Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
VGLance

Who contributed more in ranked toward the win?

Who was more to blame for the loss of a ranked battle?   

30 members have voted

  1. 1. Who was more to blame for the loss of a ranked battle?

    • The guy who set out from the beginning to score first on the team as an insurance policy in case of a loss by doing 100k plus damage not just at the end but throughout the battle as well as taking a cap
    • The afk player
    • The bottom two players who both failed to land most shots while often using the wrong ammo nor took any caps nor spot the enemy or anything else useful resulting in them both finishing with less than 300 base xp.

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,826
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts

Don't Matter everyone's opinion is different.Your poll locks a particular style of battle without a team composition map type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,513
[0O0O0]
Members
16,315 posts
12,175 battles

If no CV was present and the game went about as average.

 

Most likely...the Destroyer. He hopefully capped, spotted enemy ships and their torpedoes. Pushed the enemy, dropped smoke and put out tops to at the least negate space.

 

Considering I have zero information to go on I would say the poll is a little flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
443
[DETN8]
[DETN8]
Members
1,662 posts
16,324 battles

"I'm still mad about everyone disliking my last topic about the Ranked scoring system, so here have this ridiculous strawman of a poll!"

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[TBW]
Members
6,399 posts
12,031 battles

It's actually the two guys that went to kill the red AFK player instead of capping and targeting real threats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,672
[OO7]
Members
2,229 posts
9,719 battles
4 minutes ago, Ju87s said:

"I'm still mad about everyone disliking my last topic about the Ranked scoring system, so here have this ridiculous strawman of a poll!"

Can't be a strawman poll when the first choice is the one that gets the most blame in chat as the final minutes of the match unfold. 

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
443
[DETN8]
[DETN8]
Members
1,662 posts
16,324 battles
18 minutes ago, VGLance said:

Can't be a strawman poll when the first choice is the one that gets the most blame in chat as the final minutes of the match unfold. 

I rarely see this being blamed. It's usually complaints about the team generally sucking. Yolo'ers are the what I see blamed most, and rightfully so.

The guys who get the blame for playing to come in first are the guys like this: Two seasons back when it was Tier 7, our team basically had the match won. It was on Trident, we had point cap lead, and there were only 3 of us left. It was myself in a Belfast, another cruiser I believe, and a Sims. The red team had 2 BBs and a cruiser iirc. We had the east cap and myself and the other cruiser could safely position ourselves behind the east islands. The reds needed to come to us to win, which would mean crossing all the way over that open water while we burn them down in stealth. All the sims had to do was hang back and spot. Instead, he decides to rush the red scharnhorst at the southern middle cap to torp him. He manages the kill, but eats BB torps himself.. Astounded we all asked him why the hell he would do such a thing. His reply was that it was for insurance to keep his star in case we lost. Well it did cost us the match. Instead of all of us gaining a star, all but one of us lost one, including that [edited] Sims who was very cocky and confident he'd come in first place. He didn't even come in second or third place.

Edited by Ju87s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
76
[HAG]
Beta Testers
318 posts
4,074 battles

My problem is with the AFK players I would rather have two inept players on my team then one afk ships at least the inept can draw their fire at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
896
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
2,253 posts
8,581 battles

In general I have the most ire toward the AFK player, and would blame him/her the most... however I do realize that at least some percent of these players don't go AFK by choice, but because the game is buggy or because they are running it on some _really_ potato system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,732
[INTEL]
Members
8,577 posts
25,666 battles
16 hours ago, pikohan said:

In general I have the most ire toward the AFK player, and would blame him/her the most... however I do realize that at least some percent of these players don't go AFK by choice, but because the game is buggy or because they are running it on some _really_ potato system.

That's why it is so difficult to declare them the incarnation of evil, as VGLance does.  The game crashes quite a bit on entering and exit, and it crashes in different ways for different people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,154 posts
6,920 battles
33 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

That's why it is so difficult to declare them the incarnation of evil, as VGLance does.  The game crashes quite a bit on entering and exit, and it crashes in different ways for different people. 

yea, crashing has become more of a problem for me as of late.  game ran fine for about the first year i played.  Since one of the patches in the Sumner my game seems to crash more often.  i run pure vanilla with no mods.

 

i get an error that is something like this. 

 

wowserror2.png

Edited by Frederick_The_Great

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,788
[SALVO]
Members
17,044 posts
17,674 battles
3 hours ago, Taichunger said:

That's why it is so difficult to declare them the incarnation of evil, as VGLance does.  The game crashes quite a bit on entering and exit, and it crashes in different ways for different people. 

The thing is that you don't have to blame the player.  You can blame the "ship" on the theory that regardless of the reason the ship is afk, being down a ship places you as a significant disadvantage.  Worse, if you're in a battle with CVs and your CV is afk, you're probably boned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,672
[OO7]
Members
2,229 posts
9,719 battles
3 hours ago, Taichunger said:

That's why it is so difficult to declare them the incarnation of evil, as VGLance does.  The game crashes quite a bit on entering and exit, and it crashes in different ways for different people. 

How many times have I said there is a difference between the once in a blue moon afk we all run into vs someone who repeatedly goes afk (including internet / hardware instability issues where they should stick to other games or co-op until stabilized like the rest of us do out of common human decency)?

