Jump to content


Logging the bad players


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
40 replies to this topic

PowJay #1 Posted 19 July 2017 - 10:56 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

Hi.

 

Most of you will know that while I do knock the bad players who come here complaining, I am usually more than happy to point out the error of their ways in an honest, mostly polite, and hopefully helpful way. I am also happy to help those players who want help and do not come here to whine.

 

Today, I was mulling this over and noticing the number of poor players around with double-figure Wn8 and I was thinking about starting a thread where we could post some details of matches where a bad player was BAD. The idea being that for those players who offer the usual statements about bad teams could see that it is them and not their teams.

 

I was thinking that maybe it would degenerate into a total insult-fest and would probably be locked before long, but then I came across a platoon of two players with 1 Wn8. ONE! and 38% WR, on Airfield. It was time to take a chance and start the thread.

 

Two tier IV tanks in a tier IV/V match. Matilda and DW2. Starting west, they took to the hill. The DW2 fired 27 shots for 14 hits for 3 pens and 337 damage. The Matilda was 27/14/1 23HP- a kill shot

 

Between them, they did less than half the damage that I did in the Ke-Ho. I was top with 809HP and a kill.

 

I admit that they are both new players, but the DW2 player has bought the Strv m42-57 and has two battles with total 144 dmg for both battles. The Matilda player has bought the same tank. He has won 6 from 18 battles and has 172 average damage. He has a positive WR in the Pz 38 (t), but he has obviously been carried, because he has 98 average damage and 5 assistance dmg.

 

Both are, not surprisingly, classed as "Very bad" on noobmeter.

 

OK, so they might improve, but they have bought Premium tanks that they can't play, jumped to tier IV with no ability or willingness to try and win and are, BAD players. The type of player who will probably end up here whining about their teams one day.

 

So, if you want to post here, and later use this thread as a link to show other whiners what being a BAD player really means then feel free.

 

The rules are: DO NOT name and shame, but I guess that replay links are still acceptable. Try and pick your player BEFORE battle starts if you use XVM. AFTER battle is fine if you feel that a particularly capable tank has not been used appropriately.

 

The aim of this thread is to use it to show that BAD players are BAD players because they don't try. It is not to highlight every idiot you come across. To prove the point even more, I would like players with double (or single) figure Wn8 in particular, but RED is the key aspect.

 

If it is locked, it is locked. I won't post here alone to keep it alive. If you want to post here, then fine: but STAY WITHIN FORUM RULES, please.
 

REMEMBER, this is to be a reference for future "I would be awesome if I had better teams" whiners and not just a place to slag other players off! Thanks.



Hedgehog1963 #2 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:01 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 51274 battles
  • 7,462
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
Can you explain what you hope to gain from this?

qpranger #3 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:01 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 32423 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
Had a KV2 with better stats than mine camp in the remote corner of Widepark with zero damage and move only when there was mopping up left to perform, to which he was of course late due to slowness. Bottom on XP as well in battle results, no surprise. And our team had the upper hand from the start - and he was top tier! He could have damage farmed with ease. I just don't get it when good players perform like this. Bad players are at least predictable.

Tyrgrim #4 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:02 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9998 battles
  • 256
  • Member since:
    06-12-2012

Well you should stepin to their world for a while. Start from T1 with the free crew. Get a new free crew every teir, and start with stock tank.

Come back after a while and report how you like the MM and statpadders.



PowJay #5 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:13 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

View PostHedgehog1963, on 19 July 2017 - 10:01 AM, said:

Can you explain what you hope to gain from this?

 

I think that it was there if you read it all.

 

I am sick of the repetitive arguments with lousy players who come here and whine about how they would be unicums if only they had better teams. I really don't care if no-one else wants to get on board with this thread, we will let it rot, but if every player can post once about a 3K battle, 20Wn8 42% WR player with 20% hit rate, average tier 4.75 and average damage of 100HP/battle, then maybe some of the bad players who lurk on the forum could see the pattern- BAD play leads to BAD WR.

 

You can use this thread to get something off your chest if you must, but that is more a motivation to post, not a reason- if you get me. I have a terrible feeling that if it isn't locked, it will degenerate into an insult fest- and then get locked, but if we are FACTUAL, then everyone can interpret the meaning of the posts themselves.

 

View PostTyrgrim, on 19 July 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Well you should stepin to their world for a while. Start from T1 with the free crew. Get a new free crew every teir, and start with stock tank.

Come back after a while and report how you like the MM and statpadders.

 

I think that you will notice the significant point in the original post. BOTH players have got to tier IV in a small number of battles. BOTH have bought a tier VI Premium tank without the knowledge, or willingness apparently, to play it properly and both are prepared to camp, miss, fail to pen and lose as a result of poor performance. I mean 38% WR? COME ON!

