Jump to content


Is the ability of the playerbase at an all time low?


  • Please log in to reply
241 replies to this topic

Simeon85 #1 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:16 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 4,056
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

*
POPULAR

As we can see on the forum there are plenty of threads around the theme of how bad players are these days -

 

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/696268-premary-league-and-bot-league/

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/696170-red-players/

http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/696176-newest-meta/

 

Not to mention the threads about losing streaks etc. that pop up and the complaints in the MM thread.

 

So its a popular topic at the moment and anecdotally, with admitted zero evidence to support this, I feel like the standard of gameplay has just deteriorated to new lows and most players seem completely incapable of even semi-competent play, leading to some quit horribly one sided games (now many of the MM tin foil hate brigade will claim this is rigged or we need skill balancing, but I disagree, it's the snowball effect triggered by a few awful plays IMO) and more generally just an awful standard of gameplay. 

 

But what particularly has prompted me to come to this decision is the play of players you expect more from, players that are statistically above average, and should be somewhat competent, but these days do not seem to be.

 

Watching like 50 -  52% players making horrible horrible plays and errors you might expect from 45% players.

 

As an example last night I got barracked in chat by a 53% overall win rate player, who has even 3 marked some tier 10 tanks, about how important the 1 line on Cliff is. Pretty much any good and experienced player in this game should know that the 1 line on Cliff is a noob trap, much like the beach on Overlord, that offers no map control and any push there is almost always quite easily dealt with by having control of the middle of the map and the higher ground. (military tactics 101 really). 

 

I was quite astounded that a player who statistically was decent, could be this pig headed about such an obviously wrong assessment and it got me thinking how bad the standard of even statistically above average players seems to be these days.

 

I remember when I first started playing the game playing with a mate, we platooned a lot, he was a 48-49% overall win rate player with like 51% recents, he'd make mistakes of course, but he knew how to play the game to a competent level, was aware of map control, knew not to push into campers, knew to defend the base, could trade at least 1 for 1, could recognise cross fires and flanking, basically he could play to a competent level without being exceptional and generally just wasn't that consistent.

 

But players of that statistical level now? I don't feel they have anywhere near that level of ability, the 48-50% of now to me seem to play more like the 45-47% ers of like 3-4 years ago, they seem to be able to basically camp hard, or yolo push and do very little inbetween.

 

Despite playing the same maps probably 1000s of times they still seem to have zero clue about map control or valuable flanks etc. They can't even trade 1 for 1, lemming trans for days that don't push or just lose against lesser tanks. 

 

Just the general ability of the playerbase seems to have gone down several notches on the skill level.

 

Which leads to the horrible gameplay where teams fold like a bad poker player.

 

I can only hypothesis that this has been because of two main factors -

 

1. There has been a talent drain of good players and experienced players, forced away by all WGs bad decisions (Idiot proof heavies, derp guns galore, bad map design, OP tanks, OP premiums, sbmm in SHs, lack of rewards/features in CWs, continued annoyance of arty etc. etc.)

 

So there are less good players to go around and keep game quality up.

 

2. The new players that have replaced them over the last few years have been 'learning' in a dumb environment that doesn't teach them anything.

  • Idiot proof no frontal weakspot heavies that teach nothing about good heavy play and encourage players to become over confident when out of these dumb vehicles.
  • Lots of high calibre HE based guns that require little aiming or armour knowledge. Just auto-aim gameplay basically and always do decent damage (T49, Jap Heavies, 183s etc.)
  • Corridor maps that protect players from being flanked or cross fired, which again leads them to having no clue of what to do when they do blunder into these situations. 
  • Arty made even easier to play, which literally teaches you nothing about how to play tanks or survive in the actual game. Bigger splash so you can barely miss, faster reloads, aim times, nerfing of tracers so no counter battery etc. 
  • Dumb base camping positions with OP bushes, which then don't teach players to learn about camo mechanics, double bushing, or positioning themselves in TDs and other support tanks in anywhere else but on the red line/base.
  • 3-5-7 MM which either teaches you that you will be cannon fodder most of the time unable to do much against super power creep top tiers, or the rare top tier games where you can basically roll your face over the keyboard and still do well, but little inbetween meaning players basically just roll from game to game without really trying. 
  • Boosters and other shortcut events allowing players to get to higher tiers in record time and thus not learning enough at more forgiving tiers or how to play the vehicles. 

 

All of which IMO has bred a bunch of bad players who haven't been forced to learn the skills players coming through the game had to 3, 4, 5 years ago. 

