Jump to content


Have you ever considered why he/she is bad?

for once serious toxicity

  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

PowJay #101 Posted 02 February 2019 - 12:00 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 39790 battles
  • 5,386
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

I haven't read all of the comments, but it is clear that there are players who- if they don't have PC issues- are pretty much brain dead. I watched one the other day. Not a clue. Camped at the back on Minsk blind shooting and when we had almost won he finally advanced and his shooting at targets was almost as bad as his shooting into thin air. End result? Quite predictable. Overall stats. Pretty much what I expected.

 

Now we had won this battle, but when these sorts of players are the last ones alive and all they have to do is kill the last enemy tank on low HP and, to add insult to injury, everyone better than a zombie knows where the enemy is, or is likely to be, but he advances with his turret pointing in completely the opposite direction. When the enemy does appear it's like la, la, la, la, la in his head until he gets shot and then a couple more rounds of do, de do, de do before he realises that the enemy that shot him has appeared 50m away. All he needs to do is get one hit and he WILL pen and he WILL kill the enemy, and he misses.


 

Is it any wonder half decent players can't control their anger?



Rod_75 #102 Posted 02 February 2019 - 12:14 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 29816 battles
  • 186
  • [ORKI2] ORKI2
  • Member since:
    02-03-2012

View PostBaldrickk, on 01 February 2019 - 11:39 AM, said:

The depth is what keeps you hooked once yoy are into the game.

It's for this reason that low tier tanks can basically penetrate each other anywhere, it makes a better introduction to the game. 

 

How much time did she spend at the low tiers, or did she rush up?

 

Odd that she liked AW when it's basically as much of a WOT clone that my.com could get away with. 

 

She just got tier 1 and 2. Perhaps a tier3.

Bu ti think just tier 2.

 

Rod

23:16 Added after 1 minute

View PostseXikanac, on 01 February 2019 - 11:36 PM, said:

 

Your wifey is my hero :D

 

Yes.

And she is competitive.

She dislikes to lose.

But more important, she loves to learn.

 

Rod



Baldrickk #103 Posted 02 February 2019 - 01:32 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32165 battles
  • 16,693
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostRod_75, on 02 February 2019 - 12:14 AM, said:

 

She just got tier 1 and 2. Perhaps a tier3.

Bu ti think just tier 2.

 

Rod

Then I'm struggling to see where the difference in gameplay really is, at the lower tiers, the two games are even more alike.

 

PvP at least. The PvE which I think you said she was playing on AW is against bots who act similarly each time, and you do objectives instead of playing against real people.

 

Just trying to understand where the real difference is...



Yakito #104 Posted 02 February 2019 - 02:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20019 battles
  • 1,439
  • Member since:
    05-03-2011
And what excuse do you have for no map awareness, leaving team members to try and defend a crucial part of the map while you snipe from AP in an is3?
You can still predict a lot of things just by looking at the map.

spamhamstar #105 Posted 02 February 2019 - 06:48 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 64313 battles
  • 2,470
  • [WIKD] WIKD
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

Couldn't be bothered reading the whole thread, but just in case anyone hasn't mentioned them yet, I blame WG.  TBF it's mainly our (the players) fault but WG are still culpable of not explaining the game properly. 

 

The tutorial sucked when I started playing as only really covered using the wsad keys & firing.  I'm told its improved somewhat, but still isn't great.

 

The wiki is a bit of help, but the content there comes from the community not WG.  I know this cuz I have my own special mention in it :)

 

There's great content available on you tube, but not from WG & as WoT players tend to be a little bit older, do we all use you tube or think of it as somewhere to get help anyway?

 

I think the biggest issue is that a lot of players think of the game as just another fps, when it used to be so much more than that, despite recent attempts to dumb it down to that level.  So we instal the game, play the tutorial then jump straight into tier 1 where you don't need to learn anything to progress.  2 games later you're on tier 2, where most things still don't matter.  Tier 3 is a bit better but you're still under 50 games & can bumble your way through.  Then you're up to tier 4 & playing with everyone else anyway & have already learned the most important lesson.  You don't need to be good to progress.



Mr_Burrows #106 Posted 02 February 2019 - 07:51 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 48532 battles
  • 2,228
  • [D-NUT] D-NUT
  • Member since:
    02-17-2012

View Postspamhamstar, on 02 February 2019 - 06:48 AM, said:

Couldn't be bothered reading the whole thread, but just in case anyone hasn't mentioned them yet, I blame WG.  TBF it's mainly our (the players) fault but WG are still culpable of not explaining the game properly. 

 

The tutorial sucked when I started playing as only really covered using the wsad keys & firing.  I'm told its improved somewhat, but still isn't great.