 

Platooning normally provides the opportunity for two reasonable players to play together and removes the chance for one really BAD player to have a place on the team. In this case they have the added bonus of guaranteeing two useless players on every team they play in. I guess that this happens often: hence the very closely matching WRs.


 

Jumping_Turtle #6 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:17 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61258 battles
  • 5,301
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View Postqpranger, on 19 July 2017 - 11:01 AM, said:

Had a KV2 with better stats than mine camp in the remote corner of Widepark with zero damage and move only when there was mopping up left to perform, to which he was of course late due to slowness. Bottom on XP as well in battle results, no surprise. And our team had the upper hand from the start - and he was top tier! He could have damage farmed with ease. I just don't get it when good players perform like this. Bad players are at least predictable.

 

The problem is you never know who is behind the keyboard and playing the acount. Might be himself, might be himself being sleepy, might be himself being drunk, might be himself at work and got distracted, might be his wife, might be his son who is 4 years old, might be his neighbour .... and ince WG stated it is allowed to share acounts (they just will not help you if anything goes wrong)  .... you never know .....

PowJay #7 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:20 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 19 July 2017 - 10:17 AM, said:

 

The problem is you never know who is behind the keyboard and playing the acount. Might be himself, might be himself being sleepy, might be himself being drunk, might be himself at work and got distracted, might be his wife, might be his son who is 4 years old, might be his neighbour .... and ince WG stated it is allowed to share acounts (they just will not help you if anything goes wrong)  .... you never know .....

 

Yes, so this is not a valid entry into the hall of shame. The idea being that BAD players with BAD stats are highlighted to show that when they lost they did nothing useful and when they won they did nothing useful.

 

A good/reasonabl player having a bad day is not the same thing. I just got Top Gun in the Ke-Ho and 77 damage and died in the next battle!



Spurtung #8 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:23 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63618 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostTyrgrim, on 19 July 2017 - 12:02 PM, said:

Well you should stepin to their world for a while. Start from T1 with the free crew. Get a new free crew every teir, and start with stock tank.

Come back after a while and report how you like the MM and statpadders.

 

I did, got the pilot and the 85M, and the highest tier I have in that account is one tier 6.

Ze_HOFF_fverhoef #9 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:24 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 15159 battles
  • 3,136
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-18-2012

Sorry PowJay, I'm not coming up with some encounter with bad players. Just happens too often to be funny.

Wargaming should take it's own game a bit more seriously.

 

It shouldn't be possible to buy higher tier tanks from the premium store, if that player hasn't at least played already in that tier with a regular tank. 

Also there should be a requirement met before new players can go up a tier. Most simplistic method would be a certain amount of battles in tier y before you can move up to tier y+1.

 

It's just so tiresome to see a Lowe (or any other tier 8 premium tank) in your team that has exactly zero clue of how to play the game, because they haven't played more than 100 battles in total.



Rati_Festa #10 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:25 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42780 battles
  • 1,372
  • Member since:
    02-10-2012

Aren't all 'Bad Players' logged in XVM and also via the Personal Rating ? There will always be bad players ( I think you are miss using the term as I would suggest that they are new players ), seeing as they are already logged what do you want to do differently with that information?

 

It may be sensible that players with a low number of battles are separated from seal clubbers until a certain amount of games. 



HeidenSieker #11 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:27 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10046 battles
  • 4,650
  • Member since:
    03-26-2016

View PostPowJay, on 19 July 2017 - 11:13 AM, said:

I am sick of the repetitive arguments with lousy players who come here and whine about how they would be unicums if only they had better teams.

 

I can't say I've noticed that happening.

Kozzy #12 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:29 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38855 battles
  • 2,705
  • [EAB2] EAB2
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

View PostTyrgrim, on 19 July 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Well you should stepin to their world for a while. Start from T1 with the free crew. Get a new free crew every teir, and start with stock tank.

Come back after a while and report how you like the MM and statpadders.

 

This has been done plenty of times before and this 'myth' has been debunked.

 

One example I keep referring to:

F2P experiment



Jigabachi #13 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:31 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17923 battles
  • 19,013
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

The players you are talking about come here, puke random nonsense and then leave. There is a reason why they are the way they are: They are stupid. And you can't just fix stupid.

That said: Good intention, but 100% pointless. Would also be quite tiresome to talk about every single match every single one of us plays.



PowJay #14 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:34 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

View PostRati_Festa, on 19 July 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

Aren't all 'Bad Players' logged in XVM and also via the Personal Rating ? There will always be bad players ( I think you are miss using the term as I would suggest that they are new players ), seeing as they are already logged what do you want to do differently with that information?

 

It may be sensible that players with a low number of battles are separated from seal clubbers until a certain amount of games.

