Jump to content


Shot flies miles over?


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

wandertrap #1 Posted 06 January 2018 - 01:05 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20286 battles
  • 22
  • [DERRP] DERRP
  • Member since:
    01-03-2016

http://wotreplays.eu...e/4062080#stats

 

In this replay, at about one and a halve minutes in, I launch my first shot. In stead of going in a slight arc at the target, in it's usual flight pattern, it "hops" upwards, in the first part of the trajectory, ending up missing it's target by ten's of meters.

 

Whenever this "phenomenon" happens to me, in 90% of the cases, my team loses. So right there and then, I knew we were going to lose. And yes, in the next minute or so, my entire team is crushed (1 - 15).

 

Anybody else has some RNG-related examples like that, that are a sure indicator that you are going to win, or lose?

 



Enforcer1975 #2 Posted 06 January 2018 - 01:07 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 20760 battles
  • 10,863
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014
Had such a session yesterday. Miss miss miss miss bounce miss....and that with a supposedly accurate gun.

Dava_117 #3 Posted 06 January 2018 - 01:19 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19497 battles
  • 3,304
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

When I start to get just low damage roll, I usually end up losing the game with high damage dealt.

Or is that just confirmation bias?



gunslingerXXX #4 Posted 06 January 2018 - 03:38 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 11067 battles
  • 2,012
  • [GUNSL] GUNSL
  • Member since:
    11-16-2014

View Postwandertrap, on 06 January 2018 - 

Anybody else has some RNG-related examples like that, that are a sure indicator that you are going to win, or lose?

 

Jep. I feel it most often when I autoaim with turretless TD's for close range combat (not againt heavily armored tanks of course). When on the bad RNG team, these shots always mis/bounce/get eaten by the tracks. When normal or good RNG team these are easy hits. First situation is almost guaranteed loss.



Derethim #5 Posted 06 January 2018 - 03:52 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17518 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

I am also starting to think the RNG for wins is rigged. One team gets x ammount of RNG and the other the better y ammount of RNG.

Losing keeps you playing.



jabster #6 Posted 06 January 2018 - 04:05 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12537 battles
  • 23,418
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostDerethim, on 06 January 2018 - 02:52 PM, said:

I am also starting to think the RNG for wins is rigged. One team gets x ammount of RNG and the other the better y ammount of RNG.

Losing keeps you playing.

 

Yeh as obviously peeing players off is the way to make them play, and pay, more.

Edited by jabster, 06 January 2018 - 04:13 PM.


Derethim #7 Posted 06 January 2018 - 04:38 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17518 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View Postjabster, on 06 January 2018 - 04:05 PM, said:

 

Yeh as obviously peeing players off is the way to make them play, and pay, more.

 

It is. You lose, so you say to yourself; "This time, i'm gonna win." and you lose again. Process repeats. Same as playing a slot machine really.

jabster #8 Posted 06 January 2018 - 04:54 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12537 battles
  • 23,418
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostDerethim, on 06 January 2018 - 03:38 PM, said:

 

It is. You lose, so you say to yourself; "This time, i'm gonna win." and you lose again. Process repeats. Same as playing a slot machine really.

 

Yes of course it is.

SABAOTH #9 Posted 06 January 2018 - 05:41 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36793 battles
  • 2,914
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011

View PostDerethim, on 06 January 2018 - 03:52 PM, said:

I am also starting to think the RNG for wins is rigged. One team gets x ammount of RNG and the other the better y ammount of RNG.

Losing keeps you playing.

 

No, I am pretty sure I can have a losing streak even if blessed by rng.

 

Just need to play top tier as a braindead and blocking teammates to take 2-3 shots.

 

ON the opposite, knowing that rng is garbage, if I maximize the number of shots I can take by being careful enough, I get a winning streak.

 

And the more shots you take in a game the more equal distribution of bananas and laser shots you will get. Almost gaussian I would dare to say.

 

I suspect if I shoot only once or twice then die I would think is rigged too. :girl:



AliceUnchained #10 Posted 06 January 2018 - 07:27 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View Postwandertrap, on 06 January 2018 - 01:05 PM, said:

Whenever this "phenomenon" happens to me, in 90% of the cases, my team loses. So right there and then, I knew we were going to lose. And yes, in the next minute or so, my entire team is crushed (1 - 15).

 

Which of course is not some made up statistic at all, but derived from data collection and careful analysis...

 

As for the replay; Next time just put in that little bit of effort and provide the actual time-stamp. Seriously, how much effort would it take to start up the replay and note the time of firing? You're in an O-I camped in the back, firing at a Cromwell outside the maximum view range (so over 445 meters away), which actually disappears from view before you fire. As gun elevation is set automatically, depending on the distance you've set your aim at, and is actually increased once the Cromwell disappears the gun is elevated higher and thus the shot can disperse much higher as well. Which is exactly what happened here.