 

The wiki is a bit of help, but the content there comes from the community not WG.  I know this cuz I have my own special mention in it :)

 

There's great content available on you tube, but not from WG & as WoT players tend to be a little bit older, do we all use you tube or think of it as somewhere to get help anyway?

 

I think the biggest issue is that a lot of players think of the game as just another fps, when it used to be so much more than that, despite recent attempts to dumb it down to that level.  So we instal the game, play the tutorial then jump straight into tier 1 where you don't need to learn anything to progress.  2 games later you're on tier 2, where most things still don't matter.  Tier 3 is a bit better but you're still under 50 games & can bumble your way through.  Then you're up to tier 4 & playing with everyone else anyway & have already learned the most important lesson.  You don't need to be good to progress.

 

Well put. 
I will add that this is so true, as there are loads of players that have died their way up to tier 10. It seems to work just fine. 

 

And tbh, the XVM stats shows a lot. A lot. If you end up on a team that mostly consists of orange and red players you know for a fact that most of your teammates actually are quite bad at the game. Quite bad indeed. If you play a light and spot the enemy team your team does not hit a shot (Ih vae almost stopped going field on Siegfried Line since I have had enough 6-7-8-9 spotted tanks games but only racked up 1K assists. It just does not make sense spotting for people that does not know how to hit a barn from the inside. If you play arty you can almost count on having the enemy team break through and kill you in less than half the game. And so on and so-forth. 

I still ponder that T-44 from the other day. 18.000 games. 43% WR. That individual must enjoy being bad, for sure he must? 18K games and that much below average... Just like any Gaussian curve shows the distribution of skill there must be a similar curve for what people enjoy about playing a game - play to win or play to lose. 



1ucky #107 Posted 02 February 2019 - 06:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 85143 battles
  • 1,244
  • [THRIL] THRIL
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

Have you ever considered how people consider why players are "bad"?

 

I've considered considering it myself, but I haven't done so yet.

 



Dillstrom #108 Posted 03 February 2019 - 04:56 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1106 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013

Also bad players might have bad crews. I saw a topic at the newcomers sections, asking about if they can use tier 9 tank crew on a tier 10 tank. I'm afraid the player asking this didn't know the answer, meaning he has not moved his crew from a tank to another, meaning he has a fresh crew on every tank. Even at tiers 9 and 10. No wonder those players have 46% winrate, they are at such disadvantage with a stock crew or crew has has BiA on one crew member, 76% firefighting on one and the rest have perks at various levels.

 

I understand that some players don't want to learn even the basics, because it would take about 10 minutes a day for a week to understand how things work, but it's too much to ask. What I don't understand is why does everyone else in the team have to suffer from this? There are people who like to play this seriously, meaning they are trying to win. Trolling around with a bad crew, really stupid equipment or no equipment at all shooting only HE might be fun, but it's also unsportsmanlike conduct. Since WoT has no endgame, it's all about the battles and destroying enemies, bad players should be limited to low tiers. If they can't learn the basics, if they can't win because they can't do damage, why should they be playing with those who want to have great battles? Like great Claus Kellerman said in a video "a team mate, a member of the same team, one who share the same goals and is working with you in order to achieve them". None of the 46% WR playes are that, they don't try to win or work together to achieve them. So why should they be in the team? Limit them to tier 4 max, nobody cares what happens there.

 

Lemmingsrush has said it the best: a tomato in a position (on the map) of a unicum has a great result, a unicum in a position (on the map) of a tomato has bad result. When a player dies in the battle, it's usually not because of RNG or because they missed a weakspot, it's because of bad positioning. Bad players never learn, I see bad players doing the same stuff everytime they get a certain map. Bad players go to the valley in Lakeville, even with 3 SPGs or 5 TDs, then they can't push the valley and wonder why enemy flanked from the city. Bad players always camp in the base in Steppes, they never spot anything and die with 0 damage because enemy flanks them. Bad players think the houses in Malinovka is great cover, and they die with 0 damage because the enemy takes the map control and flanks them. When a bad player dies, nothing goes through their head, because if they were able to think what went wrong, they'd learn and one day they wouldn't be bad. But no, they die, so they exit the garage and fail another tank. This would be OK if it didn't ruin the battle for the rest of the team, in a single player game it would be no problem.

 

To become average or better than average in WoT is not hard. Go to the right places, use the strenghts of your tank, don't get killed and farm damage. It's all about damage until a certain winrate, so do damage. If you try a position on the map, and you can't do any damage from there and you can't spot anyone your team can shoot, don't go there again. Go somewhere where you can shoot the enemy and you can either stay unspotted or get into a cover after you've fired. And you also need to be able to see the enemy from there, that's why the houses at the base in Malinovka are bad, you can't see anyone from there unless they rush the field, which happens never. Still in every battle there are players camping there. Besides, the bases in Malinovka are in the open, if you can control the forest below the hill, you can let enemy come to the base because they have no cover there and you can shoot them from the forest. Of course this means you have to know you are not flanked from the hill, this means you need to control the hill. But no, bad players sit in the base behind houses, die with 0 damage and repeat the same thing in the next battle never thinking what went wrong.



