Jump to content


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


  • Please log in to reply
1181 replies to this topic

Eviscerador #241 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13487 battles
  • 678
  • Member since:
    11-24-2011

This only proves that you are a good player, which is quite obvious.

 

But if you had played the same tanks with all gold equipment, fully researched with free xp and gold ammo, your performance would have been better.

 

That is a fact. With equal skills, then equipment, tank and ammo type are what matters.

 

I'm not saying that premium stuff is pay to win, since you can get if for credits. But saying that is not better...

 

PS: of course, bad players saying that unicums are unicums because they fire gold are just clueless players who look for excuses on their poor gameplay understanding. I don't think you needed to prove that, but it is nice you had fun doing so. You have my like.



Furlock #242 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 67877 battles
  • 690
  • [EWOKS] EWOKS
  • Member since:
    08-20-2012

Hi OP!

 

I was thinking about your experiment yesterday, and asked a friend of mine at the university about his point of view. With this new input, I would like to pinpoint some little re-adjustments on the board, you may take into consideration in effort to improve the quality of your experiment.

 

- Skill is a growing factor. The more you play, the better you become. There is - however - a limit to growing of skill, but it should not hinder us by now (maybe at around 250k battles your improvement of skill would come to a near-stop movement, very slow and nearly undetectable).

 

- Skill is based on experience. The more experience you have, the better are your skills.

 

- Golf has implemented a long time ago a system about skills and players.

 

So, if you take into account that your skills of a ton of battles have a huge influence in battles with less experienced players around... then you should introduce a kind of handicap. This is what happens in golf. In your case, you would play only a certain amount of battles, a certain percentage of them, without the handicap and the rest of the matches you would introduce one or more handicap factors.

 

I'm sure you understood perfectly what I'm pointing out. In fact, after every 500 battles, you could reduce the handicap factor by another percentage. If you started with a 60% of the battles WITH handicap factor, then after the first 500 battles, you could reduce the factor to only a 50% of the battles, a.s.o.

 

The question that remains is what kind of handicap factor could you introduce voluntarily.  This is not easy to resolve, and it depends highly on you. For example, you could deliberately take the wrong path on start-up of a match, follow a lemming train, suicide stupidly in a river, shoot an allied vehicle (not much, lol), get stucked where you now know that you get stucked, no autoaim when needed, autoaim when not needed, forget about loading ammo, take away the minimap, not cap when needed or cap when its unnecessary, help the wrong guy, not helping the correct guy, using certain ammo to find out, shooting at the middle of the tank or turret instead of weakpoint knowledge applied, ... a.s.o. A list of the 50 most common mistakes in WoT would be your reference for the battles with handicap. One per battle, maximum two.

 

I think that with this handicap installed, your experiment could become very interesting for all of us. You would - as my friend told me - overcome the problem of the advantage of your actual skills and knowledge, and the contamination of data would become considerably reduced.

 

Kind regards.



AngelofAwe #243 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:34 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostFurlock, on 29 December 2014 - 04:25 PM, said:

...

 

I could, but why?

What would this prove except that I can deliberately screw up my performance?



Furlock #244 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:38 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 67877 battles
  • 690
  • [EWOKS] EWOKS
  • Member since:
    08-20-2012

View PostAngelofAwe, on 29 December 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

 

I could, but why?

What would this prove except that I can deliberately screw up my performance?

 

Thanks for asking.

 

The reason is that you are doing a nice experiment, a huge effort in fact. But the experiment is contaminated (its so called universe of data-collection) by your skills, that are not the skills of somebody starting with WoT. To reduce this contamination (which clearly spills the whole outcome by now), you introduce a handicap over your skills.

 

It would make the experiment a working one.

 

Kind regards.



AngelofAwe #245 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:40 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostFurlock, on 29 December 2014 - 04:38 PM, said:

 

Thanks for asking.

 

The reason is that you are doing a nice experiment, a huge effort in fact. But the experiment is contaminated (its so called universe of data-collection) by your skills, that are not the skills of somebody starting with WoT. To reduce this contamination (which clearly spills the whole outcome by now), you introduce a handicap over your skills.

 

It would make the experiment a working one.

 

Kind regards.

 

But the point of the experiment is not to compare my results to a player just starting out in WoT.

Furlock #246 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:51 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 67877 battles
  • 690
  • [EWOKS] EWOKS
  • Member since:
    08-20-2012

View PostAngelofAwe, on 29 December 2014 - 02:40 PM, said:

 

But the point of the experiment is not to compare my results to a player just starting out in WoT.