 

And they are taking the places of the thousands of good players who have given up on the game.

 

Oh and I believe the recent rewards programme with the T-50-2 has bought players back to the game who haven't played for years so have no idea what they are doing in the current meta and maps, which means I have seen loads of beta tester badge players failing so hard.

 

Which all adds up IMO to a standard of players and thus a standard of gameplay at its lowest level ever seen. 

 

EDIT: Also PMs that encourage poor gameplay, like get a certain amount of kills or damage in the first 3/4 minutes of games is a terrible idea as it encourages yolos. 


Edited by Simeon85, 09 January 2019 - 10:53 AM.


signal11th #2 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:20 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39059 battles
  • 5,993
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011
I think the answer can be WG have done marathon after marathon event after event, bonuses after bonus and we are just seeing the end product of that. The amount of Account farmers, bots, bad players that have come out of the woodwork is what you're now seeing.

kaneloon #3 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:36 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29229 battles
  • 2,274
  • Member since:
    11-18-2011

You sound like it's a duty to be good, and players have a will to be bad. But it is a complex game, and some people have less "natural gifts".

Beside some of your good players are with gold/food/fiber connexion farming those free to play newbies - and that doesn't teach them anything.

 

And then WG make them believe those marvellous premium tanks can save them (which is not entirely fantasy ... yes IS-3A, I'm looking at you).

 

PS : Not sure your line 1 example on cliff is a good one, lots of game are decided here, by fast south meds spotting the north team.



Simeon85 #4 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:39 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 4,056
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postkaneloon, on 09 January 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

PS : Not sure your line 1 example on cliff is a good one, lots of game are decided here, by fast south meds spotting the north team.

 

That is not the 1 line then is it, you've gone middle. Meds that rush to that spot go up and work around the central mountain, this guy camped on the 1 line and thought other people should come do the same. 

 

The 1 line on Cliff is useless, generally the team that wastes more assets there loses, because those players can't have any impact on the rest of the map. They just get farmed from the top. 



LordMuffin #5 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:43 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 48615 battles
  • 11,519
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-21-2011

View Postkaneloon, on 09 January 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

You sound like it's a duty to be good, and players have a will to be bad. But it is a complex game, and some people have less "natural gifts".

Beside some of your good players are with gold/food/fiber connexion farming those free to play newbies - and that doesn't teach them anything.

 

And then WG make them believe those marvellous premium tanks can save them (which is not entirely fantasy ... yes IS-3A, I'm looking at you).

 

PS : Not sure your line 1 example on cliff is a good one, lots of game are decided here, by fast south meds spotting the north team.

1 line on cliff us useless, you don't gain anything from there.

If you don't move your tank up to the high ground in some way, you are not contributing at all.

You can move your med to the mid of 1 line and then go up to the high ground, this is a viable play. IF1 you go mid on 1 line and stay down there wanting to spot enemy campers, you will probably not spot anyone,  and the ones spotted can probably not be shot by your team mates. So the best you can hope for is that the enemy team is so retarded that they decide to try and push you, at which point you can just move up to the high ground and have superior position and kill many tanks with ease. If you have some TDs at 1 line aswell, the enemy push will get killed in no time.

 

 

By losing the 1 line you don't lose anything of importance.

You can't cap, you are stuck below enemy team, so they can shoot down on you and can cover most of their tanks aswell. You can't push up anywhere except maybe mid 1 line area without getting into a crossfire. And even that mid 1 line push up is fruitless if enemy have control over the high ground area, because then you will be in a crossfire.



fwhaatpiraat #6 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:45 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 50451 battles
  • 905
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013

View Postkaneloon, on 09 January 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

You sound like it's a duty to be good, and players have a will to be bad. But it is a complex game, and some people have less "natural gifts".

Beside some of your good players are with gold/food/fiber connexion farming those free to play newbies - and that doesn't teach them anything.

 

And then WG make them believe those marvellous premium tanks can save them (which is not entirely fantasy ... yes IS-3A, I'm looking at you).

 

PS : Not sure your line 1 example on cliff is a good one, lots of game are decided here, by fast south meds spotting the north team.

Gold ammo, food and a fast connection don't let people go to the wrong places on the map, bad decisions do.

 

1 line on Cliff is an excellent example, it is not the fast vehicles going up that he is referring to, but the slower vehicles that just sit there for ages. And there are many of such useless players.

