Following the Roadmap: Voting to Test our Proposed APHE Shell Changes

[Panter2005]

@nerfthat213_

its still your bias towards people who voted for that specific reason, that doesn’t change anything

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.

@nerfthat213_

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.

So you just don’t care.

@nerfthat213_

but I believe it’s not fallacious either.

a link for you

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.

[Panter2005]

@WieseAufmWald

You are biased too, don’t even pretend that you aren’t.

What’s my bias?

[Iowa298]

The council has decided

[ZE4L0T]

@Panter2005

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.

Why shouldn’t grind be considered? If Panthers and Tigers are clapping everything at their BR is everyone else just supposed to die and be happy that they are ginding the tree at a slower pace? There are multiple factors affecting grind including things like actions, metas, map size, match length, teammates, BRs, fun, etc., not just multipliers. It’s okay to consider other issues caused by the changes.

@Panter2005

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.

How have you “tried your best”? Have you put aside everything you want from the game and divined from the ether what changes will make the game the most … what? Fun? Financially successful? Popular? Realistic?

See? It’s impossible to be unbiased if there isn’t agreement on what the ultimate objective/balance of the game is. You have an opinion that the game should look a certain way which differs from ours, therefore you have a bias. That’s not even touching your preferred nation (which is pretty clear based on your most played vehicles), gamemode, playstyle, etc. etc.

[bvvd妈妈漂亮的花束]

@Panter2005

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 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.

you are favouring realism over everything else. In your mind nothing else matters, as long as realism is achieved.

@Panter2005

So you just don’t care.

I do care, just not the way you do, you’re making an arguement in bad faith

@Panter2005

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.

Except it is, everybody inherently has biases. However not everybody steals. You can justify having biases, because it is quite literally normal to have them.

[Weavis69]

So they are going to test something that is a bit more realistic to the actual ballistics of the shell?

[Panter2005]

@ZE4L0T

Why shouldn’t grind be considered? If Panthers and Tigers are clapping everything at their BR is everyone else just supposed to die and be happy that they are ginding the tree at a slower pace?

Lmao.

@ZE4L0T

There are multiple factors affecting grind including things like actions, metas, map size, match length, teammates, BRs, fun, etc., not just multipliers. It’s okay to consider other issues caused by the changes.

These factors affect gameplay much more than grind. The end goal is to have fun playing the game, not grinding. Would you put your team’s and enemy’s spawns 100m apart for maximized grind?

@ZE4L0T

Have you put aside everything you want from the game and divined from the ether what changes will make the game the most … what? Fun? Financially successful? Popular? Realistic?

See? It’s impossible to be unbiased if there isn’t agreement on what the ultimate objective/balance of the game is. You have an opinion that the game should look a certain way which differs from ours, therefore you have a bias.

These are preferences, not biases. Learn the difference:

@Panter2005

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.

[Panter2005]

Not ballistics, but the post-pen effects. I recommend you to just read the 1st post of this thread or the article on War Thunder’s website.

[bvvd妈妈漂亮的花束]

@Panter2005

These are preferences, not biases. Learn the difference:

no lol, you prefer realism, but your preference for realism influences your judgement in the vote. ALL of those examples are infact bias, because you are quite literally letting your opinion on xyz influence your vote on zyx.
Furthermore, you do not lay out the facts evenly. You show a clear inclination to certain aspects over the other. This is bias, you are not impartial to the facts.

[MokaMoki]

@ZE4L0T

Why shouldn’t grind be considered? If Panthers and Tigers are clapping everything at their BR is everyone else just supposed to die and be happy that they are ginding the tree at a slower pace? There are multiple factors affecting grind including things like actions, metas, map size, match length, teammates, BRs, fun, etc., not just multipliers. It’s okay to consider other issues caused by the changes.

Yeah, the second video on the whole proposal from The European Canadian was along these lines. Very much a “sucks to suck, bro” reasoning. “People like to bring up the Jumbo, and how this will just be ruined by this change. And well…yeah. It will suffer from this change if pushed through. It sucks but like…it’s just unfortunate.”

The man quite literally pointed out why there’s opposition to it. A whole slew of vehicles will be up-ended with this change, and a lot of them won’t be good. A lot of them are in the range of vehicles I enjoy. I absolutely don’t want to see this go through. I don’t want the test because I don’t want the change.

[Panter2005]

What? This vote is literally all about realism vs fun + discussion about impact on balance of both of these options. How is realism a bias here?

Biases != preferences.

[bvvd妈妈漂亮的花束]

[markimash]

Seeing the jumbo go down in br would be nice to see though.

[Panter2005]

Jumbo will not become unplayable at all.

[Weavis69]

Yes, that would still be the ballistics of the shell.

[A_Cute_Chihuahua]

• This objectively is a nerf to APHE (the part we are voting on specifically).

