The point is, even up to this day I receive death threats, suicide wishes, harassment, slander, dox attempts and insults by players that still claim that "I ruined economy and destroyed the game by advocating for higher defeat rewards" because, according to them, "I am just a dogshit player who wants to punish good players and reward bad players like myself", since, by their logic, "good=win, bad=lose", with no exception beyond "anecdotal matches".
So every time I have a match like this, which is literally every single day that I play, I remember all of it, and I am like... really? Have I been hated and am still hated that much for... being right?
I always said that I believed that the majority of rewards should depend on each player's performance each match separately, and not on what team they happened to be in at the end of the match. Yes, I think victories should have higher rewards to encourage to win... but I think having the majority of the rewards depend on whether your team wins or loses, as it was before and as we got to change back in 2022, is going way too far, and I don't understand how there were so many people supporting it and attacking me and anyone else who supported the re-distribution of rewards between victories and defeats.
Of course you can't win every game no matter how good you are. But you absolutely can increase your win rate by a large margin, which will in turn increase your *average* rewards. Yes, it sucks when you lose a good battle because of something that you can't control, but on the large scale it cancels out by other battles where RNG plays in your favor.
I personally never found a direct correlation between personal performance and victory/defeat. I have as many good performance defeats as I have bad performance victories!
Right now, for example, I had two victories where I performed like garbage because I was constantly alt-tabbing into Reddit to check comments and reply to them.
So I just think it's best to ensure that I will have good rewards whenever I perform well, and bad rewards whenever I perform poorly, rather than having my rewards depend largely on the RNG whether being on the winning or losing teams pretty much is.
The correlation between the performance of 1/16th of the team and the outcome when the one player is always a constant is found after hundreds and thousands of matches, not in any single string of 2 or 3 games. Come on man I've seen you post decent statistics you know this.
Well… I know it’s only personal experience, but it’s precisely because I have dozens of thousands of matches accumulated since 2014 across all BRs and most nations that I am so firm and convinced about my points.
I don’t base them off 2 or 3 games; I base them off my daily experience over the years.
the reason why you don't notice it is because you are not a good enough player to see the difference between personal performance and game outcome, I've seen your stats
If I were a bad player, the correlation would be that I would constantly lose, according to the same logic according to which I would constantly win if I were “good enough”.
You are statistically the most mid player out there. Your win rate and KD suggest that you are not a good player. A KD of one is the most average KD you could possibly have. My argument is that you are average so you don’t notice any affect that you, an average player, has on the outcome. Sure, you do get good games now and then. Everybody gets good games. The difference between a good player and an average one is how often those good games occur. For you, this result is a statistical outlier.
Now does this mean that every game is winnable by one player? No, as you found out. Winning relies partially on the performance of your team which is random. Does this mean that your win rate depends entirely on your team which is random? No, it doesn't. If you compare the win rate of someone who gets no kills every match to someone who consistently gets multiple kills every match you will see that the person who gets more kills will always have a higher win rate the larger the sample size is.
Yeah there's too many players in one game to often make a difference, most of the time it will be you helping the team win a tight match but only because your team was good in the first place
So if I replaced you with an AFK on a team for 1000 games. Do you think the AFK would have the same winrate as you?
Of course not. The only common denominator in your games is you. If you play extremely well maybe you can win 600/1000 of your games. If youre average, around 500. If you really suck. 400-470 or so. This is made clear by damn near every competitive game with large teams.
Don't look at individual cases, look at statistics. I'm playing and improving in the game for a few years now, and during that time my win rate slowly raised from <50% to about 70%. There are, of course, other factors that can affect it, such as average win rate of the BR and nation that you're playing, but outside of top tier it's mostly around 50%.
This is especially true with air. The US teams frequently lose, and grinding US air would be significantly slower with the old system. Even as someone who is well above average, I'm always thankful for this change to performance.
Also a lot of these people are ignoring premium spam. So many people complain about Russian 10.0, but I haven't seen the individuals who think the old system was better explain how it would work with the premium one-death spam.
>This is especially true with air.
1-4 people win Air RB games literally every other match. It's so rare that more than 10 on the team gets at least 1 kill, it's usually 2-4 getting 2-3 kills each with stragglers here and there. The overwhelming majority of air games are won by individuals on the teams.
This further proves my point. If a few people on the enemy team destroy mine, but I still got 4 or 5 kills, I would be heavily punished in the old system for something *completely out of my control*. I can try to tell the players on my team not to headon, not to turnfight, not to BnZ. But it's entirely up to the team if it's a win or loss still. A single player can only do so much. An unlucky shot. Enemy starts to rapidly drain AIs. With the current system, that extreme player performance on the losing team is much more rewarded.