Dillstrom #109 Posted 05 February 2019 - 11:23 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1106 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013

http://prntscr.com/mguhal
Why are these players so bad? Because they are [edited]. VK camped in the base, because during 7000 battles you don't learn to use WASD to move your tank. And what happened when enemy light tank came into our base? VK did nothing because it's a retard. Then it rushed to the open and died in 15 seconds to 2 enemy TDs. Why should it be allowed to play high tier battles? It never does anything, it has 44% winrate. If it does 0 damage in every battle, why should it be in the game? It's freaking game, it's supposed to be played. This thing never plays. Same with Obj.257. Top tier heavy tank, does 0 damage because it's a moron.

 

These are the kind of rat pukes that ruin the game. It's not gold ammo, it's not SPGs, it's not unbalanced maps, it's useless subanimals that never do anything. Why? I guess they only play for fun and their fun is ruining the game for us humans. Is this what WG really wants? The meta changes also, our heavy tanks are not there to stop the enemy push, because our heavy tanks are drooling on themselves and wondering what a mouse is and how to use it. I'd understand this during the first 10 battles, but almost 10k tries and still no idea how to do anything? Even bots play better, so why not replace these useless idiots with bots? If the game is about having fun, give us bots that move and shoot and do damage instead of these coma patients. These things never learn to play because they don't want to try, that's pretty unsportsmanlike conduct. One would think the decent thing is to admit that maybe this game is not for them and quit, but of course they won't quit because it's so much fun to do 0 damage and ruin battles.



Evilier_than_Skeletor #110 Posted 05 February 2019 - 12:56 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20554 battles
  • 772
  • [TSOP] TSOP
  • Member since:
    02-05-2016

View PostYakito, on 02 February 2019 - 02:56 AM, said:

And what excuse do you have for no map awareness, leaving team members to try and defend a crucial part of the map while you snipe from AP in an is3?
You can still predict a lot of things just by looking at the map.

Besides that you'd first have to know the crucial parts of each map, no one has actually told new players what to do with the map.

 

Try to find anything on how to use the minimap. You'll find one old vid and a bunch of ever so funny "There is a minimap?" -posts. Using the map might be a little too obvious for good players for anyone to make a guide on it. But is it really and why would you look at it if you don't know why you should?



clixor #111 Posted 05 February 2019 - 01:58 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 54597 battles
  • 3,167
  • Member since:
    08-07-2011

View PostMr_Burrows, on 02 February 2019 - 07:51 AM, said:

 

Well put. 
I will add that this is so true, as there are loads of players that have died their way up to tier 10. It seems to work just fine. 

 

And tbh, the XVM stats shows a lot. A lot. If you end up on a team that mostly consists of orange and red players you know for a fact that most of your teammates actually are quite bad at the game. Quite bad indeed. If you play a light and spot the enemy team your team does not hit a shot (Ih vae almost stopped going field on Siegfried Line since I have had enough 6-7-8-9 spotted tanks games but only racked up 1K assists. It just does not make sense spotting for people that does not know how to hit a barn from the inside. If you play arty you can almost count on having the enemy team break through and kill you in less than half the game. And so on and so-forth. 

I still ponder that T-44 from the other day. 18.000 games. 43% WR. That individual must enjoy being bad, for sure he must? 18K games and that much below average... Just like any Gaussian curve shows the distribution of skill there must be a similar curve for what people enjoy about playing a game - play to win or play to lose. 

 

XVM is even worse if you start to consider that for tomato levels you have to be doing UNDER one shot a game, orange about one and a half shot. Which adds up if you look up post-battle stats, the majority of players will ONLY hit pen shot per battle. And that's every single battle they play.

 

Something i just don't understand, some players play so risk-averse (=camp), they do jack-crapfor the entire battle and eventually are surrounded and STILL do 0 dmg. Why not try something for a change, they might even do more than one pen a battle.

 



TANKOPPRESSION #112 Posted 05 February 2019 - 03:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 47816 battles
  • 968
  • Member since:
    04-25-2012

View Postclixor, on 05 February 2019 - 12:58 PM, said:

 

Something i just don't understand, some players play so risk-averse (=camp), they do jack-crapfor the entire battle and eventually are surrounded and STILL do 0 dmg. Why not try something for a change, they might even do more than one pen a battle.

 

You might want to consider that this could be one type of a WG designed bott .

