Jump to content


The R-Lion (Now F2PeditedLion) F2P experiment *Finished*


  • Please log in to reply
1181 replies to this topic

demian_sartre #161 Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36701 battles
  • 510
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011

View Postcb99, on 28 December 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

First,

The beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and what I see and read and interprets is some times not the same as another person.

It all comes down to a mix of culture, education, experience and of course what personal standing you have in the matter discussed.

 

@jabster,

I have read the whole thread,

And IMO it needs a perspective post other than chiggy's.

This is how I feel about this post, besserwisser's and smugness in general give me almost rashes and it has harm as part goal, you s*ck if you can't move the pixels in a good way.

 

@demian_sartre,

No,

I have absolutely no problem with my reading ability.

A hint,

Do not use red, red/green blindness is quite common and some might miss your “finer” points.

(found in about 6% of the male population)

 

 

-cb99

 

 

I may have overreacted but I am tired of people people failing to understand very simple points. Its written clearly without any subjective content. You can interpret thing many ways, when there is space for such interpretation. But OP was clear, objective and supported his claims with hard facts. There is not room for subjectivness. You can interpret it only one way.

rikkelt #162 Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:54 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17506 battles
  • 1,184
  • [ZIU] ZIU
  • Member since:
    03-23-2013

aView Postcb99, on 28 December 2014 - 12:49 PM, said:

First,

The beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and what I see and read and interprets is some times not the same as another person.

It all comes down to a mix of culture, education, experience and of course what personal standing you have in the matter discussed.

 

@jabster,

I have read the whole thread,

And IMO it needs a perspective post other than chiggy's.

This is how I feel about this post, besserwisser's and smugness in general give me almost rashes and it has harm as part goal, you s*ck if you can't move the pixels in a good way.

 

@demian_sartre,

No,

I have absolutely no problem with my reading ability.

A hint,

Do not use red, red/green blindness is quite common and some might miss your “finer” points.

(found in about 6% of the male population)

 

 

-cb99

 

You posted bullsh*t and instead of apologizing for it you make up stuff about "interpretation" and "that's my point of view". Back to school, learn to read and learn to understand what you read.



jabster #163 Posted 28 December 2014 - 12:58 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12775 battles
  • 26,298
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postcb99, on 28 December 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

 

@jabster,

I have read the whole thread,

And IMO it needs a perspective post other than chiggy's.

This is how I feel about this post, besserwisser's and smugness in general give me almost rashes and it has harm as part goal, you s*ck if you can't move the pixels in a good way.

 

 

That's just not how I read it. The point of the exercise is to show that the many claims of good players only have their stats because the pay money, use gold ammo, platoon, play OP tanks etc. aren't true.

 

That's pretty clearly stated upfront.


Edited by jabster, 28 December 2014 - 01:02 PM.


Blubba #164 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:00 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 61066 battles
  • 2,419
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011

Ok.. I like what you're doing here but is there any chance you could go for the Obj-430 rather than the 140?

Go on...you know you want to .... if anything, it will surely prove your point beyond all doubt.


 

Seriously though, hats of to you sir for a valiant effort (even if you whimped out of the Object 430 ;))



zikkon #165 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:01 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 40099 battles
  • 4,156
  • [ZIGI] ZIGI
  • Member since:
    02-25-2012

This interesting experiment proves only 2 things:

  1. People good at this game already knew the outcome of this experiment and are not surprised at all about the results.
  2. People bad at this game will still remain bad and refuse to acknowledge that they get bad results because they simply fail and will show astonishing lack of reading comprehension and will always calaim they would be unicum if they wanted.


Frostilicus #166 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:03 PM

    Colonel

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23708 battles
  • 3,586
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011
Hats off to the OP for taking the time to embark on this experiment, but I find myself asking - who really cares what someone else thinks about a game that another person is good/bad at?

Private_Miros #167 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25238 battles
  • 10,152
  • [EMU87] EMU87
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 12:01 PM, said:

This interesting experiment proves only 2 things:

  1. People good at this game already knew the outcome of this experiment and are not surprised at all about the results.
  2. People bad at this game will still remain bad and refuse to acknowledge that they get bad results because they simply fail and will show astonishing lack of reading comprehension and will always calaim they would be unicum if they wanted.

 

This is a social experiement more than a gameplay experiment.

 

Well, at least they are unicum in blinding theirselves and stroking their own egos.

 

View PostFrostilicus, on 28 December 2014 - 12:03 PM, said:

Hats off to the OP for taking the time to embark on this experiment, but I find myself asking - who really cares what someone else thinks about a game that another person is good/bad at?

 

Just read the forums. For many people the pure insinuation there are people that are better them them at shooting pixel tanks for relaxation is such a horror they must throw all logic overboard.