 

Basic game mechanic right there, which you could have easily deduced yourself had you bothered to look at the replay more closely. In short, another waste of a thread.



VsUK #11 Posted 07 January 2018 - 12:39 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14288 battles
  • 1,301
  • Member since:
    06-19-2012

View PostAliceUnchained, on 06 January 2018 - 06:27 PM, said:

 

Which of course is not some made up statistic at all, but derived from data collection and careful analysis...

 

As for the replay; Next time just put in that little bit of effort and provide the actual time-stamp. Seriously, how much effort would it take to start up the replay and note the time of firing? You're in an O-I camped in the back, firing at a Cromwell outside the maximum view range (so over 445 meters away), which actually disappears from view before you fire. As gun elevation is set automatically, depending on the distance you've set your aim at, and is actually increased once the Cromwell disappears the gun is elevated higher and thus the shot can disperse much higher as well. Which is exactly what happened here.

 

Basic game mechanic right there, which you could have easily deduced yourself had you bothered to look at the replay more closely. In short, another waste of a thread.

 

Whats actually a waste, is people who respond only to attack someone for putting to use exactly this forum is about. If it was an actual bug, flaw with the game. There's a support ticket system specifically designed for that. Which leaves this forum for what exactly? Yes, people expressing their frustration, opinions, complaints & suggestions. It isn't for individual bashing because he or she has better things to do than memories stats & figures of a game that isn't a tank sim. Have anyone here actually been in a tank on the field? No? I didn't think so. I have, I've been in the Tiger 1, 2, Sherman, Firefly & also FV4201, Centurion MK3, Challenger 1 & 2 during my Army days & world war 2 reenactments. In game tanks vs Real tanks. They're not even close to being pessimal, looks aside. For the record, the Centurion MK3 is what this game called Action x. What this game doesn't understand is that even though the armour thickness was between 51 & 152 depending on which side of the tank. It was also using a primitive version of the Chobham armour which was refined in the 60's to be the best armour in the world. But even the primitive version was far superior that every other tank developed before the 70's & seeing as this game doesn't have tanks that recent. I'm safe to say it was the best armour. Which allowed it to be thinner. But that's something this game doesn't recognise or understand. It's not always about thickness. This game renters mm act the armour regardless of technology. But, for some bias reason. British tanks & TD's are a joke when it comes to armour in this game. 

But, seeing as I clearly know more that most about real tanks. Feel free to continue to talk about fiction as if they're anything other than just that. Fiction, & quit with the persistent badgering & attacking of people for merely putting an opinion across. I wonder if you ever had an electrical fault in your home & you called out an electrician & he turned round & said. Why you calling me for, learn about it & fix it yourself. 

Nazgarth #12 Posted 07 January 2018 - 12:46 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,175
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011

View PostVsUK, on 07 January 2018 - 12:39 AM, said:

 

Whats actually a waste, is people who respond only to attack someone for putting to use exactly this forum is about. If it was an actual bug, flaw with the game. There's a support ticket system specifically designed for that. Which leaves this forum for what exactly? Yes, people expressing their frustration, opinions, complaints & suggestions. It isn't for individual bashing because he or she has better things to do than memories stats & figures of a game that isn't a tank sim. Have anyone here actually been in a tank on the field? No? I didn't think so. I have, I've been in the Tiger 1, 2, Sherman, Firefly & also FV4201, Centurion MK3, Challenger 1 & 2 during my Army days & world war 2 reenactments. In game tanks vs Real tanks. They're not even close to being pessimal, looks aside. For the record, the Centurion MK3 is what this game called Action x. What this game doesn't understand is that even though the armour thickness was between 51 & 152 depending on which side of the tank. It was also using a primitive version of the Chobham armour which was refined in the 60's to be the best armour in the world. But even the primitive version was far superior that every other tank developed before the 70's & seeing as this game doesn't have tanks that recent. I'm safe to say it was the best armour. Which allowed it to be thinner. But that's something this game doesn't recognise or understand. It's not always about thickness. This game renters mm act the armour regardless of technology. But, for some bias reason. British tanks & TD's are a joke when it comes to armour in this game. 

But, seeing as I clearly know more that most about real tanks. Feel free to continue to talk about fiction as if they're anything other than just that. Fiction, & quit with the persistent badgering & attacking of people for merely putting an opinion across. I wonder if you ever had an electrical fault in your home & you called out an electrician & he turned round & said. Why you calling me for, learn about it & fix it yourself.

 

Hey, if someone wants advice about illegal mods they will ask, otherwise stfu.

Edited by Nazgarth, 07 January 2018 - 12:47 AM.


