Jump to content


Why WG doesn't care about unsportsmanlike conduct?


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

Slind #1 Posted 21 June 2017 - 02:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 50221 battles
  • 1,610
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

Battle after battle 0 damage. Battle after battle pushing team mates out of cover. Battle after battle just failure. Auto-defeat when you play with them. Those players with 36% winrate. WG says, and I quote: "This position is taken in order to preserve the integrity and gaming atmosphere for the benefit of all players. "

 

Gaming atmosphere? I've got 1-3 players in every battle that don't do anything. If they'd idle in our base, they'd get banned for being AFK. But since they idle in the middle of the map, it's OK. Sure, WG, keep telling yourself that players who do nothing in the battle is not a problem as long as they keep buying premium tanks, in which they make profit after shooting two times in the battle and doing 0 damage.

 

I guess there's only one thing to do. If you can't win them, join them. I have started an experiment. Actually two. First one: I will go into battle with 0 ammo. Lets see what my winrate will be. Second: I will play normally, but I won't leave our cap circle. New account on both ofcourse.

 

But I just don't get it. Why is it ok to do nothing? How is that not unsporstmanlike conduct? Because you try but fail to locate your mouse on your keyboard so you could actually hit someone? Or you try to move out of the base but you have no fingers to press the keys on keyboard? It's like soccer player with no legs, it's not unsportsmanlike as long as he tries to play, eventhough the only thing he does is lye on his back...



jabster #2 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12532 battles
  • 22,761
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostSlind, on 21 June 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

Battle after battle 0 damage. Battle after battle pushing team mates out of cover. Battle after battle just failure. Auto-defeat when you play with them. Those players with 36% winrate. WG says, and I quote: "This position is taken in order to preserve the integrity and gaming atmosphere for the benefit of all players. "

 

Gaming atmosphere? I've got 1-3 players in every battle that don't do anything. If they'd idle in our base, they'd get banned for being AFK. But since they idle in the middle of the map, it's OK. Sure, WG, keep telling yourself that players who do nothing in the battle is not a problem as long as they keep buying premium tanks, in which they make profit after shooting two times in the battle and doing 0 damage.

 

I guess there's only one thing to do. If you can't win them, join them. I have started an experiment. Actually two. First one: I will go into battle with 0 ammo. Lets see what my winrate will be. Second: I will play normally, but I won't leave our cap circle. New account on both ofcourse.

 

But I just don't get it. Why is it ok to do nothing? How is that not unsporstmanlike conduct? Because you try but fail to locate your mouse on your keyboard so you could actually hit someone? Or you try to move out of the base but you have no fingers to press the keys on keyboard? It's like soccer player with no legs, it's not unsportsmanlike as long as he tries to play, eventhough the only thing he does is lye on his back...

 

Seriously you of all people are complaining about the behaviour of players :facepalm:

AvalancheZ257 #3 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:06 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 3818 battles
  • 227
  • [3WCST] 3WCST
  • Member since:
    05-26-2017

View PostSlind, on 21 June 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

Battle after battle 0 damage. Battle after battle pushing team mates out of cover. Battle after battle just failure. Auto-defeat when you play with them. Those players with 36% winrate. WG says, and I quote: "This position is taken in order to preserve the integrity and gaming atmosphere for the benefit of all players. "

 

Gaming atmosphere? I've got 1-3 players in every battle that don't do anything. If they'd idle in our base, they'd get banned for being AFK. But since they idle in the middle of the map, it's OK. Sure, WG, keep telling yourself that players who do nothing in the battle is not a problem as long as they keep buying premium tanks, in which they make profit after shooting two times in the battle and doing 0 damage.

 

I guess there's only one thing to do. If you can't win them, join them. I have started an experiment. Actually two. First one: I will go into battle with 0 ammo. Lets see what my winrate will be. Second: I will play normally, but I won't leave our cap circle. New account on both ofcourse.

 

But I just don't get it. Why is it ok to do nothing? How is that not unsporstmanlike conduct? Because you try but fail to locate your mouse on your keyboard so you could actually hit someone? Or you try to move out of the base but you have no fingers to press the keys on keyboard? It's like soccer player with no legs, it's not unsportsmanlike as long as he tries to play, eventhough the only thing he does is lye on his back...

 

Why spend time trying to remove the problem of unsportsmanlike conduct when you can make more premium tanks to sell? To WG, if it doesn't earn them money one way or another, then its not worth even looking at. 