 

And yes, these people are convinced they make the correct play, which baffles me as well. Just like the base camping T95s on Karelia or El Halluf: "I am slow". That is a great reason to be useless until the team is dead and the game is lost.



Dikkeh0nd #7 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:47 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22522 battles
  • 206
  • [E-BAY] E-BAY
  • Member since:
    12-29-2012
Nice post dude :)
09:48 Added after 1 minute

View Postkaneloon, on 09 January 2019 - 10:36 AM, said:

You sound like it's a duty to be good, and players have a will to be bad. But it is a complex game, and some people have less "natural gifts".

Beside some of your good players are with gold/food/fiber connexion farming those free to play newbies - and that doesn't teach them anything.

 

And then WG make them believe those marvellous premium tanks can save them (which is not entirely fantasy ... yes IS-3A, I'm looking at you).

 

PS : Not sure your line 1 example on cliff is a good one, lots of game are decided here, by fast south meds spotting the north team.

 

So i recon you go beach on overlord?

pallie_the_artillerist #8 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18384 battles
  • 1,185
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    01-12-2013

I think the playerbase is stronger than ever.  I use XVM and when I play a tier 10 only match I feel like the average WN8 is much higher than it was 4 years ago. The reason for onesided games I think lies in the fact that WG has added more and more tankwise extremes to the game. Of course a game is going to be unbalanced stomp when a Leopard 1 gets matched with an obj.  907, or a T110E5 gets matched with a type 5 heavy.

 

Sure there are still bad players around, but the highest retention rate is among well playing whales that understand the game and have great games regularly.



Sirebellus #9 Posted 09 January 2019 - 10:56 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20368 battles
  • 680
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostDikkeh0nd, on 09 January 2019 - 10:47 AM, said:

 

 

So i recon you go beach on overlord?

 

But then... I have played in a number of games on Overlord that have been won because one team sent tanks to the beach and the other team all went and camped bush in the East (9 and 0 lines)

Any tactic will work if the enemies lemming train and don't look at the minimap

Edited by Sirebellus, 09 January 2019 - 10:57 AM.


signal11th #10 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:02 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39059 battles
  • 5,993
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

View PostSirebellus, on 09 January 2019 - 09:56 AM, said:

 

But then... I have played in a number of games on Overlord that have been won because one team sent tanks to the beach and the other team all went and camped bush in the East (9 and 0 lines)

Any tactic will work if the enemies lemming train and don't look at the minimap

 

Yes but the odds are against it for every 10 games I play on overlord 1 or max 2 will win because they yoloed beach and nobody else did. Personally I would prefer an 80% chance of a win than a 20% chance. Going to the beach on Overlord as many have pointed out is just idiotic, common sense alone should "scream" at you that going to a place that.. you lose coverage over 90% of the map, takes ages to get up or down from, hard to relocate from is just a dumb idea.

TungstenHitman #11 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:05 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25369 battles
  • 4,577
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

I think it is worse and I also feel the standard was higher before. I don't think I've ever seen a playerbase in other games as clueless as it is in this game on such a large scale. You'll get clueless players in any game and we were all clueless at the start and for a while of course, but with this game it's most players most battles, it's just on such a huge scale. It's not a problem to be bad at a game or to fail etc but I'm just saying I've never seen it on such a large scale.

 

I think I have evidence of this playbase skill regression too. I recently re-purchased a JP2. The last time I had it was a year ago or maybe a bit longer. I had a potato PC and didn't do amazing things with it but I checked it's mark percentage before I started to play it again. It was at 63% MoE. After I played just one battle it jumped to 74% MoE. That's simply a massive jump. There can be several reasons for this,

 

Edit

 

(1) A tank might get nerfed. If you a play a tank weeks after the nerf, there is a jump in marks since the older resuIts with better tank will be stronger compared to the newer nerfed versions weaker average results. I don't think the JP2 did got nerfed so that's not the reason.

 

(2) It was once a popular tank with excellent players which kept the bar high and now a year later it's not as popular with excellent players so the bar is much lower now than it was. I don't think that was ever the case with the JP2

 

(3) The most likely reason, the playerbase ability is weaker now than it used to be. In other words, the standard was higher before, it was harder to mark tanks as a result but those better players are mostly gone now and all that's left are noobs and weaker players and so this is reflected in a sudden jump in MoE % after playing a tank a year later in a weaker player ability environment. What was once only good enough for 63% in a stronger playerbase is now good enough for 74% marks in a weaker playerbase. 