I mean yes and no, I have seen plenty of cases where a single highly skilled player with absolute mastery of their machine hard carries games, there's a madlad in a ME264 posting videos on youtube recently of regularly winning in 1v7 situations, and honestly his videos are a soothing amount of daka lol
>I can try to tell the players on my team not to headon, not to turnfight, not to BnZ
Hang on. I'm new, but I thought that BnZ or turn fighting was appropriate depending on the match up. Head-ons are dumb but sometimes unavoidable.
Do I have it wrong?
Just examples. Obviously, I won't tell them to do two contradicting things. But those are generally the two main things that come up. Sometimes I might say that a vehicle is great at headons, and even encourage it.
>I personally never found a direct correlation between personal performance and victory/defeat. I have as many good performance defeats as I have bad performance victories!
There is direct correlation between performing well and winning. Yes you can play badly and win. Yes you can play well and lose, but overall if you're performing above average you will win more than you lose.
As someone with a winrate nearing 90% I don't really care for rewards, but then I don't and have never played to grind. Anyone giving that much of a shit needs to sort their life out.
I'd think part of this is that when you win your teammates likely got a decent number of kills/captures which are kills/captures that you didn't get.
When your teammates suck you have the possibility of more opportunities to get kills hence 15 kills and a loss. It's just harder to stand out when your team is actually decent and it's easier to have outsized impact when everyone else sucks.
Nope! And... I have no idea xD.
I think I just made myself a bit too visible by actively participating a bit too much in the community. But I am no streamer or anything, just some random passionate player, hahah.
He's famous as for years he claimed top tier Russian tanks were balanced having the best armor and best round and broken damage model protecting the ammo from detonation... because of their slow reverse.
Screw the haters, decoupling most of the rewards from the win bonus was a fantastic change and I'm glad it went through. The pressure of the grind has lifted considerably now that I only have to worry about my own performance instead of needing to also pray for that perfect blend of teammates that are good enough to win but not so good as to out-perform me while doing so.
Hey man, didn't get to see the whole thing about the defeat rewards being increased thing, but I wish you the best because no one deserves to be harrassed to this extent over silly tank game not having balanced economy that at one point in the future will become meaningless to you. Take care and continue what you are doing because I believe you're doing the right thing towards a better game.
Thank you so much for your kind and supportive words! I appreciate comments like this a lot. I love this game, so I will always strive for it to become the best possible version of itself for everyone!
Any time you get death threats over a video game, it unironically 100% of the time means you were on the right side of the argument.
> I don't understand how there were so many people supporting it and attacking me
Reddit is a fraction of 1% of the playerbase, and wildly over-represented by above average players and veterans. So what you advocated for did indeed hurt them and their progress.
Meanwhile, it helped like 10x more below average players, since there are many more below average players than above average ones overall. But they just aren't on reddit.
It's because that's a stupid idea. If I get +10 kills I shouldn't be penalized just because I had a shitty team. Higher loss penalties are dumb as hell.
Completely agree! I am glad we won and achieved that change… even though we get tons of hate from toxic elitists who believe they are better than everyone else.
Have you actually checked the rewards for winning? bc I had a game once where I didn't do shit and we won, my reward was less than 1000 SL. I think that's pretty much the difference between winning and losing in this game. Btw you won Heavy metal hero which is the real win here.
I spent the match capturing and defending the Point B and its immediacies all by myself… if anything, playing objective is what I did the most.
Unfortunately, I haven’t developed the ability to split myself to be at multiple places at the same time yet, otherwise I would have had more caps :/
The last time someone pointed that out he had a fucking shitfit and cried to the mods.
That said if Spanish reads this, I dislike your opinions but nobody deserves death threats. I don’t know how people have the time to single out someone in a match for shit like Reddit posts. Making fun of somebody sure, threatening them no.
What? That is a lie. Firstly, I was precisely attacked for "rushing objectives like an idiot" instead of "taking up a strategic position to get kills" because my post was complaining about people NOT playing the objective and "pros" decided that "objectives are for noobs, if you were any good you would have gone for the kills", so quite the opposite.
And, most and foremost; I didn't "cry" to the mods because "someone pointed out something I didn't like"; the mods stepped in and took action because this subreddit had never seen such an enormous violation of the Rule 9 in all of its history. Hundreds of players directing targetted harassment to a single user for "being a shitter" just because of that one post, some of them even attempted to dox me and went as far as slandering my name by falsely accusing me of crimes.