DracheimFlug #4 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:08 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 8957 battles
  • 4,033
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostSlind, on 21 June 2017 - 02:59 PM, said:

Battle after battle 0 damage. Battle after battle pushing team mates out of cover. Battle after battle just failure. Auto-defeat when you play with them. Those players with 36% winrate. WG says, and I quote: "This position is taken in order to preserve the integrity and gaming atmosphere for the benefit of all players. "

 

Gaming atmosphere? I've got 1-3 players in every battle that don't do anything. If they'd idle in our base, they'd get banned for being AFK. But since they idle in the middle of the map, it's OK. Sure, WG, keep telling yourself that players who do nothing in the battle is not a problem as long as they keep buying premium tanks, in which they make profit after shooting two times in the battle and doing 0 damage.

 

I guess there's only one thing to do. If you can't win them, join them. I have started an experiment. Actually two. First one: I will go into battle with 0 ammo. Lets see what my winrate will be. Second: I will play normally, but I won't leave our cap circle. New account on both ofcourse.

 

But I just don't get it. Why is it ok to do nothing? How is that not unsporstmanlike conduct? Because you try but fail to locate your mouse on your keyboard so you could actually hit someone? Or you try to move out of the base but you have no fingers to press the keys on keyboard? It's like soccer player with no legs, it's not unsportsmanlike as long as he tries to play, eventhough the only thing he does is lye on his back...

 

So you are saying that because you are having a tantrum over perceived injustice, you will mess around teams yourself for a while..... And becoming the problem you insist exists will help what exactly?

Strappster #5 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:11 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,926
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostSlind, on 21 June 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

I guess there's only one thing to do.

 

Stop being such a princess about it?



Balc0ra #6 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:23 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64255 battles
  • 15,363
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

So I suspect you follow everyone around constantly to backup your claim? Since you know everyone does it in every game. Be it camping or pushing. Check their service record daily to see if they are still playing? Just to me sure your report worked? A huge majority of the players don't report anyone anyway. And those that do, usually waste all their reports the first game on the one that hit his ammo rack twice in  row to worry about the one camping. As WG don't care about the one hit wonder, or the one report here and there. It's the one that racks up 4-5 each game they care about.

 

View Postjabster, on 21 June 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

*Edited

 

*Edited

Edited by Nohe21, 22 June 2017 - 12:39 PM.
*This post has been edited by the moderation team due to Off-Topic content.


Walmacher #7 Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 652 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    08-04-2012

View Postjabster, on 21 June 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

 

Oh he had a lot worse on WoT replays with his titles/descriptions of what he thought about Poles and East Europeans. The fact that he's still even allowed to play the game shows you just what WG think.

 

Edited.

Edited by Asklepi0s, 22 June 2017 - 12:36 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inflammatory remarks


TungstenHitman #8 Posted 21 June 2017 - 04:20 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20553 battles
  • 3,788
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

View PostSlind, on 21 June 2017 - 01:59 PM, said:

First one: I will go into battle with 0 ammo. Lets see what my winrate will be.

 

Ya ya teams suck what ya gonna do etc etc..  now then, onto much more pressing WoT matters. Check this out, I will not only support your riding into battle with no ammo but I do solemnly swear, to gift 1000 gold.. no.. 2000 gold to ANY PLAYER who can do this and not lose AND bring home a Kolobanovs! Replay must be shown 

 

:medal::coin:      Remember, no ammo :justwait:


Edited by Nohe21, 22 June 2017 - 12:35 PM.
*This post has been edited by the moderation team due to red text use.


Ankara_Aatu #9 Posted 21 June 2017 - 04:34 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 32824 battles
  • 562
  • [RIOD] RIOD
  • Member since:
    04-11-2015
Dude, you really should re-evaluate your life choices. If the game brings you so much pain that you are willing to spend hours trying to sabotage it just to vent your frustration, maybe it's time to get a new hobby.

Orkbert #10 Posted 21 June 2017 - 04:35 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 25176 battles
  • 1,584
  • Member since:
    08-29-2013

View PostWalmacher, on 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

 

jabster, over 11k battles, average damage 377. It says a lot. may be teris is better game for you. no,tetris is so hard. girlgames is easy to play. recommend

 

Oddly enough you didn't mention his win rate, which happens to be significantly better than yours. So I'd be careful with doing recommendations for other players

juonimies #11 Posted 21 June 2017 - 04:48 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 43748 battles
  • 350
  • [KARJU] KARJU
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011

View PostOrkbert, on 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

 

Oddly enough you didn't mention his win rate, which happens to be significantly better than yours. So I'd be careful with doing recommendations for other players

 

But a player with more posts in this forum of wisdom than "games" makes him a God! Koba!