Derethim #13 Posted 07 January 2018 - 02:28 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 17518 battles
  • 1,888
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View Postjabster, on 06 January 2018 - 04:54 PM, said:

 

Yes of course it is.

 

View PostSABAOTH, on 06 January 2018 - 05:41 PM, said:

 

No, I am pretty sure I can have a losing streak even if blessed by rng.

 

Just need to play top tier as a braindead and blocking teammates to take 2-3 shots.

 

ON the opposite, knowing that rng is garbage, if I maximize the number of shots I can take by being careful enough, I get a winning streak.

 

And the more shots you take in a game the more equal distribution of bananas and laser shots you will get. Almost gaussian I would dare to say.

 

I suspect if I shoot only once or twice then die I would think is rigged too. :girl:

 

I'm not saying bad RNG makes it impossible to win. But when my 9th fully-aimed shot at mid-range in my 110 misses, something's not right.

I did maximize the ammount of shells I fired. None of them hit/one bounced, because again, it didn't hit even near the middle. One of those shots was my fault as I hit a bump and the gun depression messed it up.

Yes, sometimes you're just unlucky, but sometimes it feels pushed a little too far - I'll have three to four games like this, then I'll have one that goes 15:0 (pulled those numbers out of my.., but you get the point).

 

It wouldn't be THE dirtiest thing Wargaming has done by far - setting the RNG to be lower for one team and higher for the other for the whole match randomly, depending on their own player stat average for the team.

Not accounting for a lot of other hidden stats they may still have. Sure, you can still win if you hug every one of the enemy tanks's backsides dead-on and if you don't low-roll all the time you will win. Just saying.

There's no code of conduct, that says Wargaming can't do this sort of thing.


Edited by Derethim, 07 January 2018 - 02:30 AM.


jabster #14 Posted 07 January 2018 - 06:33 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12537 battles
  • 23,418
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostDerethim, on 07 January 2018 - 01:28 AM, said:

 

 

I'm not saying bad RNG makes it impossible to win. But when my 9th fully-aimed shot at mid-range in my 110 misses, something's not right.

I did maximize the ammount of shells I fired. None of them hit/one bounced, because again, it didn't hit even near the middle. One of those shots was my fault as I hit a bump and the gun depression messed it up.

Yes, sometimes you're just unlucky, but sometimes it feels pushed a little too far - I'll have three to four games like this, then I'll have one that goes 15:0 (pulled those numbers out of my.., but you get the point).

 

It wouldn't be THE dirtiest thing Wargaming has done by far - setting the RNG to be lower for one team and higher for the other for the whole match randomly, depending on their own player stat average for the team.

Not accounting for a lot of other hidden stats they may still have. Sure, you can still win if you hug every one of the enemy tanks's backsides dead-on and if you don't low-roll all the time you will win. Just saying.

There's no code of conduct, that says Wargaming can't do this sort of thing.

 

Clearly there’s no code of conduct that says WG can’t do this sort of thing and again clearly there’s no technical reason they can’t do it. The problem is there’s no credible evidence that they do in fact do it.



Frostilicus #15 Posted 07 January 2018 - 09:42 AM

    Major

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22458 battles
  • 2,869
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View PostVsUK, on 06 January 2018 - 11:39 PM, said:

 

Whats actually a waste, is people who respond only to attack someone for putting to use exactly this forum is about. If it was an actual bug, flaw with the game. There's a support ticket system specifically designed for that. Which leaves this forum for what exactly? Yes, people expressing their frustration, opinions, complaints & suggestions. It isn't for individual bashing because he or she has better things to do than memories stats & figures of a game that isn't a tank sim. Have anyone here actually been in a tank on the field? No? I didn't think so. I have, I've been in the Tiger 1, 2, Sherman, Firefly & also FV4201, Centurion MK3, Challenger 1 & 2 during my Army days & world war 2 reenactments. In game tanks vs Real tanks. They're not even close to being pessimal, looks aside. For the record, the Centurion MK3 is what this game called Action x. What this game doesn't understand is that even though the armour thickness was between 51 & 152 depending on which side of the tank. It was also using a primitive version of the Chobham armour which was refined in the 60's to be the best armour in the world. But even the primitive version was far superior that every other tank developed before the 70's & seeing as this game doesn't have tanks that recent. I'm safe to say it was the best armour. Which allowed it to be thinner. But that's something this game doesn't recognise or understand. It's not always about thickness. This game renters mm act the armour regardless of technology. But, for some bias reason. British tanks & TD's are a joke when it comes to armour in this game. 

But, seeing as I clearly know more that most about real tanks. Feel free to continue to talk about fiction as if they're anything other than just that. Fiction, & quit with the persistent badgering & attacking of people for merely putting an opinion across. I wonder if you ever had an electrical fault in your home & you called out an electrician & he turned round & said. Why you calling me for, learn about it & fix it yourself. 

