving that other people do it too. It doesn’t make you not guilty, they are just as guilty as you.
You thought it’s fallacious, probably because you thought I’m implying that stealing something is as morally bad as biased voting in a video game.
A false equivalence would be something like this:
Biased voting in a video game is bad, stealing is also bad, therefore if you commit either of those, you should go to jail.