 

Do you think this is evidence? I would.


Edited by TungstenHitman, 09 January 2019 - 12:25 PM.


Simeon85 #12 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:06 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 4,056
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

Games are never won by going beach on Overlord or 1 line on Cliff IMO, if teams send forces there and happen win it's not because of that push on a useless flank but because the other team is so woeful its still failed in the middle even with all the advantages. 

 

Teams still lost on defence on Sand River Assault, didn't mean the map was balanced, it just means that you can give WOT players everything going possible and they can still fail, just like players regularly fail in Defenders and Bobjects, even when top tier in 3-5-7s. 

 

View PostTungstenHitman, on 09 January 2019 - 11:05 AM, said:

I think it is worse and I also feel the standard was higher before. I don't think I've ever seen a playerbase in other games as clueless as it is in this game on such a large scale. You'll get clueless players in any game and we were all clueless at the start and for a while of course, but with this game it's most players most battles, it's just on such a huge scale. It's not a problem to be bad at a game or to fail etc but I'm just saying I've never seen it on such a large scale.

 

I think I have evidence of this playbase skill regression too. I recently re-purchased a JP2. The last time I had it was a year ago or maybe a bit longer. I had a potato PC and didn't do amazing things with it but I checked it's mark percentage before I started to play it again. It was at 63% MoE. After I played just one battle it jumped to 74% MoE. That's simply a massive jump. There can be several reasons for this,

 

(1) A tank might get a buff, I don't think the JP2 did get a buff to increase performance so dramatically

 

(2) It was once a popular tank played by excellent players back when I originally played that set the bar high but now it's not popular so the bar has since lowered... I don't think this is the case.

 

(3) The bar was originally much higher aka. player skill and ability was much higher back when I first played it but now that player ability is simply no longer there, the standard is not as high as it once was and as a result, this is reflected in such a dramatic jump from 63% MoE when I played it a year ago to 74% MoE after just 1 battle a year or more later.

 

Do you think this is evidence? I would.

 

 

Actually yes, this is a good point, I have had a similar experience in other tank with regards to MOE that I hadn't played in a long while.

 

An example is the Tiger 1 which I haven't really played since I ground out the E100 years ago, I played 1 game and jumped like 8% MOE and needed about 4 games to finish the 3 marks.

 

The 3 MOE requirement for the Tiger 1 is like 1900 combined damage these days, it's 400 damage more than it's hit points total, that is how bad the playerbase is playing that tank that you can do pretty much its HP in damage and be better than like 90% of players. 

 

And I believe the Tiger 1 actually got buffed in this time as well from when I last played it. 


Edited by Simeon85, 09 January 2019 - 11:10 AM.


Balc0ra #13 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:11 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 68047 battles
  • 17,657
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012
Funny thing is that when I joined, people said the same thing. As in with the increasing population. So for some, the issues have resided longer than others. I suspect it's due to the increased population getting better and noticing others remaining the same if you will. 

Edited by Balc0ra, 09 January 2019 - 11:12 AM.


TankkiPoju #14 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:12 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21294 battles
  • 6,562
  • Member since:
    05-20-2011

*edited*  


Edited by Jahpero, 09 January 2019 - 11:57 AM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to flaming.


unhappy_bunny #15 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:15 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18772 battles
  • 2,987
  • [-OC-] -OC-
  • Member since:
    08-01-2012

While you may be right about the overall skill level of players falling, there is something missing in your post. What is that I wonder?

 

Oh yes. The right to criticise others on the basis of their game stats. Sweet that you choose to berate low win rate players from an account that has what win rate? That makes it look like you are just raging like a spoiled child because the game hasnt given you the results you want. Your arguement would carry more weight if you posted from a different account.

 

However, there does seem to be a problem, in particular with higher tiers. The question is, why are so many low win rate players, especually with low battle counts, flocking to T8 and above?

 

One reason could be the easy access to T8 in the form of Premium tanks.

Another could be the hype that gives the impression that T8 and above is the indicator that a player has reached the top. Hype from both WG in their adverts, hype from a lot of streamers and youtube posters, and also hype from the forums. Reading the forum, there are so many instances of players saying this T8 tanks is OP or that that one is so much fun to play. WG depict a new Premium tank as being "ready to rule the battlefield", and streamers show just how awesome they are in the latest T8. And add to that the way so,e posters deride players who like to play T4-T7, and you have an environment where the new player is encouraged from all sides to skip the grind, to rush for that glittering, golden T8 without having taken the time to learn the game.