 

I know that you state that. Nevertheless, many of us are far more interested in the outcome of your experiment, if you could reduce your advantage of skills somehow. This advantage is now so big, that it fixes you into the highest classification areas. A bad player - as you stated - keeps being a bad player. Now, he started - as you did sometime ago - with zero knowledge, and then rolled on until battle number 5000 without a lot of learning. What you want to prove with your experiment, is that ANYBODY could become a very good player, if he only worked seriously, and that gold and premium are side plus, but not main part. So, if you want the experiment to prove that, you are obliged to handicap yourself, as to start and play as a newbie would do, committing a lot of errors... and learn from them.

 

You would simulate the learning curve, and this would produce a kind of learning curve and not - as now - a start at the top of the curve.

 

Then you could really tell a whiner that he is a whiner. Your experiment would assemble a real situation.

 

Kind regards.

 

(Must go to work, I'll answer when back)


Edited by Furlock, 29 December 2014 - 03:52 PM.


AngelofAwe #247 Posted 29 December 2014 - 03:57 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostFurlock, on 29 December 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

 

What you want to prove with your experiment, is that ANYBODY could become a very good player, if he only worked seriously, and that gold and premium are side plus, but not main part.

 

Yes and no, not quite correct. What I want to prove isn't that "anybody could become very good" because I don't believe that's the case. All of us regardless of skill have a cap where we will no longer improve, much like you mentioned in the earlier post.

What I want to prove is if you've played say 15,000 battles and your stats are yellow with green recents it's not because you don't fire premium ammo, it's because you lack the skill required.

If you've played 15,000 battles and have a win rate of 48% with 50% recents it's not because of WG rigging and bad MM, it's because you lack the skill necessary to carry.

 

Premium ammo, great crews, platoons and so on are only a coefficient on your skill. If you have no skill to start with then that coefficient will have little to no effect.

 

I DO believe that 99% of players could become green if they didn't make excuses for themselves and blame others for their failure though. But that's not related to the experiment.


Edited by AngelofAwe, 29 December 2014 - 04:00 PM.


SirKnumskull #248 Posted 29 December 2014 - 04:34 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18374 battles
  • 2,793
  • Member since:
    04-07-2014

View PostFurlock, on 29 December 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:

 

many of us are far more interested in the outcome of your experiment, if you could reduce your advantage of skills somehow. 

 

I don't know who you mean by 'many of us', but I am really interested in the end result of this experiment as is.

 

Nobody ever questioned that new players make mistakes and have to learn. On the other hand every single day you can read on these very forums that the game is rigged, that premium ammo makes you purple, premium account gives you better RNG, you only can get good stats if you skip grinds and only play OP tanks and also have a good connection and high end hardware. This experiment is on the way to prove all that wrong and show that the single most important factor is indeed player skill and that all these things are just excuses. A handicap would just water down the results.

 

If you want to see how a player gets better over time look at any non-rerolled account of a good player, like Angels main account or even my account.


Edited by SirKnumskull, 29 December 2014 - 04:34 PM.


Heaven_Hound #249 Posted 29 December 2014 - 05:16 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 26655 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

AoA,

 

 


 

You played Russian med line up to T45-85..given the experience you already have. But when you played T34-85 on AoA account, paid one, you were not so experienced at that time, right? Was another you, less experienced one, playing at that time, under another game patch, other maps....


 

My opinion is that premium account is influencing WR with some 15%...so the real experiment is to play two accounts...same tanks...with the same gaming experience, in the same patch environment; one account fully paid...one not. Same ammo both, even gold, doesn't matter.


 

Otherwise your experiment proof nothing! You compare apples with peaches!


 

Regards!


 



AngelofAwe #250 Posted 29 December 2014 - 05:26 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostHeaven_Hound, on 29 December 2014 - 06:16 PM, said:

AoA,

 

 


 

You played Russian med line up to T45-85..given the experience you already have. But when you played T34-85 on AoA account, paid one, you were not so experienced at that time, right? Was another you, less experienced one, playing at that time, under another game patch, other maps....


 

My opinion is that premium account is influencing WR with some 15%...so the real experiment is to play two accounts...same tanks...with the same gaming experience, in the same patch environment; one account fully paid...one not. Same ammo both, even gold, doesn't matter.


 

Otherwise your experiment proof nothing! You compare apples with peaches!


 

Regards!


 

 

I'd say I played the T-34-85 on AoA somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 battles so experience wasn't lacking, but I'm definitely a more skilled player now.

Differences in maps and patches are minimal and irrelevant.