 

It's the same story with "riggedness", their egos cannot cope they are not the best at shooting pixel tanks.

 

I don't get it either.


Edited by Private_Miros, 28 December 2014 - 01:07 PM.


chiggy #168 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:06 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32040 battles
  • 1,010
  • [ROTN1] ROTN1
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011

View Postcb99, on 28 December 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

 

 

 

 

Wow,

You really made a strong case for re-roll, take all that knowledge and your stats can't just but improve doing the same thing over again.

 

And Yes,

If you have talent and no surprise it will not have disappeared the second time around.

 

Will you now onwards link to this post to be able to from your besserwisser position keep hitting struggling players that lack your talent in the nutsack?

Because from where I am sitting it feels like that seams to be the main goal with this exercise?

 

Sure all “sports” needs it's idols to look up to and for others to strive for, that what’s get the “pyramids” going this built in hunger for more/better, but there is a difference in humbleness and class among those holding the few privileged slots.

 

 

Last,

Personally I do respect talent in whatever form,

But douchebagness sort of take away the magic, at least for me.

 

 

Good luck in your continued travel in smuggnes.

 

 

-cb99

 


+1 to you.

View Postjabster, on 28 December 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

 

Personally I suggest you reread this from the OP.

 

"Good afternoon/evening fellow forumites, you like me have probably seen the claims like "if only I had premium account, if only I shot premium rounds, if only I had good crews, if only I didn't play stock tanks, if only I skipped tanks, if only I played OP tanks, if only I used mods, if only I platooned ... I'd be unicum too" or perhaps you've even posted something like it."

 

 


Jabster,

 

Love Bottom by the way, a great show.

Its perfectly fine to post on the forum your opinion, but to state fact after 150 games only, then be rude to others with very little evidence is condescending mate. 

You pride yourself as being one of the older, more mature members of the forum. This thread in my opinion demonstrates the typical teenager, stamping my foot "I MUST BE RIGHT" attitude that has encouraged most of the older, intelligent members of the game to leave.

In the four years this forum has existed are you telling me this thread, is one off, unique and thus worthy of the highest praise as an original idea?

Playing low tiers, playing a new account, on a new IP...........honestly..........as Ricky Gervais would say "Your having a laugh".



Dr_LoVe69_makesWoTgreat #169 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:07 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 55908 battles
  • 3,301
  • Member since:
    12-24-2010

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 01:01 PM, said:

This interesting experiment proves only 2 things:

  1. People good at this game already knew the outcome of this experiment and are not surprised at all about the results.
  2. People bad at this game will still remain bad and refuse to acknowledge that they get bad results because they simply fail and will show astonishing lack of reading comprehension and will always calaim they would be unicum if they wanted.

 

So nothing changed since 2010 :bajan:

zikkon #170 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:09 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 40099 battles
  • 4,156
  • [ZIGI] ZIGI
  • Member since:
    02-25-2012

It's just wasted effort as this thread shows. All the good players knew the results from the start and most of the stat deniers will still zealously "defend" their bad stats completely  missing the point of this experiment.

 

Not that it's a surprise rerally. If they were capable of comprehending what was written in the OP (and it couldn't have been written simplier) they would probably not suck completely at WoT.



Dr_LoVe69_makesWoTgreat #171 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:16 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 55908 battles
  • 3,301
  • Member since:
    12-24-2010

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

 If they were capable of comprehending what was written in the OP (and it couldn't have been written simplier) they would probably not suck completely at WoT.

 

Another thing well known since beginning of online gaming:P



thewolfpack #172 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:19 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 59061 battles
  • 1,392
  • [LEOHQ] LEOHQ
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

I'm shocked by the stupidity of some participants here.

 

I could not imagine, hat its so hard to understand the simple premise of the experiment.

 

And the truly saddening part is, even if you explain it over and over...

 

THEY STILL DON'T GET IT!



thewolfpack #173 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 59061 battles
  • 1,392
  • [LEOHQ] LEOHQ
  • Member since:
    06-15-2011

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

It's just wasted effort as this thread shows. All the good players knew the results from the start and most of the stat deniers will still zealously "defend" their bad stats completely  missing the point of this experiment.

 

Not that it's a surprise rerally. If they were capable of comprehending what was written in the OP (and it couldn't have been written simplier) they would probably not suck completely at WoT.

 

So true!

chiggy #174 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32040 battles
  • 1,010
  • [ROTN1] ROTN1
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011

View Postedger2020, on 28 December 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

 

Another thing well known since beginning of online gaming:P

 

 

This

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

It's just wasted effort as this thread shows. All the good players knew the results from the start and most of the stat deniers will still zealously "defend" their bad stats completely  missing the point of this experiment.

 

Not that it's a surprise rerally. If they were capable of comprehending what was written in the OP (and it couldn't have been written simplier) they would probably not suck completely at WoT.

