Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
frontflip2cool

Possible Solution to the Worcester, Kitakaze, and Harugumo

107 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

5,903
[INTEL]
Members
10,474 posts
29,285 battles
21 hours ago, BarronRichthofen said:

I do not need "Help" from Unicum players that play 2 matches a day and only play within a division to pad their stats or only play at specific times of day to avoid the potatoes. Which IMO describes 99% of the "Unicum" players out there and hence their "Unicum" status.

OMG. Look at  his damage stats. You dont get 73K average damage in a Z52 by being in a division -- his damage numbers are not twice yours because  he is "stat padding". You get it by being good irrespective of win rate. Moreover, being in a division with other excellent players actually lowers one's own damage potential since the divisioned players cannibalize each other's damage. Being constantly divved and blowing away the average damage is a feat.

Meanwhile you do half his average damage, well below average, below average damage being consistent across all your T10s. I stopped playing Z-52 after 88 games because I have the same average damage you do, which sucks, and I don't like (a) being carried by div mates (63% WR is not MY doing) and (b) bringing sub-par performance to a match with other humans. Evidently, several hundred times now, you have decided that you really dont care how much you lower the team's performance. I kinda figured that was your attitude since you attacked another player for being better than you, but I thought I'd document.  

So yeah, despite your protestations, you could use some help. But that would require humility. 

Haha I see as I was writing this you marked your account private. But your stats will remain up at WarshipsToday for a while. 

PS: If he is showing up in a tech tree ship in a T10 match, he isn't stat padding. 

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
688 posts
5,656 battles
8 hours ago, BarronRichthofen said:

Now judging from your 74 matches in a Z-52, I think my experience of 536 matches in one trumps your few games. Yes you are more accurate, have a better win rate, yada yada yada.  And thinking that your "numbers" make you a better player ect is plain and simple...

So after 500 matches why havent you learned how to play Z52 then?

Are you familiar, by chance, with quality over quantity?

If there were a chess player who became really good in 100 games, you can bet they would draw a larger group of students and people with questions than the mediocre chess player with 1000.

Edit: nice job hiding your stats. That'll really help us understand how VALUED your EXPERIENCED opinion is on T10 DDs like the z52. right?

Edited by The_Painted_Target
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,654
[TASH]
Members
5,115 posts
9,873 battles
8 hours ago, BarronRichthofen said:

I do not need "Help" from Unicum players that play 2 matches a day and only play within a division to pad their stats or only play at specific times of day to avoid the potatoes. Which IMO describes 99% of the "Unicum" players out there and hence their "Unicum" status.

Is it really that hard to actually check whether someone divisions routinely or not?  Even if 99% of unicums divisioned, which isn't true, there's 1% who don't.

The guy freaking linked his stats page to you, and just a couple clicks gives you enough information to see over 90% of his battles are solo.  Yet you still insist on calling him a div-padder and elitist while launching into a rant about how anyone who cares about stats has no life.  If trying to escalate a mudslinging contest is your definition of trying to save face, you might want to reconsider acting with such a superior air.

It's not as if there aren't counterpoints to the stats card either.  @Gen_Saris's piece about < 100 battles in a ship being too susceptible to the effects of streaks is a perfect example of a simple, logical argument that doesn't stoop to the lowest common denominator.

Edited by ValkyrWarframe
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[DRHS]
Members
336 posts
14,276 battles

When I pull up the stats for the top 100 SOLO players on wow's stats there is ONE player with over 5k SOLO battles. Use https://na.wows-numbers.com/ check the stats for yourselves. The UNICUM players for the most part have UNDER 1000 SOLO battles.  Yes there are some who have thousands and those that do for the most part have their win rate in that "Unicum" bracket because of DIVISION battles. I'm not making crapup here. Check the stats for your selves.

As far as The Painted Target's stats being better than mine I FULLY Admitted  that in my 2nd post in this thread. That has no bearing on Worcester's Harugumo's or Kitakaze's. Yeah I "attacked" a unicum player. Why?

Because I'm tired of kids young enough to be my grandchildren throwing stats around as the value of their opinion. (Unicum players for the most part are young enough) As I said the is about entertainment not how big your phallus is. THAT is the issue I have with anyone who whips out their stats as a measuring stick. I hid my stats so people like Taichunger, would not do exactly what he did.  His phallus is bigger than yours so he wins crap.

The_Painted_Target is one of the few Unicum or near that point who does do most of his matches solo. Most of the Unicum do not, at least the ones who have their stats public. Again I say check the stats look at the solo tab and division tabs. I backed up that argument with fact not fiction. The stats are there they are available to all to see. The Unicum players are not all that and I admit many of them are better at this game than me. 

The point at the start of this is that I do not think Worcester's are all that bad. He does. We Disagree. Painted whipped out his stats as a measuring tool  and I retaliated.  I used the stats to point out "UNICUM" players are NOT all that, that a first glance of their Stats make them out to be, but when you really look at them Most have either few games or most of their wins are in division.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
968
[KRAK]
Members
2,773 posts
17,439 battles
15 hours ago, 212thAttackBattalion said:

They do? Then I must be doing something wrong then because under 10km I'm tearing Khababs to pieces

 

Or they are doing something wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
376 posts
5 battles
On 9/29/2018 at 1:47 PM, frontflip2cool said:

What are you worried about not being able to just sit behind an Island and constantly hold down the left mouse button in your own Worcester? Sorry bud but I think that a mechanic like this IS NEEDED because the only other way to change them in any way is to nerf them into the ground.

Minor Personal attack and ad hominen, point is moot and arguer has nothing to say due to being outwitted and outmaneuvered. Poster being replied to should consider shutting up and sitting down until he can actually activate his brain on a mode that isn't "nerf what I hate because I say so"

 

PS: only the stupid argue in favor of IRL when it comes to mechanics to nerf, and it's a potentially slippery slope going from "risking barrels melting" to "IJN ships detonate when torps are disabled"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,336
[DRACS]
Members
4,734 posts

I dislike any idea that suddenly positively or negatively affects their capacity to fire their guns (other than turret incapacitation). This includes the french reload booster, although i can live with it if its a minor buff and the guns still have a decent reload without.

If you feel a ship is overperforming in terms of dpm, then you just nerf the reload. This idea that the guns can overheat and turn the ship into a sitting duck that can't fight back is absolutely appaling. It also adds an extra layer of complication that's really not needed. You think many players want to keep a constant eye on their heat meter while in a pitched knife fight over a cap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×