 

Why do you think premium account influences WR? Anything to base that on?

And if the difference is 15%, do you mean AoA would have a 42% WR without premium?

My estimate is that the difference between free and premium for me would be about 2% if I use same ammo/crews/equipments. Only because I'd get better modules faster and struggle less with thee grind.

 

I don't think you understand what the point of the experiment is.

 

 



SirKnumskull #251 Posted 29 December 2014 - 05:27 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18374 battles
  • 2,793
  • Member since:
    04-07-2014

View PostHeaven_Hound, on 29 December 2014 - 05:16 PM, said:

My opinion is that premium account is influencing WR with some 15%...

 

Not sure if troll or really dense... :sceptic:



WAD81 #252 Posted 29 December 2014 - 05:28 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26386 battles
  • 683
  • Member since:
    10-02-2012

Hmmmm, once again for those who fail to comprehend it: AoA learning curve and his skill now have no bearing to his experiment.

He wanted to prove that purple stats can be done without certain additions. And not without the skill. Of course it would be impossible without skill.

Wtf, you would perhaps want someone to prove that you can become unicum straight from the 'green' status for example. Well, feel free to do that. Even with the premium features. 



Heaven_Hound #253 Posted 29 December 2014 - 05:56 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 26655 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

View PostAngelofAwe, on 29 December 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

 

I'd say I played the T-34-85 on AoA somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 battles so experience wasn't lacking, but I'm definitely a more skilled player now.

Differences in maps and patches are minimal and irrelevant.

 

Why do you think premium account influences WR? Anything to base that on?

And if the difference is 15%, do you mean AoA would have a 42% WR without premium?

My estimate is that the difference between free and premium for me would be about 2% if I use same ammo/crews/equipments. Only because I'd get better modules faster and struggle less with thee grind.

 

I don't think you understand what the point of the experiment is.

 

 

 

 

If you want to make it relevant play now, with the today experience you have, same line on a full paid account. See if you will have same WR as non paid. You will be unicum on both I agree with that. Skill is skill!


 

More, I would bet that if you play same tanks with a paid account your stats will be even better than ones of RetLion.


 

You have on T34-85 on RetLion some 30% increase in killed vehicles, also 20% increase of avg. damage...so, your actual skills influenced more games then 2%.


 


 

Regards


 


 



AngelofAwe #254 Posted 29 December 2014 - 06:02 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

Tried to squeeze as much information as possible into this screenshot update.

Just finished my 77th battle in the T-34-85. On the far right you can see I have 20k exp which means I can unlock the final vehicle upgrade, the last engine.

What remains now is the 53k exp grind to the T-43, a tank I definitely do not look forward to playing in tier 8/9 with 144 pen throughout the grind.

You can also see I have a decent amount of credits which keeps increasing rather rapidly in this tank despite me being back to a standard account since 1,5 days. 5000 free exp remains unused and will be saved until T-44 or T-54, no need to use it on the T-43 since it won't improve the tank much anyway.

105 gold (-20) has also been gathered from WG's missions and will be used exclusively for moving a couple pieces of equipment to the future tanks in order to save credits.

I am also closing in on completing the USSR mission which will give me 3 free days of premium. Not sure how much I'll be able to play at the point when I get them but I suppose I should try to use them for the T-43 grind as much as possible if I can.

 

On the left you can see most of my crew has reached 100% except for my gunner (96%) who had to be recruited for the tank. Not going to have 6th sense until well into the T-43 grind though... sigh.

 

You can also see I just passed the 2nd mark of excellence at 77 games played while grinding the tank with a bad crew. Quite possible I'll achieve the 3rd mark before I finish the tank, we shall see.

Still not sure if I'm going to keep the tank for credit grinding later on but considering I'm not lacking credits atm I probably will... and just put a new 75% crew in the tank later on if I need to grind.

 

Spoiler

 


Edited by AngelofAwe, 29 December 2014 - 06:23 PM.


Heaven_Hound #255 Posted 29 December 2014 - 06:03 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 26655 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

View PostSirKnumskull, on 29 December 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

 

Not sure if troll or really dense... :sceptic:

 

This is my guess. Wonder why always paid accounts are replying to this kind of comments of mine....


 

While this game supposes some Real Skills, affected by something called RNG and MM - ie calculations on WG servers, is clear that the final result could be seen differentiated by paid and non paid accounts.


 

And while my guess is that credit card players are somewhat favored, you being in that category is same like you wearing glasses with blue lenses and and argueing with me over an object I see being white, because I don't wear any glasses!