• That means even if it is balanced by BR etc, it will still increase time to kill and SLOW down the game (relative to a “Yes” vote, since both already include the forced changes, not relative to now).

• Slower gameplay is boring and less fun. So “No”

[MokaMoki]

I don’t necessarily disagree but we have zero evidence as of now that they would move it down from 5.7 to what? 5.3 where it will see see Tigers and be far less effective or maybe 5.0 so it then gets to club 4.0s? And we find ourselves back at the start of this whole discussion of “I don’t like this change. So I wont be voting for the test”.

Maybe they don’t move it at all? Maybe it stays at a BR where it can’t really do much of anything so then what? It just becomes a roadblock on the tech tree you have to slog through before you get to the next thing? I’m sorry, but I’m not for that. I’m not up for finding out. I’d rather the Abrams armor issue get revisited. I rather see what’s going to come of the research bonuses no one liked. I’d rather have bomber cockpits. Because finally getting a cockpit that isn’t just filled with a matte green wall with six or even dials also helps with “realism”.

[HMSD33Dauntless]

I would far rather have a time to kill, especially in a vehicle type that’s literally called “tanks”. At the moment times to kill are 0 or close to it because most APHE shots are instant kills. If they don’t instantly kill you, they’ll certainly take most of your crews and modules and leave you seriously disadvantaged until you can spawn in something else. The idea of having WT being a rapid TTK game is boring.

[BasherBenDawg8]

~50% of the community voted yes to the change, nothing is decided yet either as the vote isn’t even over.

Please note:
1: a brand new account can vote, meaning people can potentially bot the vote
2: in less than 2 hours the vote went from 65-35 to 50-50 quite fast and unnaturally… perhaps point #1 has something to do with it…
3: A Russian Content Creator urged his fan base to vote no and told them to act on it. Don’t know how gaijin feels about that, but it seems a bit problematic if you ask me.
4: Multiple people seem confused about if it’s a Test or the vote will decide if it’s fully added or not. Gaijin had to make a whole post clarifying that it was indeed a test. I have a feeling that due to the large amount of misunderstandings taking place due to gaijins lack or clarification, this could result in them not taking into account a decent sum of the “No” votes.
5: nearly half the playerbase voted yes to a test, and likely gaijin will go through with it anyway since the vote is so close and the test won’t cause any problems to the game overall, as it’s simply just a test.

[MokaMoki]

@BasherBenDawg8

1: a brand new account can vote, meaning people can potentially bot the vote

There has been zero evidence that is occurring. We have zero data on our side to back this up.

@BasherBenDawg8

2: in less than 2 hours the vote went from 65-35 to 50-50 quite fast and unnaturally… perhaps point #1 has something to do with it…

Again, you have no proof. Queue the image of the 2020 US Presidential election that so accurately and hilariously fits here. We have no evidence that has occurred.

@BasherBenDawg8

3: A Russian Content Creator urged his fan base to vote no and told them to act on it. Don’t know how gaijin feels about that, but it seems a bit problematic if you ask me.

A singular content creator has that much pull? Highly doubt it. Also, as people have pointed out, there are noticeable differences in the number of voters on the RU side versus this side. It’s also worth pointing out that several prominent English CC’s have made videos saying they want to see the changes and yet their comment sections are mostly negative/against the change. So on cannot simply say content creators are influencing this vote. In the three discord communities I’ve seen this come up, the majority opinion has been against it as well.

There has also been enough time since people here first screamed interference that if “yes” was truly more popular, you’d have seen a shift back to “yes” being up. That has not been the case.

@BasherBenDawg8

4: Multiple people seem confused about if it’s a Test or the vote will decide if it’s fully added or not. Gaijin had to make a whole post clarifying that it was indeed a test. I have a feeling that due to the large amount of misunderstandings taking place due to gaijins lack or clarification, this could result in them not taking into account a decent sum of the “No” votes.

Maybe, but if so, that’s on Gaijin. They could have easily closed this poll and relaunched another if that was the case. And again, there has still been a fair amount of time for more yes votes to come in.

@BasherBenDawg8

5: nearly half the playerbase voted yes to a test, and likely gaijin will go through with it anyway since the vote is so close and the test won’t cause any problems to the game overall, as it’s simply just a test.

This would invite a lot of backlash. What is the point of a poll if you disregard the results anyway? And it’s honesty a bit wild people are hoping for that. Additionally, it’s not a simple thing by their own words. They stated in this exact announcement post that setting up an event would take a consider effort which is why the vote for a test is even happening. For someone claiming people didn’t read or understand the prompt, you are sort of incriminating yourself for the very same thing here. You should be hoping Gaijin respects the results of the vote. If “yes” wins, then it wins. If “no” remains the dominant decision, then it should be respected.