It is impossible to ignore a caste within the community that forcibly segregates players, describing them negatively just because the player expressing their opinion plays casually since they need to maintain a stable social life.
Which does not aim to maintain a K/D of 10/0 in every vehicle in the game.
My two cents on the issue, since I explored the option to make something similiar few months back.
XVM, or how the WoT tool was called, was just that - a tool. It doesnt even show info that isnt public, it just refines stats into more easibly accessible information.
Same with Statsharks Live Game Viewer.
Some people will use it to be more toxic, some just might want tool that will help them analyze the gameplay and make more informed decisions.
I know for sure would adjust my playstyle if I knew the person watching my left flank couldnt pour water out of boot with instructions written on the heel.
I just had a masive Déjà vu with this post
Sardine isn’t completely wrong in this case. It’s clear that somebody who is truely bad at the game (let’s take the previous 0.2 K/D and 30% winrate example) either have a very warped/unrealistic view of the overall balance picture or just have very little knowledge.
For example: my field of expertise is Chemistry, so I’m not going to give opinions about biology stuff and I won’t get mad when I’m being told my opinion of biology stuff holds less weight than the opinion of people who are good at that stuff.
Careful, you’re making sense.
This level of toxicity always ruins games.
“Bad” players have to exist for good players to exist.
And I am sick of skilled people demeaning the people that are the reason they even have their good stats.
“Hurr durr, your stats are bad even though I only have good stats because you let me.”
I’m not even saying this as someone that this commonly occurs to, because my stats exist because of worse players as well.
The difference is I respect them, I encourage them, I listen to their views, and don’t dismiss them just because of some weird nonsense.
Pretty much exactly this. Not to mention offensively it allows me to be more flexible. I know the person who has never survived a match probably won’t be able to evade my missile, whereas Bad karma is probably going to kill me. This lets me know who to be more wary of and who to pay attention to.
Give me a name os vehicle, let’s check IF someone can or not can give u opinion about it.
its now the issue if someone can or can not have an opinion; having opinion should always be alowed.
its matter whenever someones opinion corresponds to the reality. Person with 0.2 KD in BMPT calling for BMPT buff probably shouldnt be talking about BMPT balance.
I mean i 100% agree. I am one of those players. Im by no means amazing. All im saying is if someone wants to say negative things about me because im a “bad player” That says more about them then anything else, and I just don’t care lol. I just dont think a website/ software should get a bad rep soley because some people mis-use it
We just had an example of a player making a strong claim that could easily be falsified by Statshark.
Now is that good or bad?
huh?
You are distorting things. A player with a low win rate with a vehicle, EVEN if they are in the current META of the game, should still be able to express their opinion.
We are debating whether to give the person the RIGHT to express what they think and, no matter how ABSURD their opinion about that vehicle may be, it SHOULD BE ACCEPTED so that this opinion CAN BE REFUTED AGAINST THEM, allowing them to see their own OPINION from other perspectives.
What I see here is players using THIRD-PARTY WEBSITES to obtain player statistics in order to discredit them to an entire gaming community, causing their opinion on any other important topic to be automatically ignored or deemed irrelevant.
It’s one thing to use something to testify based on good intentions to help someone who thinks BMPT should go back to 10.0, for example.
It’s another thing to go to other topics, other discussions, and find the same person, but discredit them because they don’t have enough win stats with a certain vehicle or nation, and constantly expose and ruin that player’s credibility in the community.
This is toxic behavior that should be punished, and of course, third-party sites should result in the player being banned from any community platform, BUT NOT FROM THEIR ACCOUNT, OBVIOUSLY.
I’m trying to say that toxicity is so prevalent among players in topics that should be overwhelmingly 80% in agreement in order to be reviewed by developers and staff, but end up being contaminated by players who, by using third-party websites, end up opening trenches that are difficult to overcome, and if they are overcome, time has passed and now it no longer makes sense to have developers look at that topic again.
Thats something you can already do by checking the profile of the people on your match
I dont think it says what vehicles the enemy is using, at least when it was the free version it didnt tell.
Yes, I love when people that have never touched vehicle X or even played in the BR range of vehicle X say that it’s totally OP/bad.
You don’t need 3rd party websites to see stats from people.
No im not.
People are perfeclty free to express their opinion now, no matter their stats, and that shoudlnt be taken away under any circumstances.
However they are not free from consequences, just like in real life.
Someone might have freedom to express their support to a regime bent on suppresing human rights; but he shouldnt expect to face no consequences from others.
Similiarly, person making stupid claim shouldnt be free from facing critique from saying such stupid claim in the first place.
issue with this is that some of these people double down in face of evidence proving them wrong; ie. refuting their statements fails.
these “third party websites” dont use any personal info, all of it is visible on your in-game profile. What these 3rd party websites do is that they process said complex information into more easily accessible format.
again, some people deserve to have their opinions be deemed irrelevant if all they do is that they spout nonsense and double down in face of evidence proving them wrong.
Thats harrasment and against forum rules. If you someone does that, I highly encourage you to report such behaviour.
However if i merely run into Tiger_tank in yet another of his thread, I do not need to form complex counter-argument to whatever hot take he freshly conjured.
For example, how would this person take the opinion of a player who does not have the BMPT?
She would either ignore it completely or create a trench based on the argument that if you don’t have the vehicle, your opinion is invalid.
Even if you face the vehicle in question, you see with your own eyes that it is clearly too strong for the BR it is in, survives rounds of shots that others would not survive, and that most players report the same things.
It simply doesn’t count, because according to people like this, your opinion is only valid if you buy the vehicle or obtain it through the tech tree. When we have a large majority of players who focus on only one nation, since their time is usually limited to just a few hours of leisure.
Do I really need to try to explain this to all of you?
Issue with this is that someone can probably guess how vehicle performs just from facing it; mostly with planes.
For example I dont need to play M2K to know trying to out-1circle him in F-4S is probably terrible idea.
That I completly agree with.