People not understanding the basics of the game

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 minute ago, Aethervox said:

I saw something else, you played like a coward.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Others have already said that there is a replay bug which causes the points to be switched on-screen. OP has told you his side was leading. Are you going to call him a liar?

[Aethervox]

4 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Immaterial redirection - a typical tactic of those who have no point to make.

4 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Others have already said that there is a replay bug which causes the points to be switched on-screen.

I watched the replay. What bug? I saw the enemy team had the lead for the later half of the battle.

5 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

OP has told you his side was leading.

Check replay. I saw the enemy team leading in points & OP got the W only because the last enemy BB got rammed.

5 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Are you going to call him a liar?

You trying to fish with 'bait', 'Cthulhu'? 

[thornzero]

For what its worth. The so called 'replay bug' is very suspicious if you ask me.

[Frostbow]

4 hours ago, torino2dc said:

Folks talk about wanting a more educated player base as if that will make their play experience better. Spoiler alert: it won't. 

The way we know this is because there are formats that exclude inexperienced players: clan battles, tournaments, and (to a certain extent) Gold Ranked. 

We need to define first the 'make their play experience better'. Is it a hard fought, close Random Battle? Is it a chill, sniping, camping Random Battle? The intricacies and the beauty of this game is that there is something for everyone, whether one is at home in PVE, Random Battles or in other, more competitive modes.

I cannot claim to speak beyond my admittedly very limited experience in the game, and I do understand where you are coming from when you mentioned about excluding inexperienced players in formats such as tournaments. 

Pre-pandemic, my experience in PVP has often been about hard fought battles. Sure, there were infrequent instances when the results showed a lopsided victory or defeat, but these were more of exceptions than the norm. What sustained my interest as I was playing more and more PVP and less Co-op, were the battles that showcased decisions and their late- to end-stage impact. It was a vastly better experience made even more entertaining and enlightening when I see purple players in divisions on both sides, fighting it out. 

Now, battles that reach the 17, 18, 19 minute mark are becoming less frequent, and I see an increasing number fellow players that somehow equate damage to game impact. Now, one can just yolo and not worry about waiting for the battle to end because he can just go to another match. Is it a better experience for all involved? Does it translate into an entertaining and enlightened post-battle discussion? I do not think it will, but I can only speak for myself.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I would rather have a hard fought battle that resulted in a defeat, than a lopsided victory that took almost zero effort to achieve. That for me would be a better play experience. 

[Ensign Cthulhu]

43 minutes ago, thornzero said:

For what its worth. The so called 'replay bug' is very suspicious if you ask me.

I believe @Lord_Zath has encountered this bug live on review streams. Ask him if you like.

[thornzero]

14 minutes ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

I believe @Lord_Zath has encountered this bug live on review streams. Ask him if you like.

No, I'm good.

[Justin_Simpleton]

27 minutes ago, Frostbow said:

What sustained my interest as I was playing more and more PVP and less Co-op, were the battles that showcased decisions and their late- to end-stage impact. It was a vastly better experience made even more entertaining and enlightening when I see purple players in divisions on both sides, fighting it out. 

The early game actions that lead to late-game outcome is what I aspire to achieve mostly in a BB.  This means I concentrate on the DDs and subs, take the hits as I move in to spot torpedoes and ignore the BBs for the most part.  Most times I last only a few minutes but typically I'm near the top of the leader board due mostly to smacking DDs and taking control of key areas.  When things work well, my allies dominate the flank and position themselves to advance and win while not worrying about DDs and subs.  When things don't work so well, it looks like I yolo'd and died.  The conventional idea of dueling battleships is a pretty rare occurrence for me and so, my damage output is not that great.

Trying to make this kind of play work is one of the things that keep me interested.

[clammboy]

lol doesn’t anybody work anymore! 

[HogHammer]

30 minutes ago, clammboy said:

lol doesn’t anybody work anymore!

Heck, I don't sleep anymore.

[Justin_Simpleton]

36 minutes ago, clammboy said:

lol doesn’t anybody work anymore! 

Nope, I'm broke.

[ArIskandir]

2 hours ago, thornzero said:

For what its worth. The so called 'replay bug' is very suspicious if you ask me.

