No, I’m saying that your argument about Thunderskill being invalid is invalid in itself. Let’s review the argument:
Spoiler cause it's long
You - Thunderskill is irrelevant since only Gaijin has the true stats
Me - The sample size is larger than most studies and is most definitely large enough to be statistically significant
You - Thunderskill is unreliable because the sample “only” accounts for people who go out of their way to register with the website, who generally care more about their performance. Meanwhile, Gaijin has all the data.
Me - I mentioned its massive sample size because of this, and refute that Thunderskill shouldn’t be used (especially with its large sample size). I also refute the idea that the balancing on a vehicle’s actual performance is being done effectively by Gaijin (if at all).
You - Sample size doesn’t matter if it is biased to begin with
Me - Thunderskill already takes skill into account, and there are some statistics that are the same regardless of skill. Regardless, you can normalize a “biased sample”
You - You cannot change a biased sample
Me - You can normalize a biased sample
You - So I guess you know what the normal data is, then, so why don’t you prove it?
Me - You can go off of the skill distribution of other videogames, or just use the general normal distribution, which are both common avenues for normalizing data in the statistical sciences
You - That isn’t evidence, prove you know what normal is
Me - I’m not going to write an academic paper for free
You - So you don’t know what you’re talking about?
TL;DR: Me not wanting to write an academic paper for free does not mean there are not statistical methods to normalize data.
And? I obviously didn’t start playing yesterday, and I’ve gotten to 10.7 in Air (US tech tree).
Bombload =/= a vehicle’s entire performance
Cool, but the vast majority of people disagree with you.
Yes you have just summarised that you don’t know what you’re talking about, have done no research and have no evidence to prove anything you said and you do not know what the normal is. The facts stand at:
Thunderskill is widely accepted as not entirely reliable, gaijin themselves have said so in the past too because of biased sampling.
Only gaijin have the unbiased stats.
You have nothing to prove otherwise.
That’s where we are at. The rest of it just you presenting your opinion. Which is fine, until you start trying to claim that it is objective when you’re asking for vehicles to move BR based on your opinion. It is not.
Thunderskill is thought of as unreliable, but there’s no justification for this. Gaijin would of course want to say it is unreliable, because they don’t base their balancing off of a vehicle’s actual performance.
Only gaijin have the unbiased stats.
I’ve already shown that you can normalize data, how you could do that, but I’m not going to write a thesis for you for free.
Thunderskill is thought of as unreliable, but there’s no justification for this.
Did you just forget the entire conversation that took place? There is justification for it, we’ve been over this already.
Gaijin would of course want to say it is unreliable, because they don’t base their balancing off of a vehicle’s actual performance.
Do you have a single shred of evidence for your tinfoil hat theory here?
Only gaijin have the unbiased stats.
Correct.
I’ve already shown that you can normalize data, how you could do that, but I’m not going to write a thesis for you for free.
No you haven’t. You haven’t shown anyone, anything. I asked you to show us all and you went “Uh no, besides I don’t have anything you can’t expect me to actually put what I made up into practice to substantiate my claims? That’s ridiculous!”.
If we were talking about aircraft I’d of mentioned you have 10.7 air, again you cant follow a conversation this is about toptier tanks currently
It quite literally is 90% of what they’re balanced by again bombers are balanced a different way to everything else
You see the difference is i dont care they can have their own opinion on the Ariete because they have toptier and have fought against or played the Ariete, now You on the other hand cant even see the lowest br ariete on your own team so you quite literally cant have an opinion on the subject and any opinion you do try to make is tantamount to drivel
I find it interesting that you once again parse out specific K/D without considering that I skipped T80B because I already owned the T72AV TURMS (then 10.0, now 10.3), and the T-80UD (then 10.0, now 10.3), and thus never played the T80B all that much in the first place.
I’ll put it another way:
You don’t consider that my line-ups are each 8 or 9 crew slots, and the reason the M1’s K/D is that steady rate is because it often comes in as a second or third spawn in a fight, when other heavier MBTs have already been cooked and I have a better understanding of the battlefield and where certain enemies are located.
You don’t consider that how powerful a tank is on its first spawn will directly affect the layout of the battlefield and how useful it is to the player.
If the player is incapable of actually destroying stuff, it’s going to feel like suffering to the player.
–
I think you mean I don’t sit and camp a sniping position.