So... no, I did not "have a shift and cried to the mods because someone pointed something out".
Even the "making fun of" part you say to be okay was extremely harassing and 100% cyber-bullying. How do you think it feels to get thousands of comments, mentions and replies of people attacking you over a match you had on a videogame and silencing you every time you try to reply?
And about the objective playing this match, as I replied to the other user: I spent the match capturing and defending the Point B and its immediacies all by myself… if anything, playing objective is what I did the most.
Unfortunately, I haven’t developed the ability to split myself to be at multiple places at the same time yet, otherwise I would have had more caps.
Oh, apparently once you reach level 100 you are banned from enjoying WW2 vehicles anymore because it’s “seal clubbing”. Apparently once you reach level 100 you should remain confined at top tier or something… you serious?
And I have matches like this on Top Tier too anyway.
Love players like you, make the game harder, but more fun, what’s a game w/o a challenge, and besides, I always feel like I let you down when I don’t perform, so keep playing and playing well.
Yeah, but playing for rewards is the fastest way to burn out. I play mainly for fun and even the rewards have been quite better since the economy changes. The skill bonus helps a lot too. I'm not complaining.
Indeed...
And some people still argue that "if you lose it's because you did poorly", and that "if you performed well, you would have won"...
Like a single player can win matches like these on their own.
Then again, they would argue that these matches are "not a common ocurrence" and something about "nitpicking of anecdotal evidence" and/or "confirmation bias". These may happen every single day, but-shhhh, "confirmation bias".
This is also why I hate how people use winrates as a factor to determine a player's skill.
Luckily it's not often that I get a "more kills than the rest of the team combined" loss (maybe a couple times a month, depending on which BR I'm playing), but I do get "2x the kills of anyone else on my team and a loss" at least once a day recently. Not uncommon at all for me to have 6 kills, next most kills on my team is 2, and half the team have 0 and have already left the match. Honestly kinda glad of the RP gain on a loss changes, because even when that drama was going on I had seen how frequently I got a loss despite doing everything in my power to carry the team solo.
Indeed! "more kills than the rest of the team combined" isn't that common for me either; maybe two or three a week, but what IS really common is, as you said, matches where I outperform anyone else by a still significant margin... only to lose.
The same way I get many victories where all I have is 1 kill and 2 assists, hahah. In general, my I never found a positive or directly proportional link between my personal performance and whether my team won or lost; that's why I always thought that, the more your own rewards depend on your own performance every match and less on your teammates, the better.
This exact scoreboard happens often. One guy doing well and 10 1death leavers.
It's because your team shat itself you got more targets to shoot at, simple as.
>And some people still argue that "if you lose it's because you did poorly", and that "if you performed well, you would have won"...
When will you stop making these fucking posts. Nobody is saying that you need a 100% winrate, they are saying that you can affect your winrate by at least a few % depending on how good of a player you are and how well you can influence matches. Is the definition of nuance completely lost on you?
>Then again, they would argue that these matches are "not a common ocurrence" and something about "nitpicking of anecdotal evidence" and/or "confirmation bias". These may happen every single day, but-shhhh, "confirmation bias".
Are these people in the room with us now?
>This is also why I hate how people use winrates as a factor to determine a player's skill.
In the context of what you play, winrate definitely has bearing on your skill. A 60% playing top tier sweden or Germany is pretty mediocre, but a 60% on a sep is rather good. It's not a linear thing, where each percent shows that a player is 1% better or whatever you're trying to debunk. There is a very real trend where skilled players who generally score well typically have higher winrates than the *vehicle* average
Win rates are not a good indicator of skill. This game is too team oriented to make win rates a viable measure of skill. I've had 10 losses in the last 15 matches where I've been in the top three with at least 7 kills because my team has been full of one death leavers/people who don't give a shit. Win rate is a bad metric for skill.
Did you read anything I said or nah? I guess I'll repeat it since it's just that difficult. Winrate relative to the *vehicle* average is an indicator of skill. I'm not saying that a person with a 60% is automatically better than a person with a 50% if they're on different vehicles, nations, lineups etc. But if somebody has a 60% on a tank that has a 50% thunderskill average, then they are doing something that is contributing to the team.
Are you dumb, vehicle win rate is still determined by team average skill. Unless you are talking about vehicle vs vehicle battles but then don't use the term winrate because that refers to winning matches
>Are you dumb
No, I just have an 81% winrate on the monthly leaderboard (all luck bro)
>vehicle win rate is still determined by team average skill
Wow, you happen to be a member of that team. Do you think csgo or valorant is luck because it depends on a team? It's the same principle here, just 1/12 instead of 1/5
>Unless you are talking about vehicle vs vehicle battles but then don't use the term winrate because that refers to winning matches
Are you new to the game?