 

And then, that player gets castigated for doing the very thing he was encouraged to do. 



cro001 #16 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:17 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30916 battles
  • 2,488
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View Postpallie_the_artillerist, on 09 January 2019 - 10:56 AM, said:

I think the playerbase is stronger than ever.  I use XVM and when I play a tier 10 only match I feel like the average WN8 is much higher than it was 4 years ago. The reason for onesided games I think lies in the fact that WG has added more and more tankwise extremes to the game. Of course a game is going to be unbalanced stomp when a Leopard 1 gets matched with an obj.  907, or a T110E5 gets matched with a type 5 heavy.

 

Sure there are still bad players around, but the highest retention rate is among well playing whales that understand the game and have great games regularly.

 

I agree with this. This also polarizes the playerbase, you have guys who are more inclined to play whatever tank to get decent stats and guys who like hipster tanks and play4funTM. What you eventually end up is player who cares in his meta tank versus player who doesn't really care that much.

But also it's important to note that people got lazy with over time with simplified maps and mechanics/tanks, I often find myself doing "why bother" move when I drive some tanks because it's incredibly hard for one tank to outplay another and stupid map.

 

View PostTankkiPoju, on 09 January 2019 - 11:12 AM, said:

*edited*  

 

*edited*  


Edited by Jahpero, 09 January 2019 - 11:58 AM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to off-topic.


The_Georgian_One #17 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:18 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38575 battles
  • 1,776
  • [KOFN] KOFN
  • Member since:
    01-05-2015

I think you're right with the reasons you provided, Tajj. It's various changes over last few years that scared the good players away and appealed to less skilled, casual players. At the same time WG took a strategy to satisfy the needs of the bad players and make sure they don't have to put any effort to learn even the most basic things.

 

Over last couple of weeks in particular, probably due to T50-2 and Xmas special, I've been seeing tons and tons of players with 20k or more battles and 45-46% win rate. They haven't learned anything, putting so much time in the game and they will not learn, cause they don't have to. Reporting them as bots doesn't work, they pay for the game (most likely), so they have credits to play higher tiers and they don't care they loose 50k credits a battle, cause they can't pen anything playing their IS7s.

 

There is no system to encourage better play, nor is there anything that punishes botting. This will only become worse and worse, as good players will have lesser control over their win rate (you really cannot chew through the full enemy team alone!), will get frustrated and leave.

 

As to the statistics - I've already been looking at it, but will actively count now - the number of players with above 50% WR in teams. It is very frequent for this to be around 3 a team nowadays, unless you only play in the evening, when the quality of players seem to be higher.


Edited by The_Georgian_One, 09 January 2019 - 11:21 AM.


cro001 #18 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:28 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30916 battles
  • 2,488
  • [GX] GX
  • Member since:
    10-21-2012

View Postunhappy_bunny, on 09 January 2019 - 11:15 AM, said:

Oh yes. The right to criticise others on the basis of their game stats. Sweet that you choose to berate low win rate players from an account that has what win rate? That makes it look like you are just raging like a spoiled child because the game hasnt given you the results you want. Your arguement would carry more weight if you posted from a different account.

 

How did you draw that from OP? He literally stated that old 49%ers play better than today's 52%er. Also how does his post make his look spoiled? As far as his posts go, he posts unicum level posts regardless of his account.

 



CmdRatScabies #19 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:29 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 37628 battles
  • 4,590
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostSimeon85, on 09 January 2019 - 11:06 AM, said:

An example is the Tiger 1 which I haven't really played since I ground out the E100 years ago, I played 1 game and jumped like 8% MOE and needed about 4 games to finish the 3 marks.

 

The 3 MOE requirement for the Tiger 1 is like 1900 combined damage these days, it's 400 damage more than it's hit points total, that is how bad the playerbase is playing that tank that you can do pretty much its HP in damage and be better than like 90% of players.

 

And I believe the Tiger 1 actually got buffed in this time as well from when I last played it.

 

Remember that a lot of things have changed in the last couple of years.  Even if a tank isn't nerfed or buffed directly then it will be affected by the tanks it's playing against - 3/5/7 will have had an impact as will buffs to other tanks it meets.  Some tanks will be impacted more than others.