Oh, no, this was simply an ad hominem.
Mobility in top tier matters, sure, I won’t deny that. On the other hand, getting there without getting your guts punched out is another question entirely. You have to make high risk maneuvers or take your time in maneuvering, which eliminates the aforementioned mobility because you have to avoid common lanes of travel so you don’t die.
And again, on long distance maps (which are common at top tier), M774 doesn’t do jacksquat to its 10.7 contemporaries, much less 11.0, 11.3 or 11.7.
I’m still finishing the series, but I guess thanks for the shoutout? Yet again, I haven’t bothered insulting y’all, but you continually seem to want to make passes at me personally.
Maybe you have bothered to look at my Tiktok and seen my computer screen size?
Yes, a 960 can run the game at 60 FPS. I’m not going to play in ULQ because I prefer a little more ‘pretty’ on my screen. If I were to play in ULQ or some such, yes, I probably would be able to pick out enemies very easily and be more aware, but then I try not to abuse mechanics of the game purely out of spite.
They seemingly like to lean on the idea of everyone else being ‘absurd’ about buffs of any nation, other than the nation that’s being talked about.
Gaijin isn’t the determiner of what is ‘happy’ to players.
Decent summary.
And again, if US players are given that small buff, maybe some of the “less brainless” will return to actually play.
As it stands, I’ve received dozens, if not hundreds of comments over the past few months, all people reiterating that they won’t even bother returning to the US tech tree until the turret ring is fixed, much less a small buff to the ammunition.
So Casino and lyn’s postulations are based on an even smaller sample size than they know. Are all these players who patently refuse to play the US ‘brainless’ to them?
I find it interesting that you once again parse out specific K/D without considering that I skipped T80B because I already owned the T72AV TURMS (then 10.0, now 10.3), and the T-80UD (then 10.0, now 10.3), and thus never played the T80B all that much in the first place.
I think you will find that I pointed out all of your 10.7 vehicles, not just the T-80B. And I also pointed out that you performed better in the M1 than all of them except for the 292. Which is quite remarkable given that you say the M1 needs to have a penetration shell closer to the 2A4 when you already perform better in the M1 than the 2A4.
You don’t consider that my line-ups are each 8 or 9 crew slots, and the reason the M1’s K/D is that steady rate is because it often comes in as a second or third spawn in a fight, when other heavier MBTs have already been cooked and I have a better understanding of the battlefield and where certain enemies are located.
So with this paragraph and everything after, you’re trying to tell me that you try to play intelligently with the M1, but don’t bother with the other tanks? I’ve heard this one before when I’ve pointed out similar instances with other US mains. That they just “try harder” with the M1 and that’s why the stats are better. Maybe you should try harder in those other tanks too then?
Gaijin isn’t the determiner of what is ‘happy’ to players.
Cool story I never said that. I said that it will get moved if gaijin is not happy with its performance.
So Casino and lyn’s postulations are based on an even smaller sample size than they know. Are all these players who patently refuse to play the US ‘brainless’ to them?
And my smaller sample size, being the entire playerbase and every match that takes place with the M1 because gaijin have and use those stats to balance it? Please do tell how that is a small sample size.
Keep it on topic and remain respectful to each other, if you guys have issues that would derail the thread just use PMs. And of course… avoid profanities.
Cool story, and as I said, Gaijin isn’t the determiner of what is happy to the players.
Whether or not you’re happy doesn’t really matter if gaijin is happy with where a vehicle is balancewise. It’s irrelevant. I could be unhappy about say the rooikat MTTD moving up in return for getting DM33. Doesn’t matter though because the fact is gaijin have deemed it needs to move up whilst getting DM33, whether or not I am happy about it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
If all those players aren’t returning, then Gaijin has failed, as have you.
Last I checked war thunder has been doing pretty well over the years as far as we can see on steam charts. As the old adage goes “If you don’t like it, nobody is forcing you to play”.
But asking for a slight buff in ammunition isn’t going to destabilize the whole meta. It might encourage other players to return.
I’m speaking of other players. And again, you all were very adamant earlier that the round would even be a placebo or have zero effect? Yet when I bring up legitimate concerns about long-range maps and the 774s’ performance, you seemingly disregard it?
So what is it? A slight buff to ammunition that’s historically accurate is too much? Or not enough?