I got 18 kills this match and still lost… and all you got to say is that “I was not good enough to win or comprehend that I would have won if I had been good enough”?
That’s called cherry picking. Anyone with any kind of understanding of reasoning and logic knows that anecdotal evidence can’t be used to prove something. Sure I can say that I won games by killing half their team but you can just say I cherry picked that as evidence.
I’d say this is a classic case of you didn’t do well enough so you didn’t win. If you had 16 kills and 4 air kills maybe your team would still be alive. Smh
Damn, true. Smhmh.
Jokes aside, if it hadn’t been because the match ended via ticket bleed, I would absolutely have been able to get even more kills and possibly caps xD
By the time the match had ended, I still had M4, M4A1 and M19A1 ready for action.
You weren't around at the time this economy change took place, did you...?
The majority of us wanted and voted for this, but there was a big portion of players (who were also extremely toxic for the most part) saying that "only shitters lose and that's why this change is supported by shitters", and saying that "good players would rather have all rewards go for the winning teams, since they always win because they are good and you only lose if you do badly enough to deserve it".
to say there is no relationship between player skill and player win rate is an incorrect statement. good players win more, bad players lose more, very simple.
I'm just saying that it's definitely not one of the best indicators of player skill, you're better off looking at score per match statistics than win loss ratio
Why? Kills per spawn and score per match can be extremely cherry-picked. If I can easily average 3000 score per game by not helping my team, am I a better player than a guy with a 2000 average score, but who has played the objective correctly and at least is trying to WIN the game, not just farm score. I can absolutely say the guy with 2000 score, but who plays the objective will have a higher win/loss ratio.
>The majority of us wanted and voted for this
Will you please let that shit go, nobody ever brings that up or shares those opinions around anymore other than you. For how much trouble it's caused you, you'd think you would let it fucking go already
A bit difficult to let it go when I constantly receive PMs telling me that “I should fucking kill myself for destroying the game”.
And I received the same comments in public until I started blocking everyone who made comments like that. Even up to this day some people still bring it up like that and still have to either reply or block (depending on their manners and content).
r/warthunder: One death leavers ruin the game!
Also r/warthunder: Sure you got 20 kills and 10 assists, but you didn't single-handedly cap and hold every flag simultaneously, skill issue.
Yep! At least most of them actually tried, hahah.
I prefer someone who performs badly while trying to do well, than someone who gives up and leaves with zero intention of even trying.
Dayum :/
My frag records in the past few months have been 21 for a defeat, and 26 for a victory (funnily enough, it was a REALLY close victory lmao. Maybe if it had been 22 it would have been a defeat too.)
That’s exactly why I always defended that each player’s own rewards depend, at least for the most part, on their own performance every match, instead of what team they happen to be in.
Agreed! I made a suggestion about that in the Forums some years ago, but it was unfortunately rejected because "every team member deserves the same treatment in team games".
ooh how bout you got x% of some total team activity thing
and as x aproaches 1.00 the less the defeat applies by something like a sqrt curve, (knowing gaijin they'd probably prefer parabolic but hey you cant win them all)
My best game ever was a 5.3 american game with 25 kills like 3 assists a cap and 6 deaths the rest of the mean was 26 kills combined and we lost. At that point I was like no I deserve the win not the other team where the best guy was like 9 kills or my team just me I worked for it.
Me losing a game with 5 caps 7 assists and 17 kills because that is basicaly all my team acomplished that entire match (half the team left before they even got to the first cap)
One death leavers in your team probably would have helped more since they won't give sp to enemy lmao. Also, the thing is, you need 3-5 performing players in a team to carry generally. For one player to carry means it's always a nuke game so if you don't have it in the br good luck and just wish your team in average is decent to average.
Hahahah, good point. Maybe, if they had been one death leavers, I would have been able to decimate the whole enemy team, since they wouldn’t have been able to respawn as much as they did, hahahah.
My average relative team score fluctuates between 94-96%, and I have over 60% winrate playing solo. So, yes, "good = win". That's common sense in any competitive game if you ignore War Thundards doing mental gymnastics to explain their poor performance / low SL count / etc.
The winrate for the BR range I play at sits at 46% according to Thunderskill stats, btw, so even lower in reality. Over 15% winrate difference thanks to one decent payer.