 

Proving that you can win a small number of games, in low tier tanks......then declaring that anyone else who used the forum to complain is an idiot. My point is and always has been..............what is the point of this thread? It just doesn't prove anything other than I am a good player, look at me!

Narcissism at its finest !!!!!

 

Lets hope there isn't a global catastrophe and we need scientists to save the world. If they reached conclusions this quickly from experiments we would be extinct in no time. But if we need anyone to play WOT to save the world I'll give you a call!


Edited by chiggy, 28 December 2014 - 01:31 PM.


Balz0rz #175 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:29 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 10260 battles
  • 51
  • Member since:
    08-05-2011

So.. As my laptop is 4-5 years old, and my wireless internet is worse than yours... Are you saying that without all the lag, packet losses and stuff, my Wn8 could potentially be 900 better? (I took the 100 away from it, since I don't have to play in Tampere *joke*)

 

 

Also I'm a noob who can't find/see smileys on phone :'(



Private_Miros #176 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:32 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25238 battles
  • 10,152
  • [EMU87] EMU87
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View Postchiggy, on 28 December 2014 - 12:28 PM, said:

 

 

This

 

Proving that you can win a small number of games, in low tier tanks......then declaring that anyone else who used the forum to complain is an idiot. My point is and always has been..............what is the point of this thread? Its just doesn't prove anything other than I am a good player, look at me!

Narcissism at its finest !!!!!

 

Lets hope there isn't a global catastrophe and we need scientists to save the world. If they reached conclusions this quickly from experiments we would be extinct in no time.

 

So, basically you are saying that as time progresses, his stats will go down, and not stay stable or up?

 

Also, if it proves that he is a good player, that is already enough. The purpose was to prove wrong those that claim that there are no good players, but only p2w and other none-skill related reasons to appear good while being as average as them.


Edited by Private_Miros, 28 December 2014 - 01:32 PM.


chiggy #177 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:33 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 32040 battles
  • 1,010
  • [ROTN1] ROTN1
  • Member since:
    07-17-2011

View PostBalz0rz, on 28 December 2014 - 01:29 PM, said:

So.. As my laptop is 4-5 years old, and my wireless internet is worse than yours... Are you saying that without all the lag, packet losses and stuff, my Wn8 could potentially be 900 better? (I took the 100 away from it, since I don't have to play in Tampere *joke*)

 

 

Also I'm a noob who can't find/see smileys on phone :'(

 

 

He's saying exactly that my friend.



Element6 #178 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:34 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32010 battles
  • 11,578
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    01-06-2013

View Postedger2020, on 28 December 2014 - 01:16 PM, said:

View Postzikkon, on 28 December 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

 If they were capable of comprehending what was written in the OP (and it couldn't have been written simplier) they would probably not suck completely at WoT.

 

Another thing well known since beginning of online gaming:P

Well, "everyone" cannot get better by obtaining knowledge alone, you need to be able to utilize that knowledge better than the rest or you will stay at your current level.



demian_sartre #179 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36701 battles
  • 510
  • Member since:
    06-18-2011

View PostPrivate_Miros, on 28 December 2014 - 12:32 PM, said:

 

So, basically you are saying that as time progresses, his stats will go down, and not stay stable or up?

 

Also, if it proves that he is a good player, that is already enough. The purpose was to prove wrong those that claim that there are no good players, but only p2w and other none-skill related reasons to appear good while being as average as them.

 

Don't bother. 9 Pages of texts and some still don't get the point.

jabster #180 Posted 28 December 2014 - 01:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12775 battles
  • 26,298
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postchiggy, on 28 December 2014 - 12:06 PM, said:


+1 to you.

 


Jabster,

 

Love Bottom by the way, a great show.

Its perfectly fine to post on the forum your opinion, but to state fact after 150 games only, then be rude to others with very little evidence is condescending mate. 

You pride yourself as being one of the older, more mature members of the forum. This thread in my opinion demonstrates the typical teenager, stamping my foot "I MUST BE RIGHT" attitude that has encouraged most of the older, intelligent members of the game to leave.

In the four years this forum has existed are you telling me this thread, is one off, unique and thus worthy of the highest praise as an original idea?

Playing low tiers, playing a new account, on a new IP...........honestly..........as Ricky Gervais would say "Your having a laugh".

 

Exactly which facts do you think I'm stating after 150+ games and why is it rude to say my reading of what was said was different and I thought it was pretty clear. Yes there are some good players who seem to think that being good at pixel tanks means that can be abusive I just don't happen to think this post is one of them.

 

There's a big difference bettween saying what I think this is trying to show and saying what this does show. Personally I'm yet to be convinced that this won't point towards paying makes a bigger difference than may have been assumed.






2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users