It doesn’t matter the crowd.
Whether pro or against the changes, whenever someone acts the way he did and says what he said, 9 out of 10 times it’s someone that is an active detriment to their own team.
Not everything is “us and them”. Every side of an argument has people that are otherwise the same would it not be for the argument in question.
“VOTING ON X” means you’re deciding on it. If parliament votes on a law, it doesn’t mean you then get to just say “Oh well thanks for showing your non binding opinions, guys, but I choose not to follow that law” or your condo association votes 5-3 to ban real estate for sale signs on the balconies, and then the clerk just doesn’t update the document anyway “Eh I disagreed, they shared their opinion but it was wrong lol so I didn’t write it in”
Okay but what if I did do that
The vote has shown that there are enough players that are interested in testing… like I said, if the vote was closer to 60% no, then that would be more clear…
This is about finding out how many were interested in testing… not setting something into law…
I do think they have a legitimate point in that y’all need to be more clear at the beginning, though.
In their defence,
this is not showing their assists, which I believe is a major missing information on player performance.
In DOTA, KDA matters not KD. In LOL, KDA matters not KD. In Insurgency (Sandstorm), score matters and not K/D.
A player that consistently gets On hand/Wingman awards should count for something, no? Now, given the 76mm is an APHE tank assists are less of a common thing but still.
Also objective captures.
Lacking proper KDA, what about unmodified SL/RP gain divided over matches played as a better metric? Some tanks you can get over 2000+ if not 3000 score and don’t get a single kill. While RP/SL is not direct score, it does indicate it somewhat.
They could have just as easily just run the test WITHOUT any vote at all, prolly the better option anyway. I mean seriously, how can anyone make an “informed” decision about such a thing without testing it to some degree first? And for that matter, they didn’t even have to allow players to join the testing and just done an “in house” testing themselves and then ran with whatever results they got from that. Splitting hairs about the vote results, which were very close and it has been clearly shown how a content creator went above & beyond to sway other players votes . . . yeah, not how things should work. But the main thing many players seem to completely forget and/or ignore is the simple fact that . . . “your approval is not required” . . . works that way with most anything in the world really. Players get to play the game they are given, or choose not to play . . “freedom”. What they do not however get is the right or privilege to dictate the development of the game. Sure, voice your opinion, just remember . . that’s all any of us have is, an opinion . . not even a matter of right or wrong . . . just opinions. At any rate . . . none of this is even worth arguing about. I got on the Dev to try and see what I thought about it and couldn’t even catch a game or find any testing going on . . C’est la Vie . . . and there were a total of 706 people logged into the Dev server . . . a VERY small sampling and no telling how many of those were staff, so . . . . we’ll see how it goes.
To me, there are a great many other things that need work in tank battles besides the performance of ONE type of shell . . . but that’s just my . . . . opinion. ☻
That doesn’t make any sense, if 52% of players don’t even want it to be tested at all, then NO possible outcome of testing could be appreciated by the majority of players. Even if every single person who wanted it tested all felt positively during testing, it would STILL be most people not wanting it. Not even wanting to test inherently implies you don’t care about the test results and will feel negatively about it either way.
The only reason to go ahead and test anyway, in fact, logically, is if you plan to ignore the next vote too.
“Enough people for testing” logically would need to be at a minimum a majority and more reasonable, significantly MORE than a majority, such that the portion of those who wanted testing who decide they don’t like it later can still leave behind 51% at the end anyway.
What about the next round of the poll, do we need to win by 51% or need to be something massive like 60% to don’t get it pushed through? Legit question.
At this point, since this is a huge change to the area of the game that is very popular (rank 3-4), maybe even a core of the Ground game mode, I would suggest two things:
Introduce this change for Ground game modes on the live server for e.g. a week. I mean the live server, not the event server. And before you say that you can’t do this, because it will upset many players. If the change will be accepted, but majority of players won’t even vote, you will upset these players anyway. So it’s better to do a proper live server test (e.g. during the Ground event, so players will see how these changes affected 45k score grind), and then ask all players for their opinion about the new damage model. This way you will make sure that everyone at least know what they are voting for and how the game will look like if this change will be accepted. If you only create an event server, it won’t be very popular, most players won’t even notice that server. Only a week-long test on all servers would allow people to get a good feeling about the proposed change, with normal matchmaker and plenty of enemies playing different vehicles.
Create a user interface inside the game to tell players the new damage model is currently being tested on all Ground servers, it will last a week and after a week everyone will be able to vote for the new system or the old one. Voting should also have its own interface inside the game. This way you will reach many more players, and we won’t have a situation where only about 60k players who voted decide about the future of hundreds of thousands of players.
Just use your magneto powers man…
In my defense they have 36% WR in the M4A3.
If you’re getting assists, that means you’re helping your team. I do not know what witchcraft you need to do to have such horrible win rate.
Also, the main round you should be using with the M4A3 is APHE. Kill assists aren’t uncommon, sure, but they should not be higher than your actual kills.
KDA matters in LOL and DOTA because you are typically team fighting and can stun/root/silence etc. Sure you can do the same in wt, but you are typically not diving in the middle of an entire team just to stun them all for the rest of your team. If you are just barrelling people repeatedly, and someone comes and kills them like 3 minutes later, that doesn’t really do anything.
Also sub 50% wr on everything, clearly not helping the team much.
I’m with this though.
It’s a bug.
On my SS13 server with the earlier mentioned “Early dev had the bright idea to implement material hardness to allow players to craft weapons with fancy sci-fi materials and get extra damage vs armour. Cue players ripping apart bar tables to fashion marble spears with electric wiring on a metal rod because it turns out, marble is one of the hardest materials in the code for mining purposes.”
If that was polled, the players using marble spears would’ve opposed it. They have, in fact, opposed it very loudly as devs were “taking away player creativity.” The fix was to add fragility to materials and now, marble and glass spears break in a few hits. Still useful as throwing weapons in a pinch tho.
In the long run it was healthier for the game as people no longer stole the bartender’s countertops to make spear to hunt deathclaws.
its not witchcraft its called : american team. second to german team in brain activity.
In other words, let’s say you estimate that up to 90% of the people who want to test it end up liking it, at most.
Then in that scenario, you would logically need [all people who didn’t even want to test it] + [10% of those who do want to test it] to STILL add up to less than 50% to justify testing. If, that is, you plan to honor the next vote either.
In this example, that would be 55%+ Yes votes
The only way “enough” could logically be less than 50% would be if you assume that people who voted not to test are too dumb to even know what they want, and would enjoy the test results. Which is even more insulting than i originally thought, if so.
Fair enough. I mostly went by my own experience of british life. Assists, unless battle pass needs them (then you somehow detonate all ammo racks.)
The M4A3 (76) is something like my 3rd favorite medium tank in game and in real life and I have 102 RB games with 63% WR.
US teams are not the main factor here, unless you want to claim I’m carrying my team often which I’m just not that good.
Even recently, I played 3 games after something like 3 months of not playing and being rusty as all hell. I barely did anything, with my maximum being 2 kills in one match, and yet I won all three games.
So again, from my point of view, just saying “it’s the teams” does not cut it for me. I’d also add that I play mostly solo.
Like I said… they will want to see a more clear or significant majority lead over the other… so, in my opinion, I would say something closer to 60%… have to wait and see what else they have to say on the matter in later notifications
“Finally, we would like to remind you that a significant majority of votes “For” changing the scattering sectors of fragments of APHE shells is required to make a positive decision. Otherwise, this mechanic will not be introduced.”
In my case, assists usually happen in way of kill gunner/breech or driver/transmission/engine with APDS , teammate blows them up before I get to reload.