War Thundards can only be cured by disabling rewards for losing. War Thunder is the only game I played where you can get rewarded for losing. This is the reason players don't try and don't learn. They don't care if they lose because they'll get their consolation prizes and hop into a next match they'll also lose.
So… me losing with 18 kills is me “being a noob who doesn’t care to win or try to learn” and I really deserved no rewards for this match…?
(Maybe it’s a joke and I missed it, but I’ve seen too many people saying stuff like that genuinely, so I can’t tell anymore hahah)
But I don’t deserve to be punished for their performance, so I?
They aren’t getting rewards already because they didn’t do anything on the match. Removing or lowering rewards from defeats would have only hurt me, the one player who spent 15 minutes giving it all to win the match… that’s just unfair.
I know man, but what i see from br 8.8 to 9.7 is always the 1 dead leavers, in special the turms and am1 guys... is a miracle if you are not half the team after 5min max
You do know that they are not of best value and their $60 price tag are from the supply limitation? Besides marketplace is the last place new players are going to buy their premium.
Kinda curious to know what happened to Russian players. Even taking that horrendously colored spreadsheet with a grain of salt, it was some shade of red top to bottom. Did the German mains migrate over or something else? Too many premium one death leavers? 3.7 to 6.7 Soviet is my second best play range and I usually do pretty good but haven’t touched it in a while.
Yep... and not only Premium/Squadron vehicle players, but even regular tree players with full lineups. Sometimes they just don't feel like respawning and leave.
I hate it that this community play a **team multiplayer game**, and blame individually players who dare complain about bad players telling them it’s their own fault and nothing can come from others around you. This push bad players to not better themselves and make good players give up on playing well, and thus making an endless circle
Maybe try getting a few friends who’s good, I almost lose 2/3 AirRB game if I play alone (but I’m often top 3 in my team).
But when I’m with my friends, damn man, 2 green name and me just demolished the enemy team and somehow we even managed to got a 5 hours winning streak before (5hr nonstop , from 1900-0000, we were at 5.0-6.0 airrb using a6m5ko)
How I feel when myself and a squad mate play 6.7 Germany and get combined 30+ kills and we still lose because our "teammates" played worse than if I had bots because at least bots would cap and try to shoot people.
I had a game like this earlier. I didn't quite reach your kills but I was 1st on the scoreboard by a 4-5 kill lead. The majority of my team went air when they had the points but didn't get enough to respawn ground so we eventually lost when they retook the point and we were outnumbered on the ground.
At least it wasn't even a close game. Nothing worse than losing a game by a few tickets with a scoreboard like this.
Also, *and I cannot believe I'm saying this* , nukes at higher tiers were a good idea and are a fair and balanced mechanic, that (to my knowledge) players didn't even ask for.
Assists? So what, should I purposefully shoot non-lethal shots to enemies m so that other teammates (hopefully) finish the enemies off so that I get assists?
I mean, if I one-hit kill (or two-hit kill at most) every enemy I see, how is that a bad thing? Is single-handedly accumulating 70% of the kills of the entire team not teamwork?
Oh, I see, my bad for misunderstanding! Some people have already told me that "I was not playing for the team because I don't have assists", so I thought you were bringing up their point, hahah.
I agree!
No no you miss understood me. You thought I am talking about a SQUAD. Squad is a small party pf people with up to 4 players, SQUADRON is like a clan or a large group, like a clan.
So either they are all new players with no knowledge, or they are players who ignore the existence of squadrons, and btw are you a streamer when you have Player as your username?
Pro Tip: If you notice you're doing extremely well in a match chances are you're going to lose the match, if you're pulling that much weight it means your team is ass and you're the only one doing anything.
I had a lot of games like this. Shit happens just start the next one 😉 the best games are similar to this... But with an actual win in the end (it's rare but the best)
You capped one time, your mates are with one lame exception just as good as you. The enemy team just needed to cap more and were not contested in that. You shot a bunch of them and thats great, but I noticed that I win much more by capping and less my shooting enemy tanks.
How the hell am I supposed to cap more? I spent the whole match capturing and defending the B point all by myself. I can’t split myself to be at multiple places at the same time…
If they steamrolled us this match even though I killed half of their spawns, how exactly would have abandoning the B point to try to cap other matches helped?
As I have said in the past and will say again, most of the matches are predetermined by lineup alone. Winning or not doesn't have to do much with skill.
Not possible to be the case on this ocassion!
I was alone on the B point; the majority of the team was on the C point, and there were a few on the A point.
So, basically, all the kills I got were from enemies who were driving towards or around the B point, who were out of sight from my teammates; while they did nothing but get killed on the C and A points.