I vouch for the bug, I've experienced it frequently... I actually got it on video but that's one I did not upload

[Wolfswetpaws]

47 minutes ago, clammboy said:

lol doesn’t anybody work anymore! 

I'm on vacation.

[BOBTHEBALL]

10 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Most players are ignorant when new.  Did you walk into Kindergarten knowing how to do integral calculus?

The difference lies in how the player themselves chooses to improve. Or not.

Barely anyone starts off good at a game. What matters in this case is if they want to try and actually become better. I was tired of being bad at games so I decided Wows would be the game I try and improve at. Everyone can do it if they put the work in, just not everyone chooses not to which is fine but then it leads to interesting situations.

[clammboy]

48 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I'm on vacation.

I hope you enjoy your vacation wolf are you with family? My last vacation was 2006 and that's the last time I was on a plane.

[torino2dc]

3 hours ago, Frostbow said:

Now, battles that reach the 17, 18, 19 minute mark are becoming less frequent

I used to be one that said "things used to be better." I used to lament the disappearance of the mythical "middle class" of players that @Andrewbassg alluded to -- the meat and potato guys that kept their ships on the board long enough for the games to get satisfyingly tight. 

What made those positions untenable for my mind was:

1) I had absolutely no numerical data on match duration or average player skill.

2) I know the human brain is generally very bad at keeping track of large data sets.

3) I know the brain is generally good at forgetting un-fun experiences if they have no other salient qualities. 

4) I know that the brain tends to over-emphasize recent experiences vs. older ones, especially if they're coupled with strong emotions.

Put together, I have no means of proving that the past used to be better, and I also distrust my only available record-keeping device -- my brain. For that matter, and this is nothing personal, I also distrust everyone else's memories on the subject -- I don't see why their brains should be exempt from the design flaws that plague mine.

----

TLDR: I think it's easy to say "things used to be better" because it feels right and it's hard to prove otherwise. The price is a slight but constant disappointment with the present. Given how unreliable or unobtainable the data is, that's not a price I'm willing to pay. I'd rather believe that things are pretty okay.

[Wolfswetpaws]

59 minutes ago, clammboy said:

I hope you enjoy your vacation wolf are you with family? My last vacation was 2006 and that's the last time I was on a plane.

I'm trying. 
I'm not with family.
I'm at home, with a wife who has informed me on multiple occasions that she wants to divorce me. 
I believe her.
So, home life is ... not ideal.

But, I bought a motorcycle and plan to have fun this summer.
The bike is currently in the shop, for some parts to be installed. 
One of the parts in a handlebar kit was missing, though. 
So I'm waiting on those parts to arrive from the vendor, so that the work can be completed.
Before I put my bike in the shop, a friend of mine and I did some riding together, which was nice.
I'm planning to do some day-trips and sight-seeing.

Tonight, my wife's aunt passed away.  I've met her (in the past) and she was a nice person.

There are times when I am very grateful for people like you @clammboy, here, that I can count among my life's blessings.
This is one of those times.  🐺

Edited Wednesday at 11:36 PM by Wolfswetpaws

[clammboy]

3 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I'm trying. 
I'm not with family.
I'm at home, with a wife who has informed me on multiple occasions that she wants to divorce me. 
I believe her.
So, home life is ... not ideal.

But, I bought a motorcycle and plan to have fun this summer.
The bike is currently in the shop, for some parts to be installed. 
One of the parts in a handlebar kit was missing, though. 
So I'm waiting on those parts to arrive from the vendor, so that the work can be completed.
Before I put my bike in the shop, a friend of mine and I did some riding together, which was nice.
I'm planning to do some day-trips and sight-seeing.

Tonight, my wife's aunt passed away.  I've met her (in the past) and she was a nice person.

There are times when I am very grateful for people like you @clammboy, here, that I can count among my life's blessings.
This is one of those times.  🐺

Sorry to hear that stay strong Wolf my wife left me 18 years ago. It was tough at first but life goes on and we are stronger then you think. You can adept to anything with a strong mind and don't be afraid to lean on your friends you need that that's what I learned. 

[Navalpride33]

File this one under your "basic" fundamentals of WOWS, doesn't coincide with others' definition of the said topic.

