I wouldn’t say the disagreements that we have in the game are just minor disagreements. They tend to feel like the other side doesn’t want you to exist.
When I like heavy tanks and the opposing side wants heavy tanks to be penetrated with ease, or in cases like Maus they would rather have it literally removed, than put up with balancing it, then how am I supposed to handle that disagreement.
Whenever I think there was a change that was unfair to the other side, I tend to point it out. Especially when I often have played on the other side or want to play it, even though I play one nation more than the others.
They tend to feel like the other side doesn’t want you to exist.
What? I’ve been having discussions on this game for years and I’ve never felt this way even when the person is hurling the most disrespectful things in the book. I think you might want to remove your own emotion from the discussion if you feel this way.
When I like heavy tanks and the opposing side wants heavy tanks to be penetrated with ease, or in cases like Maus they would rather have it literally removed, than put up with balancing it, then how am I supposed to handle that disagreement.
You can start handling it by realizing everyone has an opinion? By not getting emotionally invested? Just think “Okay, they think that’s the way it should be, cool.” The Maus debate is a hilarious one because the best way to fix it is to keep it exactly where it is.
they are not, however your tastes lead you to have a bias;
the fact that you PREFER realism, leads you to be biased towards it when it comes down to making a decision e.g. this vote
You just refuse to accept that preference is different from bias.
It’s just circular logic at this point.
“Everyone is biased, because everyone has a preference, and everyone’s preference is due to the fact that they are biased.”
you have it backwards, everyone is biased because they have preferences, I’m not arguing this anymore.
Just because you cannot understand basic english concepts, does not make you unbiased
Okay but quick question. What is the point of meticulously accurately modeling a vehicle then putting it in a completely make believe game mode with made up parameters?
That’s incorrect. In a question of taste, the subject only relies upon their own perception of goodness, not on an objective method of determining what is objectively good. It follows then that any subjective method which the subject uses must be proper. Therefore bias and preference are interchangeable in a question of taste, or, as I said at first, preference doesn’t exist in a question of taste.
I’m not a dev, you should ask them. It is however a game, and in my opinion, a game and its aspects should however be enjoyable, even to an extent to the cost of realism.
Voting no, because a few vehicles you like will benefit from this, is unfair to other voters.
The fact that a few vehicles will benefit from this change is not this change’s quality. Balance is a quality of this change, a few vehicles becoming better/staying better than the others isn’t.
It’s an objective fact that the taste of fruits is one of their qualities, but the fact that you are selling them isn’t. It’s a quality only for you, a bias.
Then Gaijin loses even more credibility. Why ever hold another vote again if you ignore the results and do it anyway. In every poll, vote, election ever, there are always people who are misinformed or uninformed. And how do you know if they voted in bad faith? It’s wild you are asking for Gaijin to just ignore the majority opinion. I would say that is “operating in bad faith”.
You are conflating two different ideas. Fruits have an objective chemical composition which means that when we eat them we experience taste, but which one tastes better is purely subjective.
Again, the evidence the Russian CC has had any effect on the vote is simply not there. Haven’t people pointed out time and time again the difference in votes between the Russian forum and the Eng?
You then name two other CC’s where one, Spookston, hasn’t made a singular video on it since the proposal was announced. Yes, Spookston has made videos about how he’s not a fan of APHE in its current state. But he hasn’t posted a video on it since it was announced. And the other made his a few days after the vote was put up.
So pray tell, how did they influence the vote?
For Oddbawz, he lays everything out in a fairly non bias manner. “This will make some vehicles significantly stronger, and others will become significantly weaker. If you’re voting yes just because you don’t want your cupola shot at, that’s fine. And if you’re voting no because you don’t want your favourite tank weakened, that’s also fine. The important thing is that we are getting a chance to vote”.
The European Canadian is for the change with a very “sucks to suck” argument.
Tankenstein is also for the change but gets people will vote no for the same reason Oddbawz points out.
Matdawg also made a video supporting the change and voting yes.
But when you look at their comment sections, a majority of the comments are against it. Even though the CC’s are for it.
Simply put, no. You are indeed wrong. CC’s are not influencing the outcome to any noticeable manner.