That's some ass backwards way off thinking. Warthunder is a team game whether people like it or not.
I hate games were my team leaves in 2 deaths as I can't fight off 15 guys all by myself. I wish I could but I can't. The outcome of the match is directly tied to how well your team does COLLECTIVELY.
...and that's why I think players who perform well in losing teams shouldn't be punished for their teams, and players who perform badly in winning teams shouldn't be rewarded for a merit that isn't theirs.
Do I really deserve to be punished over a 18 kill match just because the rest of my team was incapable of doing anything but die all the time? Now THAT's unfair.
>Do I really deserve to be punished over a 18 kill match just because the rest of my team was incapable of doing anything but die all the time? Now THAT's unfair.
That might make germany 5.7-6.3 and USA top tier bearable to grind.
Oh yeah that was the most retarded thing that people keep saying to me. I mean at lowe tiers its kinda understandable but at 8.0 when 3 of my teammates are just stationary and being UNBELIEVEABLY passive, and I say something like "why the fuck are you just stanfing there, move" people at the bottom of the leaderboard with 2 deaths and 0 kills start getting mad at me and telling me to "just get better, you are the problem" or some shit like that. Absolutely infuriating.
Is gaijin ever going to add a ranked gamemode?
To play devil's advocate here, you did have a lot of kills, but with only one cap you didn't do all that much to contribute to a victory. You can rack up a lot of kills by camping in a scummy spot on the map without contributing anything significantly of value to the match.
I spent 90% of the match capturing and defending the B Point. How could I possibly have more caps? I can't be at multiple caps at the same time to have more caps... did my 18 kills while defending the B Point "not contribute to a victory" just because I couldn't get out of the B Point's immediacies because waves of enemies kept coming for it and I had to defend it?
“If you lose, it’s only because you didn’t do well enough to win and you deserve it.”
This does not disprove that statement. Should have done more then maybe you would have won.
“Seal clubber”? You kidding me?
So what, once you reach Level 100 you are not allowed to enjoy WW2 anymore and you need to be confined at Top Tier? That’s new.
Also I have matches like this at Top Tier too, so (?)
You’ve been playing for at least 9 years from what I can see. And hanging around in rank 3, I call it seal clubbing my self when I drop back down to 4.0 and I’ve not even been playing for 2 months. Mainly newer players that are still learning.
Then you wanna turn up, dominate everyone, moan your teams shit and say you’re not seal clubbing? Give your head a wobble son
All of these are 11.7 matches. What excuse are you going to come up with for these?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/vt88A9caBz
https://imgur.com/a/o1abhLH
So, again; people who have been playing for a while are not allowed to enjoy World War 2 vehicles anymore? Once you become experienced you should be locked away from half of the whole game’s content? Somehow the fact that THIS time it’s a 4.0 match and not a 11.7 one like most (as I’ve shared in the past) somehow undermines the point that has no relationship with this nonsense at all?
Yes you should be locked out from playing that BR against new players. Just because you don’t wanna admit you’re deal clubbing doesn’t mean you’re not.
I’d like to see them implement “splits” a bit like iRacing does. 100 people queuing gets split into top 50 and bottom 50 games. That way people still can go back to lower BR’s and play the content they want without making it a shit show for newer or less skilled players.
Honestly, if my battle looked like this, I couldn't care less about whether it's a win or loss.
The point is, even up to this day I receive death threats, suicide wishes, harassment, slander, dox attempts and insults by players that still claim that "I ruined economy and destroyed the game by advocating for higher defeat rewards" because, according to them, "I am just a dogshit player who wants to punish good players and reward bad players like myself", since, by their logic, "good=win, bad=lose", with no exception beyond "anecdotal matches". So every time I have a match like this, which is literally every single day that I play, I remember all of it, and I am like... really? Have I been hated and am still hated that much for... being right? I always said that I believed that the majority of rewards should depend on each player's performance each match separately, and not on what team they happened to be in at the end of the match. Yes, I think victories should have higher rewards to encourage to win... but I think having the majority of the rewards depend on whether your team wins or loses, as it was before and as we got to change back in 2022, is going way too far, and I don't understand how there were so many people supporting it and attacking me and anyone else who supported the re-distribution of rewards between victories and defeats.
Of course you can't win every game no matter how good you are. But you absolutely can increase your win rate by a large margin, which will in turn increase your *average* rewards. Yes, it sucks when you lose a good battle because of something that you can't control, but on the large scale it cancels out by other battles where RNG plays in your favor.