Thus comes the root of the frustration.

Remedy...

ADAPT!

Failure to adapt will result in a failed result.

 

[Frostbow]

4 hours ago, torino2dc said:

I used to lament the disappearance of the mythical "middle class" of players that @Andrewbassg alluded to -- the meat and potato guys that kept their ships on the board long enough for the games to get satisfyingly tight. 

I used to add to my contacts list players I have personally met in battle whose stats and actual performance were noteworthy and good. The list includes those who carried battles to victory or those who obviously are purple-level players. Now, when I check their profiles on wows-numbers, their last battle happened years ago. And when I check my in-game contacts list, they are offline. 

[Frostbow]

16 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

File this one under your "basic" fundamentals of WOWS, doesn't coincide with others' definition of the said topic.

Thus comes the root of the frustration.

Remedy...

ADAPT!

Failure to adapt will result in a failed result.

 

But you said in so many times before that "there is no skill" needed in World of Warships. So why should one bother with adapting? 😂

[Navalpride33]

4 hours ago, Frostbow said:

But you said in so many times before that "there is no skill" needed in World of Warships. So why should one bother with adapting? 😂

Well... Think about it... If there's no skills needed to play WOWS (as I noted many times)... You're adapting to other factors  (in game) in the realm of human psychology. Some included not limited too..

• Playing Drunk
• Playing High as snoop
• Playing while Highly medicated as prescribed by your Doctor (Yet some of us somehow end up overdosing with life altering results).

Because WOWS dont need skills to be good in ... Some players' elect to play in an alternate state. You, the normal player who's sober.. Can't tell if a player is under the influence of these substance (unless they incriminate themselves in chat).

So what takes skill to master and people still fail and/or kill people when under the influence?

• Normal driving
• Piloting a private Cessna 150 (The minimum a normal person can afford with a PPL)
• Boating.

These situations. You can't adapt if someone messes up really badly. In WOWS, you can be High, Drunk or medicated (or all of the above) and still perform.

I hope this clears up your confusion on whats "skill" (none existent in WOWS) and adapting to the situation in WOWS.

As noted earlier.. Instead of complaining just ADAPT! Plus its free.

GL.

Edited Thursday at 08:32 AM by Navalpride33

[Andrewbassg]

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

TLDR: I think it's easy to say "things used to be better" because it feels right and it's hard to prove otherwise

That holds merit only, until valid points and reasons can be articulated. For example, there is a large consensus among professionals,  that old school recording gear sounded "better". Even the best gear made today can't hold a candle to them. And there is a perfectly reasonable explanation why is that.

In the old days electronical components were made with bigger tolerances, coz grids weren't as stable and they had to be made  this way. Also  the manufacturing processes  themselves weren't precise enough, to produce so called "high quality precision" components,  thus allowing the components to have  more headroom and more room for the music to "wiggle" Just compare todays PSU's to what was made back in the day, where's the big traf in em? You need "juice" to have "balls" and today's gear with their switch PSU's  have none of that, you run out of juice real fast. We have precision alright, but sounds like crap. And we can't go back, coz the whole thing (consumer society) is set up like this, it is literally everywhere, from fridges to tv's , manufacturing processes and whatnot.

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

1) I had absolutely no numerical data on match duration or average player skill.

Average skill, as data point, is irrelevant, because a) you have no  objective metric to measure skill. And b) the data what Wedgie uses and what is available for us  is only contextual. You have no proof, nor evidence, that what used to be 1500 PR represent the same skill value today.

Yeah, that's why soclal "sciences" not paired with history and psychology is vax. At best. The "data" tells you that "this is fine" when it is not. You need human input and expertise to interpret the data. And tthat human needs to correclty understand the actual context. Context is always king.

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

2) I know the human brain is generally very bad at keeping track of large data sets.

See above. Data, alone is irrelevant and can be highly misleading.  Interpreting data is as much art, as is science ,if not more.

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

3) I know the brain is generally good at forgetting un-fun experiences if they have no other salient qualities. 

The brain is a wonderful asset. But we are soo much more than just brain.

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

4) I know that the brain tends to over-emphasize recent experiences vs. older ones, especially if they're coupled with strong emotions.

