Jump to content


Am I losing it or do I have really really bad luck?


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

xX_Boo_Xx #21 Posted 21 August 2015 - 02:11 AM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 10813 battles
  • 109
  • Member since:
    05-12-2015

View PostCarvinMarvin, on 21 August 2015 - 02:00 AM, said:

 

Or in other words, welcome to maths where you win rate is over 50%.

 

 

ohhh true... is that how it works?  Ok more mechanics of the game to learn ;)



The_Gaffer #22 Posted 21 August 2015 - 04:25 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 53801 battles
  • 2,385
  • [SHIRE]
  • Member since:
    10-28-2013

View PostBrendon_2015, on 21 August 2015 - 08:49 AM, said:

I'll do that Hans once I've got my Tier 6 sorted. I'm happy to platoon with you. Still saving for it though so you may have already completed it by the time I get there. I'm also in the o well it's going to be a very one sided affair, but I'll go down fighting but I just have to shake my head and cringe when you see parked up tanks and tactics destined for failure straight off the bat.

 

As my daughter reminds me, "it's just a game dad". 

 

 

 

I'm in no rush to complete that mission. To a large extent I try to ignore the missions. I think they can cause you to play at least somewhat selfishly because you need X kills or some such. Some missions more than others, of course. 

 

I'll platoon with you in any tier except 1 (I don't keep tier 1 tanks anymore) and 10 (I haven't got a tier 10 tank yet). I still need Ace Mastery in my Tetrarch (tier 2) - just can't seem to play the bloody thing well enough but I can't give up on it.

 

My son also reminds me that I need to calm down. Funny, coming from him, as he was banned for a day back when you could still damage your team mates. He got really annoyed by team mates blocking him, preventing him from reversing into cover, and used to let them have it. Haha! 

 

 


Edited by HansVonSchroif, 21 August 2015 - 04:27 AM.

"It's the job that's never started as takes longest to finish."

 


The_Gaffer #23 Posted 21 August 2015 - 04:53 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 53801 battles
  • 2,385
  • [SHIRE]
  • Member since:
    10-28-2013

View PostxX_Boo_Xx, on 21 August 2015 - 12:11 PM, said:

 

 

ohhh true... is that how it works?  Ok more mechanics of the game to learn ;)

 

Yep, if you have a win rate of X%, you need to keep winning at X% or better to keep it from dropping.

 

So, if your win rate is 60% and you play 10 games, you need to win 6 of them to keep your win rate at 60%. Anything less and it drops. Anything more and it climbs, albeit ever so slightly.

 

It feels like you need to do more work to increase your win rate because, well, you do. Sticking with the 60% example above, say you have 60 wins out of 100 games. If you win your next game, you will have 61 wins out of 101 games, giving you a win rate of 60.396%, a gain of 0.396%. If you lose your next game, however, you will have 60 wins out of 101 games, giving you a win rate of 59.406%, a loss of 0.594%. Rounding up we can say a gain of 0.4% versus a loss of 0.6%. So, losing drops it more than winning raises it.

 

If you did lose the game and won your next game, you would then have 61 wins out of 102, giving you a win rate of 59.8%. You would need to win the next one as well to get 62 out of 103 games, giving you a win rate of 60.194%. So, losing one game when you have 60 wins out of 100 games means you need to win the next two just to maintain your win rate.

 

Of course, it's not really constructive to focus on a small number of games. You will have bad days that will do your head in. You will also have days when your notification history is full of wins. I love that, scrolling through and it's all yellow (why not green, I wonder?) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


"It's the job that's never started as takes longest to finish."

 


SydB #24 Posted 21 August 2015 - 07:31 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 10819 battles
  • 918
  • [STORM]
  • Member since:
    07-05-2014

View Postaxolotlrose, on 21 August 2015 - 09:47 AM, said:

And sometimes not much at high tiers either...

 

Not much? Is there even any?

Proud member of Metalstorm Calm before the storm strikes

 

 

 


Brendon_2015 #25 Posted 21 August 2015 - 08:26 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 15178 battles
  • 706
  • Member since:
    07-22-2015

I don't blame your son as I know how he feels. thankfully it doesn't occur very often however I can recall one instance where one player literally parked behind me the entire game. I died as unable to get out of way of incoming fire. O well it only lasts the fight...   

 

If I'm on I'll definitely platoon.


Brendon

 

It's only a scratch, just buff it out. 

Actively working on Tier 9, Conquerer & T54 Tier 8, Indian, ISU 152 & IS 3, Tier 7, Comet, Panther & Tiger 1


Gandalf__Greyhame #26 Posted 08 October 2018 - 01:57 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 224 battles
  • 702
  • [SHLRE]
  • Member since:
    06-24-2016

View PostThe_Gaffer, on 20 August 2015 - 01:03 PM, said:

 

I feel the same way my friend. I platooned with my young son in lower tiers a lot, although he has now lost interest in the game. 

 

Some people will defend the MatchMaker ad nauseum, saying that we're mistaken, it works on weight, etc. I've played enough games to be able to do as you say, know which side will win when MatchMaker throws up those ridiculous match ups, barring the stronger vehicle team being really bad and/or AFK and/or the weaker vehicle team being really good. 

 

I try to give up the notion that the game should be "fair" in terms of the teams being equally matched but it still bugs me when there are really bad match ups.

 

have a mission to complete in a tier 6 platoon so please consider teaming up with me if you want to play in tier 6. I am not a great player but I stick with my platoon mate - check my stats if you like. 

 

 

This guy has been a rigged mm theorist for a long time .

                                                                

 

   





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users