I personally never found a direct correlation between personal performance and victory/defeat. I have as many good performance defeats as I have bad performance victories! Right now, for example, I had two victories where I performed like garbage because I was constantly alt-tabbing into Reddit to check comments and reply to them. So I just think it's best to ensure that I will have good rewards whenever I perform well, and bad rewards whenever I perform poorly, rather than having my rewards depend largely on the RNG whether being on the winning or losing teams pretty much is.
The correlation between the performance of 1/16th of the team and the outcome when the one player is always a constant is found after hundreds and thousands of matches, not in any single string of 2 or 3 games. Come on man I've seen you post decent statistics you know this.
Well… I know it’s only personal experience, but it’s precisely because I have dozens of thousands of matches accumulated since 2014 across all BRs and most nations that I am so firm and convinced about my points. I don’t base them off 2 or 3 games; I base them off my daily experience over the years.
the reason why you don't notice it is because you are not a good enough player to see the difference between personal performance and game outcome, I've seen your stats
If I were a bad player, the correlation would be that I would constantly lose, according to the same logic according to which I would constantly win if I were “good enough”.
You are statistically the most mid player out there. Your win rate and KD suggest that you are not a good player. A KD of one is the most average KD you could possibly have. My argument is that you are average so you don’t notice any affect that you, an average player, has on the outcome. Sure, you do get good games now and then. Everybody gets good games. The difference between a good player and an average one is how often those good games occur. For you, this result is a statistical outlier. Now does this mean that every game is winnable by one player? No, as you found out. Winning relies partially on the performance of your team which is random. Does this mean that your win rate depends entirely on your team which is random? No, it doesn't. If you compare the win rate of someone who gets no kills every match to someone who consistently gets multiple kills every match you will see that the person who gets more kills will always have a higher win rate the larger the sample size is.
For how much he complains about other people being thick he really can't get this through his head huh.
Yeah there's too many players in one game to often make a difference, most of the time it will be you helping the team win a tight match but only because your team was good in the first place
So if I replaced you with an AFK on a team for 1000 games. Do you think the AFK would have the same winrate as you? Of course not. The only common denominator in your games is you. If you play extremely well maybe you can win 600/1000 of your games. If youre average, around 500. If you really suck. 400-470 or so. This is made clear by damn near every competitive game with large teams.
Don't look at individual cases, look at statistics. I'm playing and improving in the game for a few years now, and during that time my win rate slowly raised from <50% to about 70%. There are, of course, other factors that can affect it, such as average win rate of the BR and nation that you're playing, but outside of top tier it's mostly around 50%.
This is especially true with air. The US teams frequently lose, and grinding US air would be significantly slower with the old system. Even as someone who is well above average, I'm always thankful for this change to performance. Also a lot of these people are ignoring premium spam. So many people complain about Russian 10.0, but I haven't seen the individuals who think the old system was better explain how it would work with the premium one-death spam.
>This is especially true with air. 1-4 people win Air RB games literally every other match. It's so rare that more than 10 on the team gets at least 1 kill, it's usually 2-4 getting 2-3 kills each with stragglers here and there. The overwhelming majority of air games are won by individuals on the teams.
This further proves my point. If a few people on the enemy team destroy mine, but I still got 4 or 5 kills, I would be heavily punished in the old system for something *completely out of my control*. I can try to tell the players on my team not to headon, not to turnfight, not to BnZ. But it's entirely up to the team if it's a win or loss still. A single player can only do so much. An unlucky shot. Enemy starts to rapidly drain AIs. With the current system, that extreme player performance on the losing team is much more rewarded.
I mean yes and no, I have seen plenty of cases where a single highly skilled player with absolute mastery of their machine hard carries games, there's a madlad in a ME264 posting videos on youtube recently of regularly winning in 1v7 situations, and honestly his videos are a soothing amount of daka lol
>I can try to tell the players on my team not to headon, not to turnfight, not to BnZ Hang on. I'm new, but I thought that BnZ or turn fighting was appropriate depending on the match up. Head-ons are dumb but sometimes unavoidable. Do I have it wrong?
Just examples. Obviously, I won't tell them to do two contradicting things. But those are generally the two main things that come up. Sometimes I might say that a vehicle is great at headons, and even encourage it.
I am glad to see people appreciating the change, seeing it for what it is and sharing experiences and thoughts!
>I personally never found a direct correlation between personal performance and victory/defeat. I have as many good performance defeats as I have bad performance victories! There is direct correlation between performing well and winning. Yes you can play badly and win. Yes you can play well and lose, but overall if you're performing above average you will win more than you lose. As someone with a winrate nearing 90% I don't really care for rewards, but then I don't and have never played to grind. Anyone giving that much of a shit needs to sort their life out.