Example ; A destroyer or tank with a quite powerful gun that sits very near the back in cover and not helping when they could if they moved a bit to get a shot  , then hes the only one left against say 2 very low hp enemy and winnable if now it dose exactly what its been doing all game waiting for the enemy , so what dose it do the WG designed bott that is , hes say right im going to move now towards their cap so becomes full hp target for two silly low hp tanks and now hes dead .

My opinion is this is just one of the WGs designed bott behaviours .

 



Dillstrom #113 Posted 05 February 2019 - 05:08 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1106 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013
Ok, how about these two: There is a house on Fisherman's Bay, near the docks where there is a bush next to the house, I think it's a church. You can get into the bush from behind that house, see the enemy, shoot an retreat back behind that house. That's what I did. I had two 44% WR things with me. They were right there next to me, watching me. One was top tier T34 with 7k battles. What did it do? Nothing, it hid behind the church all battle. The other guy went behind the bush side first, shot once but didn't move back and got killed. I took 22 shots from there, I spent almost the whole battle there farming the enemies, waiting to get unspotted, while these 2 never even tried anything intelligent. I guess we've just proven that monkey sees, monkey does doesn't work with things that are neitherhumans nor animals. But why are they in the battle? And someone tell me what kind of learning disability do they have not be able to move their tanks into the bush and to shoot? I ask once again, is this what WG wants this game to be?

Edited by VyNKaSMyN, 05 February 2019 - 08:21 PM.
*This post has been edited by the moderation team due to insults.


jabster #114 Posted 05 February 2019 - 05:16 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12721 battles
  • 25,709
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostDillstrom, on 05 February 2019 - 04:08 PM, said:

Ok, how about these two super stupids: There is a house on Fisherman's Bay, near the docks where there is a bush next to the house, I think it's a church. You can get into the bush from behind that house, see the enemy, shoot an retreat back behind that house. That's what I did. I had two 44% WR things with me. They were right there next to me, watching me. One was top tier T34 with 7k battles. What did it do? Nothing, it hid behind the church all battle. The other guy went behind the bush side first, shot once but didn't move back and got killed. I took 22 shots from there, I spent almost the whole battle there farming the enemies, waiting to get unspotted, while these 2 never even tried anything intelligent. I guess we've just proven that monkey sees, monkey does doesn't work with things that are neitherhumans nor animals. But why are they in the battle? And someone tell me what kind of learning disability do they have not be able to move their tanks into the bush and to shoot? I ask once again, is this what WG wants this game to be?

 

So this battle then Slind. Well you didn’t mention gas chambers this time which is a plus.

 

http://wotreplays.eu/site/4767232#stats

 

http://wotreplays.eu/site/index/version/78/player/Slind/sort/uploaded_at.desc/


Edited by jabster, 05 February 2019 - 05:18 PM.


Baldrickk #115 Posted 05 February 2019 - 06:09 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 32165 battles
  • 16,693
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View Postjabster, on 05 February 2019 - 05:16 PM, said:

 

So this battle then Slind. Well you didn’t mention gas chambers this time which is a plus.

 

http://wotreplays.eu/site/4767232#stats

 

http://wotreplays.eu/site/index/version/78/player/Slind/sort/uploaded_at.desc/

I didn't realise that it was him.

I did think it might be, but then the language seemed too tame.



Dillstrom #116 Posted 05 February 2019 - 06:11 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1106 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013
How does a bad player play T-44 as top tier? Camp in the base. How does a bad player play T71 DA? Camp in the base. How does a bad player play Black Prince? Camp in the base. And all this in the same battle. Tell me why these idiots can't learn to play? They are not new to the game, they just suck. So we are basically playing 12 vs 15, really great. 25k battles but doesn't know to move from the base, and dies with 0 damage. Bad players are bad because they don't even try to play, why is WG allowing this?

Dillstrom #117 Posted 05 February 2019 - 11:28 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 1106 battles
  • 103
  • Member since:
    10-16-2013

How many battles does it take to learn that you can win by capping the enemy base? Obviously more than 7000 for one particular bad player. Why hasn't him learned to cap? It might be just me but I don't think that's too difficult... So we were capping, one tank in the cap and one bad player sitting behind a rock next to the cap. We had time to cap with 2 tanks, but not with 1 so the enemy came, killed the one capping, then killed the one hiding behind a rock next to the cap. Why should a player that hasn't learned to cap in 7000 battles be in the battle? Does our team need a moron that follows the attack to the enemy base but not into it, and when it's time to win by sitting still and doing nothing, he fails? No wonder he has 45% winrate.

 

I think the reason is, when normal person's brains work like this: "cap = win, no cap = defeat", a bad player thinks "if I do nothing, we will win". What a team mate, "a member of the same team, one who shares the same goals and is working with you in order to achieve them". If someone, like that player, doesn't even try to be a team mate to any of those 14 players, why should it be in the team? Or in a team game?







Also tagged with for, once, serious, toxicity

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users