 

 



AngelofAwe #256 Posted 29 December 2014 - 06:07 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostHeaven_Hound, on 29 December 2014 - 06:56 PM, said:

 

 

If you want to make it relevant play now, with the today experience you have, same line on a full paid account. See if you will have same WR as non paid. You will be unicum on both I agree with that. Skill is skill!


 

More, I would bet that if you play same tanks with a paid account your stats will be even better than ones of RetLion.


 

You have on T34-85 on RetLion some 30% increase in killed vehicles, also 20% increase of avg. damage...so, your actual skills influenced more games then 2%.


 


 

Regards


 


 

 

I'm not paying for this game so impossible to test that.

 

Of course they'd be better, I'd have to play less stock, but that's the only difference.

 

I said I think the difference between RL and a new premium account would be about 2%. Nothing to do with how I've performed so far.



SirKnumskull #257 Posted 29 December 2014 - 06:17 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18374 battles
  • 2,793
  • Member since:
    04-07-2014

View PostHeaven_Hound, on 29 December 2014 - 06:03 PM, said:

While this game supposes some Real Skills, affected by something called RNG and MM - ie calculations on WG servers, is clear that the final result could be seen differentiated by paid and non paid accounts.

 

Please check the pinned MM thread. Despite having premium account and several premium tanks I had really bad MM in my last 1300 games. My teams were so bad that there is only a 0.1% chance of it happening. I saw higher tiers much more often than average. Still my average winrate over 1000 battles didn't drop below 57%. If we go by your "logic" that would have been 42% without premium. My winrate over the last 500 battles is 63%. That would be 48% without premium. Angels recent winrate on his main account would be 49%.

 

Either you are completely delusional or you haven't really thought this one through. 



Heaven_Hound #258 Posted 29 December 2014 - 07:01 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 26655 battles
  • 67
  • Member since:
    08-03-2013

View PostSirKnumskull, on 29 December 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

 

Please check the pinned MM thread. Despite having premium account and several premium tanks I had really bad MM in my last 1300 games. My teams were so bad that there is only a 0.1% chance of it happening. I saw higher tiers much more often than average. Still my average winrate over 1000 battles didn't drop below 57%. If we go by your "logic" that would have been 42% without premium. My winrate over the last 500 battles is 63%. That would be 48% without premium. Angels recent winrate on his main account would be 49%.

 

Either you are completely delusional or you haven't really thought this one through.

 

I are somehow right and will restate it: max 15%. For skilled players the difference is much less...figuring like 5%...you cannot win the same game two times..one time because of premium and second because of skills.


 

Looking at the common tanks we both play (ones with more then like 100 games). Some you play a bit better, some I play better. There is anyway a difference...you skipped most of the tanks you cannot make a difference with in a random. I never skipped a tank. Still you have 3% ...plus the lost games where I was stock and cd not help too much...say 5% at the end.


 


 

PS


 

Don't they learn in schools over there what a debate is? You think you make a point calling me delusional? Or you do learn in schools and I have to think at a low IQ on the other end of the wire???


 


 


 


 



AngelofAwe #259 Posted 29 December 2014 - 07:01 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

 

T-34-85 definitely stronk tenk.



AngelofAwe #260 Posted 29 December 2014 - 07:03 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 40742 battles
  • 3,185
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-24-2011

View PostHeaven_Hound, on 29 December 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

 

I are somehow right and will restate it: max 15%. For skilled players the difference is much less...figuring like 5%...you cannot win the same game two times..one time because of premium and second because of skills.


 

Looking at the common tanks we both play (ones with more then like 100 games). Some you play a bit better, some I play better. There is anyway a difference...you skipped most of the tanks you cannot make a difference with in a random. I never skipped a tank. Still you have 3% ...plus the lost games where I was stock and cd not help too much...say 5% at the end.


 


 

PS


 

Don't they learn in schools over there what a debate is? You think you make a point calling me delusional? Or you do learn in schools and I have to think at a low IQ on the other end of the wire???
 

 

I stick to the same as before. For a good player it can make 2%, for a bad player it will be even less since they don't have an impact on the game regardless of what they drive.

MM has no benefits for "paying customers".

 

Something you also fail to consider is that WHERE and WHEN you deal your damage is significant in how many games you'll win. If you kill some tanks when you're alone alive it gives you a nice score but no wins. If you don't defend the base when you should you'll lose.

Even if you have the same average damage/ kills that says very little about how you play to win.

Neither have you considered platooning.


Edited by AngelofAwe, 29 December 2014 - 07:09 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users