Jump to content


Panthéon ! And brands of excellence !

Gold or not gold !!! 1 or 4 stars

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

X_THE_FRENCHMAN_X #1 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:41 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 23516 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    10-29-2014

Hello,

 

Panthéon

   I have made a tour in the new Pantheon and I find that this ranking is very well done, very readable, pleasant to watch, short bravo !!! But I can not help thinking that in front of me (I am not badly ranked with Churchill III and KV-220-2) some are better placed because they use a lot of gold shells !!! Would it be impossible to have a ranking where you only find players who shoot with classic ammunition (this is my case) ?????? For me, this would be the ranking that REFLECTS THE QUALITY AND MAJORITY OF THE PLAYER THE BEST !!!

Brands of excellence

   There is a lot of difference between the first and the second, I sometimes get 76-77% but 85 !!!Hard hard !!!
Would not it be interesting to go up to 4 stars?
65% = 1 star
75% = 2 stars
85% = 3 stars
95% = 4 stars

 

Cordially thank you very much.



X_THE_FRENCHMAN_X #2 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:42 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 23516 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    10-29-2014
And ... sorry for my english !!!

Dava_117 #3 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:47 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20240 battles
  • 3,649
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
Why do you assume that top player in the leaderboard spam gold?

Jotneblod #4 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:53 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1010 battles
  • 179
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    01-01-2015
Yes.

spuriousmonkey #5 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:55 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 44728 battles
  • 3,362
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    06-23-2011

0% = 1 mark

100% = 2 marks



OreH75 #6 Posted 05 October 2017 - 03:59 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 48853 battles
  • 2,295
  • [OXIDE] OXIDE
  • Member since:
    05-29-2013
Sounds like: "I cant reach 2nd MoE, please lower the requirement!"  and "I am the best and anyone better than me is shooting full premium shells"

CmdRatScabies #7 Posted 05 October 2017 - 04:08 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37626 battles
  • 4,506
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostDava_117, on 05 October 2017 - 03:47 PM, said:

Why do you assume that top player in the leaderboard spam gold?

 

I thought Gold was compulsory in Churchill III and KV-220-2.

Dava_117 #8 Posted 05 October 2017 - 04:12 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 20240 battles
  • 3,649
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 05 October 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

 

I thought Gold was compulsory in Churchill III and KV-220-2.

 

Talking in general, but actually, when I see those 2 tanks, I assume they're full gold...


Edited by Dava_117, 05 October 2017 - 04:12 PM.


CmdRatScabies #9 Posted 05 October 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37626 battles
  • 4,506
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostDava_117, on 05 October 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

 

Talking in general, but actually, when I see those 2 tanks, I assume they're full gold...

 

Always fun when you get a message after the game complaining that you're a "gold noob".  I mean, what did they expect?  :)

FluffyRedFox #10 Posted 05 October 2017 - 04:41 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23912 battles
  • 8,709
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-05-2012
que

WindSpIitter1 #11 Posted 05 October 2017 - 04:47 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 278 battles
  • 1,054
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017

I'm not sure what the point is of a ranking without gold ammo. What about food or premium consumables? What about crew differences? Surely to get a proper ranking we should all play with a fresh 50% crew and HE every game? 

 

If the point is to have a ranking where people see who's the very best in a tank and what the upper limit is, then excluding any advantages possible just because you don't agree with them is stupid right? I want to see the DPG of a full APCR conqueror running full premium consumables and food every game rather than the DPG of someone who takes the moral high ground with regards to gold ammo. 

 

If steroids had no detrimental effects on health then you can bet your [edited]every athlete would be overtly on the juice. Hell, most already are. 



JocMeister #12 Posted 05 October 2017 - 05:48 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 23908 battles
  • 2,181
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015

View PostX_THE_FRENCHMAN_X, on 05 October 2017 - 03:41 PM, said:

Hello,

 

Panthéon

   I have made a tour in the new Pantheon and I find that this ranking is very well done, very readable, pleasant to watch, short bravo !!! But I can not help thinking that in front of me (I am not badly ranked with Churchill III and KV-220-2) some are better placed because they use a lot of gold shells !!! Would it be impossible to have a ranking where you only find players who shoot with classic ammunition (this is my case) ?????? For me, this would be the ranking that REFLECTS THE QUALITY AND MAJORITY OF THE PLAYER THE BEST !!!

Brands of excellence

   There is a lot of difference between the first and the second, I sometimes get 76-77% but 85 !!!Hard hard !!!
Would not it be interesting to go up to 4 stars?
65% = 1 star
75% = 2 stars
85% = 3 stars
95% = 4 stars

 

Cordially thank you very much.

 

Yeah, if you shot gold you would 3 mark everything!

 

Everyone with 3 marks only shoot gold. True story. 



Homer_J #13 Posted 05 October 2017 - 06:08 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 29674 battles
  • 31,429
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 05 October 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

 

I thought Gold was compulsory in Churchill III and KV-220-2.

 

Only if you want to be useful.

X_THE_FRENCHMAN_X #14 Posted 06 October 2017 - 05:08 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 23516 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    10-29-2014

Well, apart from the fact that 3 stars = gold, the rest does not really tell me. For the stars it is only a proposal, the customer service has indicated to me that it was the place to do it. I just find that 20% between 65 and 85 is a little much, it is a remark, needless to get carried away.

PS: I am neither a noob nor an expert






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users