HeidenSieker #12 Posted 21 June 2017 - 05:17 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10046 battles
  • 4,648
  • Member since:
    03-26-2016

View PostWalmacher, on 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

jabster, over 11k battles, average damage 377. It says a lot. may be teris is better game for you. no,tetris is so hard. girlgames is easy to play. recommend

 

My average damage is 137% of his, but his win rate is better than mine (same average tier). Can you think why that may be, hm?

Edited by HeidenSieker, 21 June 2017 - 05:17 PM.


Balc0ra #13 Posted 21 June 2017 - 05:45 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 64255 battles
  • 15,363
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostWalmacher, on 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

 

jabster, over 11k battles, average damage 377. It says a lot. may be teris is better game for you. no,tetris is so hard. girlgames is easy to play. recommend

 

This was a discussion about geographical hate, not skill level. Then again your average damage is barely above 200. Nor do many of your tanks go above their own tanks hit point in average. And his WR is higher then yours. So what's your point?

 

He has 1800 battles in a tier III tank, that usually pulls your average down. And it faced tier 5's with 33 average pen before. So like I did in mine, you had to farm spotting damage to be effective vs damage. And his second most played tank is a tier 6 scout. That has 2x more assist damage on average then damage. Indicating he played his role in it.

 

 



Strappster #14 Posted 21 June 2017 - 05:45 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23695 battles
  • 8,926
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    10-20-2015

View PostHeidenSieker, on 21 June 2017 - 04:17 PM, said:

My average damage is 137% of his, but his win rate is better than mine (same average tier). Can you think why that may be, hm?

 

jabster's a total scrub who gets carried more often than you?



jabster #15 Posted 21 June 2017 - 06:06 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12532 battles
  • 22,761
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostBalc0ra, on 21 June 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

 

This was a discussion about geographical hate, not skill level. Then again your average damage is barely above 200. Nor do many of your tanks go above their own tanks hit point in average. And his WR is higher then yours. So what's your point?

 

He has 1800 battles in a tier III tank, that usually pulls your average down. And it faced tier 5's with 33 average pen before. So like I did in mine, you had to farm spotting damage to be effective vs damage. And his second most played tank is a tier 6 scout. That has 2x more assist damage on average then damage. Indicating he played his role in it.

 

 

 

I'm not sure but I think much of the assist damage on the T-50-2 is lost in time as it was before it was even recorded. 



jabster #16 Posted 21 June 2017 - 06:06 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12532 battles
  • 22,761
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostHeidenSieker, on 21 June 2017 - 04:17 PM, said:

 

My average damage is 137% of his, but his win rate is better than mine (same average tier). Can you think why that may be, hm?

 

Luck?

 

View PostStrappster, on 21 June 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

 

jabster's a total scrub who gets carried more often than you?

 

Well I have tooned with gplasoon for I think about twelve games. Would that count?
 

Hold_The_Door #17 Posted 21 June 2017 - 08:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 17664 battles
  • 869
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View PostWalmacher, on 21 June 2017 - 03:35 PM, said:

 

jabster, over 11k battles, average damage 377. It says a lot. may be teris is better game for you. no,tetris is so hard. girlgames is easy to play. recommend

 

hey leave jabster alone, only I'm allowed to attack jabster and i seldom do now days since i lack the creative intelligence to beat him in a war of words, sure i can destroy him in game but on this forum he's a borderline unicum 



magkiln #18 Posted 21 June 2017 - 08:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 22571 battles
  • 731
  • [EKKE] EKKE
  • Member since:
    09-21-2015

View PostStrappster, on 21 June 2017 - 05:45 PM, said:

 

jabster's a total scrub who gets carried more often than you?

 

Maybe he plays exclusively at tier 1?

jabster #19 Posted 21 June 2017 - 08:37 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12532 battles
  • 22,761
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostHold_The_Door, on 21 June 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

 

hey leave jabster alone, only I'm allowed to attack jabster and i seldom do now days since i lack the creative intelligence to beat him in a war of words, sure i can destroy him in game but on this forum he's a borderline unicum 

 

Well I did try Life is Strange but it was just a bit out of the age range I can identify with.

 

Edit: As for the destroying me in game do you want to go for a 1 vs. 1 with £10 to the charity of choice?


Edited by jabster, 21 June 2017 - 09:01 PM.


Hold_The_Door #20 Posted 21 June 2017 - 09:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 17664 battles
  • 869
  • Member since:
    03-29-2011

View Postjabster, on 21 June 2017 - 08:37 PM, said:

 

Well I did try Life is Strange but it was just a bit out of the age range I can identify with.

 

ah no, they just announced a prequel at e3 lol 




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users