Even I get the crash to login screen now and then, once yesterday in fact. But it happens immediately at drop so by the time I log back in it might only be 5-10 seconds of missed time. If someone is playing on such old technology that it takes them five minutes to get back in after rebooting their computer, that's not a defensible excuse because they're also the same people with such low frame rates, their hit ratio is in the teens. 

Instead of injecting your personal animus toward me in every lying troll post you make, how about you try being a decent human being and just turn off my post notifications so you can be miserable on your own time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36
[SF-3]
Beta Testers
227 posts
12,948 battles

the team that loses is the one that contributed more to the loss. all 3 choices can contribute to a loss. ive contributed to my team losing on my occasions. i didnt yolo, i didnt go afk, i didnt sit back and farm dmg. I just plain  made mistakes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,672
[OO7]
Members
2,229 posts
9,719 battles
2 minutes ago, Cpt_Cupcake said:

@VGLance you forgot TKer's.

 

I was thinking of that, but I figured it would be too obvious and throw off the intention of the poll which is to show that people actually think someone putting enough hurt on the enemy enough to keep their star is actually more of a hindrance than someone who is afk and contributes zero.  It's important to illustrate what kind of audience you're dealing with in order to know whether or not you can engage in logical and reasoned debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,732
[INTEL]
Members
8,577 posts
25,666 battles
23 hours ago, VGLance said:

How many times have I said there is a difference between the once in a blue moon afk we all run into vs someone who repeatedly goes afk (including internet / hardware instability issues where they should stick to other games or co-op until stabilized like the rest of us do out of common human decency)?

Instead of injecting your personal animus toward me in every lying troll post you make, how about you try being a decent human being and just turn off my post notifications so you can be miserable on your own time. 

I dont have any personal animus toward you. Actually, I feel you're rather amusing. 

I've never had a repeated AFKer in Ranked, haven't had an AFK at all this season, in fact. All my losses were my own fault.

Heart of the matter is defining what "habitual AFKer" is, concretely and helpfully. Consider how many other such mechanisms are flawed and abused, color me pessimistic that a useful and not abusable definition can be constructed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,672
[OO7]
Members
2,229 posts
9,719 battles
3 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I dont have any personal animus toward you. Actually, I feel you're rather amusing. 

I've never had a repeated AFKer in Ranked, haven't had an AFK at all this season, in fact. All my losses were my own fault.

Heart of the matter is defining what "habitual AFKer" is, concretely and helpfully. Consider how many other such mechanisms are flawed and abused, color me pessimistic that a useful and not abusable definition can be constructed. 

You can tell by a person's stats that it's not their first time when they have over 2k games played and are averaging less than 15k dmg with avg tier played over 6.  And there have been many threads of people complaining about afk players.  You've been lucky if you haven't had any.  I've had several this season alone and I haven't played that many games.   There is also the group I lump together that are deserving of a loss of two stars that are nearly as bad as afk players:

  • Those who are consciously aware their system, network, and/or internet is so poor in capability or reliability that it caps their performance well below average and well below what is considered just enough to carry their 1/7th of their responsibility toward the win.
  • Botters
  • TK'rs (most infrequent I've personally seen but others have experienced this)
  • People who might as well be afk in sabotaging the team like the North Cal who parked by the CV the whole match never firing his guns.  Or the DD that charges a cap, sits broadside in smoke, eats torps and is dead before 3 min doing no damage himself... and countless other examples of players ending up with less than 300 base xp, which for all intents and purposes, sane people would consider to be a useless player that did not do enough to contribute to the win or otherwise be considered a team player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
234
[WOLF2]
Members
888 posts
7,199 battles
12 hours ago, Taichunger said:

The answer is, of course, "always VGLance"

Agreed.   Not sure why he didn't write his name as the first option, since that's who he's referring to.

Probably did his stat tool, saw it was a bust, went into save a star mode.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,732
[INTEL]
Members
8,577 posts
25,666 battles
16 hours ago, VGLance said:

You can tell by a person's stats that it's not their first time when they have over 2k games played and are averaging less than 15k dmg with avg tier played over 6.  And there have been many threads of people complaining about afk players.  You've been lucky if you haven't had any.  I've had several this season alone and I haven't played that many games.   There is also the group I lump together that are deserving of a loss of two stars that are nearly as bad as afk players:

  • Those who are consciously aware their system, network, and/or internet is so poor in capability or reliability that it caps their performance well below average and well below what is considered just enough to carry their 1/7th of their responsibility toward the win.
  • Botters
  • TK'rs (most infrequent I've personally seen but others have experienced this)
  • People who might as well be afk in sabotaging the team like the North Cal who parked by the CV the whole match never firing his guns.  Or the DD that charges a cap, sits broadside in smoke, eats torps and is dead before 3 min doing no damage himself... and countless other examples of players ending up with less than 300 base xp, which for all intents and purposes, sane people would consider to be a useless player that did not do enough to contribute to the win or otherwise be considered a team player.

That is not a concrete definition. That is only what you have said before. I can agree with all except the last, which is sheer elitist nonsense. I don't like the turds like that either, but being prone to potato-ing now and then, I can sympathize.

Concrete is a number. How many AFKs are needed? Or how often? Or what? 4 games at O base XP? 8 games?  Average XP under 100? 

The problems begin when you start thinking about it concretely. 

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×