And you’re correct, it’s my opinion that improving the M1 to that degree would encourage others to play. But most importantly of course, the turret ring. But since the M1, M1 KVT, and IPM1 all have the turret ring modeled in such a way that they don’t immediately go to useless when a 30mm spits on them, that’s another thread which we have covered and are now waiting 10 months and counting to see fixed.
I like how you always have an excuse for something. Instead of just accepting that you play the m1 better than it’s equivalents in other trees, there’s some mental gymnastics justification that means it actually isn’t better. As if you play the m1 intelligently, but the Leo’s like an idiot?
I’m speaking of other players. And again, you all were very adamant earlier that the round would even be a placebo or have zero effect?
I never said anything about being a placebo. Some other people did, I never.
So what is it? A slight buff to ammunition that’s historically accurate is too much? Or not enough?
Your argumentative question here is based on your incorrect assumption from above.
And you’re correct, it’s my opinion that improving the M1 to that degree would encourage others to play. But most importantly of course, the turret ring. But since the M1, M1 KVT, and IPM1 all have the turret ring modeled in such a way that they don’t immediately go to useless when a 30mm spits on them, that’s another thread which we have covered and are now waiting 10 months and counting to see fixed.
Glad we can agree that it is only your opinion and you at least understand this unlike speclistmain who does not see the distinction. Turret ring bug reports have been acknowledged. Nothing else to that.
Considering that the opposition here has been making excuses to not include the M833, I don’t see how my excuses are any different from theirs.
And I’m glad we can agree that you don’t like the distinction and that Gaijin has been waffling on getting the turret ring fixed for top tier M1A1s and M1A2s for almost a year now.
When the Clickbait got the M829A2, y’all said it was handholding the premium players.
The difference between giving the M833 to the M1 or M1 KVT isn’t even that great of a buff by comparison of the Clickbait M1A1 being given the current strongest US round in the game.
And I’m glad we can agree that you don’t like the distinction and that Gaijin has been waffling on getting the turret ring fixed for top tier M1A1s and M1A2s for almost a year now.
And? There are lots of vehicles in the game that have had long outstanding bug reports that still have not been fixed. They will fix it when they get around to it, they’re not going to drop everything else that is in hand just to jump on the special child.
When the Clickbait got the M829A2, y’all said it was handholding the premium players.
Who is “y’all”? I’ve never heard of him. Certainly isn’t me because I never said this either. Besides I thought even US mains were complaining about clickbaits ruining win rates and dragging teams down with poor performance? This is just further credence that gaijin balances based on the average vehicle performance as they say. The clickbait newbies have managed to drag down the performance sufficiently to get it buffed. By the same metric if the M1 performance drops, it will get buffed or moved. Otherwise it will remain as is.
The difference between giving the M833 to the M1 or M1 KVT isn’t even that great of a buff by comparison of the Clickbait M1A1 being given the current strongest US round in the game.
Guess you’ll just need to hope that you get enough newbie KVT players doing poorly to lower the average performance enough then eh?
And? Those vehicles should have been addressed more swiftly. Not simply ‘the special child’, although the special child in question happens to be the top tier of an entire tech tree of a major nation in the game.
That’s the great thing about submitting suggestions, they don’t need to require your permission or the company’s to be made. And general observations of gameplay matter quite a bit.
No you simply infer it alongside those with louder personal insults.
This is not a worthy argument for keeping a vehicle the same as-is. And again, you’ve never really been able to adequately explain why the M833 shouldn’t be added to the M1 and M1 KVT.
In my experience with the IPM1, the M833 round feels like a slightly more powerful M774. It does the job, not great, but not terrible. And that’s a machine that’s tiered now at 11.3, versus 10.7. Thus, it makes perfect sense to include it as the next round up for the M1 and M1 KVT, similar to every other vehicle at 10.7.
No other vehicle at 10.7 outside of light tanks and IFVs has such a light main gun round as the M1 and M1 KVT. And even the light tanks still have the M833 (see the CCVL, which sits at 10.0 and has just as much mobility as M1, just no armor) for use on long-range maps as a fourth-tier round.
Thus, adding the M833 wouldn’t break the game. What’s your refutation of this?
PS: One more follow-up:
If the ‘newbies’ dragged down the performance enough that it needed a buff, does that mean that the buff goes away after the newbies catch up?