 

Seeing as you are straying into areas miles away from the point, which was very adequately resolved already, let's just compare you to a sportsman who has been found out to be a drug cheat - your ill-informed views are biased, subjective and no longer welcomed or believed

Kindly do one and clear off



cragarion #16 Posted 07 January 2018 - 10:23 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 44073 battles
  • 2,559
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View PostDerethim, on 06 January 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

 

It is. You lose, so you say to yourself; "This time, i'm gonna win." and you lose again. Process repeats. Same as playing a slot machine really.

 

No you say screw this peice of crap game i'm sick of losing and uninstall.

Frostilicus #17 Posted 07 January 2018 - 10:36 AM

    Major

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 22458 battles
  • 2,869
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Postcragarion, on 07 January 2018 - 09:23 AM, said:

 

No you say screw this peice of crap game i'm sick of losing and uninstall.

 

Sometimes the best option is indeed to log out - no point uninstalling though, you'll be back :):):)

AliceUnchained #18 Posted 07 January 2018 - 11:25 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostVsUK, on 07 January 2018 - 12:39 AM, said:

Whats actually a waste, is people who respond only to attack someone for putting to use exactly this forum is about. If it was an actual bug, flaw with the game. There's a support ticket system specifically designed for that. Which leaves this forum for what exactly? Yes, people expressing their frustration, opinions, complaints & suggestions. It isn't for individual bashing because he or she has better things to do than memories stats & figures of a game that isn't a tank sim. Have anyone here actually been in a tank on the field? No? I didn't think so. I have, I've been in the Tiger 1, 2, Sherman, Firefly & also FV4201, Centurion MK3, Challenger 1 & 2 during my Army days & world war 2 reenactments. In game tanks vs Real tanks. They're not even close to being pessimal, looks aside. For the record, the Centurion MK3 is what this game called Action x. What this game doesn't understand is that even though the armour thickness was between 51 & 152 depending on which side of the tank. It was also using a primitive version of the Chobham armour which was refined in the 60's to be the best armour in the world. But even the primitive version was far superior that every other tank developed before the 70's & seeing as this game doesn't have tanks that recent. I'm safe to say it was the best armour. Which allowed it to be thinner. But that's something this game doesn't recognise or understand. It's not always about thickness. This game renters mm act the armour regardless of technology. But, for some bias reason. British tanks & TD's are a joke when it comes to armour in this game. 

 

Cool story bro, but given the context in which one should read it as a reply utterly irrelevant and unrelated. I have absolutely no idea what point you're trying to get across here. That you know some random bits and pieces about tanks? Good for you. I fail to see how that has any bearing on the post you responded to.

 

View PostVsUK, on 07 January 2018 - 12:39 AM, said:

But, seeing as I clearly know more that most about real tanks. Feel free to continue to talk about fiction as if they're anything other than just that. Fiction, & quit with the persistent badgering & attacking of people for merely putting an opinion across. I wonder if you ever had an electrical fault in your home & you called out an electrician & he turned round & said. Why you calling me for, learn about it & fix it yourself. 

 

Based on what you wrote previously, all you seem to know are some bits and pieces, random facts. But as I was talking about the replay, and explained some basic game mechanic, I still fail to see how 'real tanks' fit in here. I get the impression you accidentally posted this in the wrong thread or something. 

 

As for your example; there are a few crucial differences. For one I have such issues covered under warranty/contract. And two, electricians and companies providing similar services tend to want to earn money. Having people 'do it themselves' isn't really in their best interest.



brumbarr #19 Posted 07 January 2018 - 12:17 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Postjabster, on 07 January 2018 - 06:33 AM, said:

 

Clearly there’s no code of conduct that says WG can’t do this sort of thing and again clearly there’s no technical reason they can’t do it. The problem is there’s no credible evidence that they do in fact do it.

 

And there is no reason at all why they would even bother with that.

RamRaid90 #20 Posted 07 January 2018 - 12:19 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21494 battles
  • 6,487
  • [D0NG] D0NG
  • Member since:
    12-14-2014

View PostgunslingerXXX, on 06 January 2018 - 02:38 PM, said:

Jep. I feel it most often when I autoaim with turretless TD's for close range combat (not againt heavily armored tanks of course). When on the bad RNG team, these shots always mis/bounce/get eaten by the tracks. When normal or good RNG team these are easy hits. First situation is almost guaranteed loss.

 

If you're autoaiming at close range in a tank that has to traverse it's hull to fire, you deserve to lose. If you're autoaiming at all when not in a fast tank circling a weaker tank, you deserve to lose.

 

You deserveto lose the second you over use this mechanic.


Edited by RamRaid90, 07 January 2018 - 12:20 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users