Simeon85 #20 Posted 09 January 2019 - 11:32 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 1097 battles
  • 4,056
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View Postpallie_the_artillerist, on 09 January 2019 - 10:56 AM, said:

I think the playerbase is stronger than ever.  I use XVM and when I play a tier 10 only match I feel like the average WN8 is much higher than it was 4 years ago. The reason for onesided games I think lies in the fact that WG has added more and more tankwise extremes to the game. Of course a game is going to be unbalanced stomp when a Leopard 1 gets matched with an obj.  907, or a T110E5 gets matched with a type 5 heavy.

 

Sure there are still bad players around, but the highest retention rate is among well playing whales that understand the game and have great games regularly.

 

Surprised you think that its higher than ever, especially considering your clan which was well known and very good, probably most of its old members no longer play, which is similar for many other good clans of old.

 

Though I do agree on the mismatch thing, which is further made worse because of 3-5-7, 50bs being matched against Type 5s, Grilles and Strvs vs Bobjects, 430Us vs 30bs etc. and they are your top tiers, makes it difficult, especially if there are average players on both sides for those players in lesser tanks to contribute for their team, especially in paper tanks in this armour/corridor meta.

 

 

View Postunhappy_bunny, on 09 January 2019 - 11:15 AM, said:

While you may be right about the overall skill level of players falling, there is something missing in your post. What is that I wonder?

 

Oh yes. The right to criticise others on the basis of their game stats. Sweet that you choose to berate low win rate players from an account that has what win rate? That makes it look like you are just raging like a spoiled child because the game hasnt given you the results you want. Your arguement would carry more weight if you posted from a different account.

 

However, there does seem to be a problem, in particular with higher tiers. The question is, why are so many low win rate players, especually with low battle counts, flocking to T8 and above?

 

One reason could be the easy access to T8 in the form of Premium tanks.

Another could be the hype that gives the impression that T8 and above is the indicator that a player has reached the top. Hype from both WG in their adverts, hype from a lot of streamers and youtube posters, and also hype from the forums. Reading the forum, there are so many instances of players saying this T8 tanks is OP or that that one is so much fun to play. WG depict a new Premium tank as being "ready to rule the battlefield", and streamers show just how awesome they are in the latest T8. And add to that the way so,e posters deride players who like to play T4-T7, and you have an environment where the new player is encouraged from all sides to skip the grind, to rush for that glittering, golden T8 without having taken the time to learn the game.

 

And then, that player gets castigated for doing the very thing he was encouraged to do. 

 

Free speech gives me the right to criticise whatever I like I'd reckon.

 

Though I would agree that tier 8 premiums, particularly then ones given out for free or for heavy discounts or rentals to inexperienced players cannot help the gameplay standard. 

 

 

View PostThe_Georgian_One, on 09 January 2019 - 11:18 AM, said:

Over last couple of weeks in particular, probably due to T50-2 and Xmas special, I've been seeing tons and tons of players with 20k or more battles and 45-46% win rate. They haven't learned anything, putting so much time in the game and they will not learn, cause they don't have to. Reporting them as bots doesn't work, they pay for the game (most likely), so they have credits to play higher tiers and they don't care they loose 50k credits a battle, cause they can't pen anything playing their IS7s.

 

There is no system to encourage better play, nor is there anything that punishes botting. This will only become worse and worse, as good players will have lesser control over their win rate (you really cannot chew through the full enemy team alone!), will get frustrated and leave.

 

As to the statistics - I've already been looking at it, but will actively count now - the number of players with above 50% WR in teams. It is very frequent for this to be around 3 a team nowadays, unless you only play in the evening, when the quality of players seem to be higher.

 

Yep. 

 

Boosters, credit boosters, free tier 8 premiums, PMs, current Xmas events, probably easier than ever for players to fail their way to higher tiers and afford to keep failing there. 

 

The amount of premium spam is insane at the moment and I can only presume it's the extra credits everyone is earning from the Xmas event. 

 

And yes its hard to carry when you don't get time to do it, which often you don't when the team fold so quickly. 

 

I also feel that whilst we have seen average game times not changing much, that these have been artificially bumped by the super campy map changes introduced after 1.0, like Erlenberg, Malinovka, Prohk etc. where games get drawn out to stand still because of all the OP base camping positions meaning on these maps it takes ages to dig out the final campers, even though in reality the game was over several minutes ago, and these drawn out games tend to even out the fast losses that seem to be happening.

 

I have also done the same, looked at post match screens and seen how many above 50% players there are, most players in both teams now seem to be like sub 47%ers and you barely see anyone above 50% win rate. 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users