 

Two things. One- bad players often come to the forum whining about their teams. We had a player post yesterday with a very colourful screenshot showing the skill mismatch between his teams. In fairness, he is improving greatly, but his overall 48% WR does not inspire excessive confidence.

 

Then we have another player who also has a poor track record, complaining that he is being raged at. Again, he is improving, but he is still part of the problem and not the solution.


We have all seen players with THOUSANDs of battles and still red Wn8/WR. There is nothing about being new in it.

 

Two. New players are separated in lower tiers (apparently) but if they choose to rush the tiers before learning about the game then they are fair targets. Also, as I have noted before, there are plenty of seal-clubbers on BOTH teams in low tiers, so it is pretty much like every other tier.



Jumping_Turtle #15 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:39 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61258 battles
  • 5,301
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

View PostPowJay, on 19 July 2017 - 11:20 AM, said:

 

The idea being that BAD players with BAD stats are highlighted to show that when they lost they did nothing useful and when they won they did nothing useful.

 

But what is the point in this when we are talking about random games with random players who have random ideas why and how they play this game ?



alienslive #16 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:43 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 87971 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    09-20-2013

Bad players don't understand why are they bad. And I guess most of them don't care about that.

 

My favorite type of teams who see the win chance by xvm and start camping in 2 squares on the map or leming train the beach on overloard...

 

I don't have time to come here and show every bad players/teams I meet.


 



PowJay #17 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:43 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

OK, seeing as how I have finished my morning session, I will end with this one. Enemy Marder 38T in a tier V battle. Crashes after travelling 55 metres. First to die of either team. This gets my attention.

 

1034 battles. 44% WR. Average damage in the Marder 38T 162HP. My average damage in the Marder 38T? 539HP and I still tend to get 2nd Class Master rather a lot (i.e. underperform)

 

"Very bad" rating. double figure Wn8. Most of his 47 tanks on WoT Life shown as black Wn8. His highest is orange with one battle.

 

His team won. How, I do not know as they were statistically MUCH worse than mine. I wonder if he takes pride in that victory but would have blamed his terrible team if he had lost.

 

This time, I was second on damage in the Ke-Ho, to our KV-1.


 



PowJay #18 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:51 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 4,192
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

View PostJumping_Turtle, on 19 July 2017 - 10:39 AM, said:

 

But what is the point in this when we are talking about random games with random players who have random ideas why and how they play this game ?

 

OK, I will reply to this and then I am off.


Whenever someone starts a thread whining about bad teams, they often fail to see the point entirely that they are part of the problem and not part of the solution. In addition, once someone invariably starts knocking their stats, more bad players tend to come out of the woodwork supporting the OP and dismissing the simple concept that bad players have bad win rates.


 

By pre-empting these arguments by demonstrating what bad players are doing wrong then we have a resource to direct them to. The reason I want players chosen BEFORE battle starts is to see if a bad player is playing badly or perhaps too aggressively, for example. Camping or YOLOing in other words. Turning over, crashing, drowning: we can all do these things from time to time, but we target these bad players based on their bad performance, and check their stats.


 

A number of us post in this manner on the "How's your day" or "Stupidest things", threads anyway. So here is one location to put everything.


 

Like I said, either lots get on board, or we let it drop off the page and forget it. If no-one wants to use it, then I am not posting here alone to keep it alive. Fair enough?



anonym_sfDyoWv7xpoS #19 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:51 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 130
  • Member since:
    07-11-2018

Using overall ratings in general will often lead to under or overestimating the player in question. These results might be badly skewed due to poor play, etc. early in their career and does not reflect how they play now.  Being Red overall is not a guarantee of imminent failure.  I have seen many a player (who I later checked on WOTLABS) who were experienced and good, absolutely monkey around and contribute nothing.


 

 

Only recent stats are of use.


 

My overall WR is just short of 49, which is red as far as I recall (don't use XVM myself), but does not at all reflect my current ability (when I apply myself that is).


 

Started last night with a two losses with minimal damage, cause I couldn't get my act together in the first game and arty decided otherwise in the second, after that it was 8 direct wins ( all in the Marder 38T, mostly bottom tier) with 5 games of 1.4k+ damage and 5 kills.  I then called it a night.  Being red according to XVM was not the deciding factor.


 

cheers


 



HeidenSieker #20 Posted 19 July 2017 - 11:54 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 10046 battles
  • 4,650
  • Member since:
    03-26-2016

View PostKozzy, on 19 July 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

This has been done plenty of times before and this 'myth' has been debunked. One example I keep referring to: F2P experiment

 

Not debunked. To debunk it you need to look from the PoV of a new player as referred to in the OP, not a WG pro player, whatever that is.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users