You have an interesting point here, but you are applying it in the wrong way (i.e dismissal). Humans and not only, associate. For example we tend to like songs, because of the memories associated with that song, not necessarily because of the song. Never dismiss associations,thats the sinlge biggest mistake you can do, try to understand and relate to them. The latter is the most important thing you can do.

6 hours ago, torino2dc said:

and I also distrust my only available record-keeping device -- my brain. For that matter, and this is nothing personal, I also distrust everyone else's memories on the subject -- I don't see why their brains should be exempt from the design flaws that plague mine.

Ummm......you mean, we can safely discount every single testimony ever made , historical or otherwise?

Juust sayin'.......

Edited Thursday at 06:01 AM by Andrewbassg

[Ferdinand_Max]

18 hours ago, Aethervox said:

What I saw was they were leading on points. I saw something else, you played like a coward. You didn't even try to torp when you could have & your team mate was asking you to. You would have lost if it wasn't that your Kongo rammed their Kongo (which he had to do as he was losing the BB vs BB battle). The real mistake was the enemy Kongo allowing itself to get rammed, otherwise, their team would have won.  You did absolutely nothing to assist your Kongo. Your play was not OK, it was abysmal. As a DD (with smoke) you kept firing long range volleys - you deserved the criticism you got from the player on your team.

Have you actually watched the replay?

We were leading in points, had three caps, there was absolutely no need for us to risk engaging him. There were four caps in total, I could easily chase the guy around taking back any caps he took. If one team has points advantage and no team ever controls more than two caps, it is a foregone solution. I have won games in precisely such situations before, even when I was the only one left alive on my team.

And I simply didn't have concealment to try and stealth torp him. Fact that our Kongo was lower in health was the entire reason why I didn't want us to engage as I figured it was too risky. If I could have ambushed him safely I would have, but the guy was not an idiot either.

But apparently, to you, acting brave is more important than winning the game.

On 6/26/2024 at 1:28 PM, thornzero said:

I watched the replay mostly to see some talented DD work. I am no expert but this is just some thoughts.

Tier 5 is not advanced and easy to get to, therefore the players are going to make mistakes and if you run a mm you will see how many inexperienced people there are.

It also was straight T5 with 5o% bots which means you can play aggressively at the beginning which you sort of did.

But what troubles me is the points were not in your favour? Am I missing something? From over the 1o minute mark until the end, Green was down by like 2-3oo points?

You were at full health and you had a couple opportunities to ambush the BB, if he's coming at you you can fire a little longer beyond your torp range as he moves forward. Then pop smoke on your way out. Or you could have yolo'd him with full health, sent a stream of torps and popped smoke on the way out.

Either way, a win is a win and green BB wasn't too salty until the very end. But I am wondering what you were seeing with the points or if I missed something.

That is a replay bug - points get switched around in replay (so red team gets green's points and vice versa) so in reality we were heavily leading in points for the last ten minutes or so. Even if the enemy player had managed to keep two caps under his control, he will have still lost on points alone.

If we had been trailing by that much, trust me, I would have gone for a point-blank engagement myself. Done it often enough in the past, and yoloing is reasonably successful at low tiers to risk it. But as it was, there was simply no need to risk engagement at all.

[Aethervox]

15 minutes ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Have you actually watched the replay?

Yes, one & a half times (first time I missed first part of it)

15 minutes ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

That is a replay bug - points get switched around in replay (so red team gets green's points and vice versa)

Well, that is BS then that they do that. My comments relied on the Reds having the lead in points.

[Ferdinand_Max]

3 minutes ago, Aethervox said:

Yes, one & a half times (first time I missed first part of it)

Well, that is BS then that they do that. My comments relied on the Reds having the lead in points.

I figured. But I thought that the possibility of a replay bug is well-known... I know Jingles had noted it in multiple of his videos already.

But yeah, as I said, we had him two-to-one, three caps to his one (most of the time) and a decent points lead. The only thing to do was to stop him from taking like, all the caps, or killing us both, and the game was in the bag.

And I had seen enough matches where winning team threw the game by trying to "win harder" as Jingles would say (a.k.a. trying to kill entire enemy team when they didn't have to) to risk engaging just for the sake of not appearing a coward.