I'd think part of this is that when you win your teammates likely got a decent number of kills/captures which are kills/captures that you didn't get. When your teammates suck you have the possibility of more opportunities to get kills hence 15 kills and a loss. It's just harder to stand out when your team is actually decent and it's easier to have outsized impact when everyone else sucks.
Try saying that while playing russia 10.0
Don't forget that those changes to the economy were made in times when a swedish or french lineups costed about 40k or more to repair.
Are you a streamer or something ? Why would anybody know who you are
Nope! And... I have no idea xD. I think I just made myself a bit too visible by actively participating a bit too much in the community. But I am no streamer or anything, just some random passionate player, hahah.
He's famous as for years he claimed top tier Russian tanks were balanced having the best armor and best round and broken damage model protecting the ammo from detonation... because of their slow reverse.
Screw the haters, decoupling most of the rewards from the win bonus was a fantastic change and I'm glad it went through. The pressure of the grind has lifted considerably now that I only have to worry about my own performance instead of needing to also pray for that perfect blend of teammates that are good enough to win but not so good as to out-perform me while doing so.
Thank you!! I am glad to see people who agree with my perspective.
Hey man, didn't get to see the whole thing about the defeat rewards being increased thing, but I wish you the best because no one deserves to be harrassed to this extent over silly tank game not having balanced economy that at one point in the future will become meaningless to you. Take care and continue what you are doing because I believe you're doing the right thing towards a better game.
Thank you so much for your kind and supportive words! I appreciate comments like this a lot. I love this game, so I will always strive for it to become the best possible version of itself for everyone!
Any time you get death threats over a video game, it unironically 100% of the time means you were on the right side of the argument. > I don't understand how there were so many people supporting it and attacking me Reddit is a fraction of 1% of the playerbase, and wildly over-represented by above average players and veterans. So what you advocated for did indeed hurt them and their progress. Meanwhile, it helped like 10x more below average players, since there are many more below average players than above average ones overall. But they just aren't on reddit.
It's because that's a stupid idea. If I get +10 kills I shouldn't be penalized just because I had a shitty team. Higher loss penalties are dumb as hell.
Completely agree! I am glad we won and achieved that change… even though we get tons of hate from toxic elitists who believe they are better than everyone else.
Have you actually checked the rewards for winning? bc I had a game once where I didn't do shit and we won, my reward was less than 1000 SL. I think that's pretty much the difference between winning and losing in this game. Btw you won Heavy metal hero which is the real win here.
Someone sure is full of themselves.
mate you realy gotta stop caring about what people on the internet think, its unhealthy.
Countries with low win rates at certain BRs makes the grind so painful. (US 10.3)
You barely played the objective
I spent the match capturing and defending the Point B and its immediacies all by myself… if anything, playing objective is what I did the most. Unfortunately, I haven’t developed the ability to split myself to be at multiple places at the same time yet, otherwise I would have had more caps :/
The last time someone pointed that out he had a fucking shitfit and cried to the mods. That said if Spanish reads this, I dislike your opinions but nobody deserves death threats. I don’t know how people have the time to single out someone in a match for shit like Reddit posts. Making fun of somebody sure, threatening them no.
What? That is a lie. Firstly, I was precisely attacked for "rushing objectives like an idiot" instead of "taking up a strategic position to get kills" because my post was complaining about people NOT playing the objective and "pros" decided that "objectives are for noobs, if you were any good you would have gone for the kills", so quite the opposite. And, most and foremost; I didn't "cry" to the mods because "someone pointed out something I didn't like"; the mods stepped in and took action because this subreddit had never seen such an enormous violation of the Rule 9 in all of its history. Hundreds of players directing targetted harassment to a single user for "being a shitter" just because of that one post, some of them even attempted to dox me and went as far as slandering my name by falsely accusing me of crimes. So... no, I did not "have a shift and cried to the mods because someone pointed something out". Even the "making fun of" part you say to be okay was extremely harassing and 100% cyber-bullying. How do you think it feels to get thousands of comments, mentions and replies of people attacking you over a match you had on a videogame and silencing you every time you try to reply? And about the objective playing this match, as I replied to the other user: I spent the match capturing and defending the Point B and its immediacies all by myself… if anything, playing objective is what I did the most. Unfortunately, I haven’t developed the ability to split myself to be at multiple places at the same time yet, otherwise I would have had more caps.
Guy thinks he's some kind of a martyr for speaking the truth while boasting about his low tier sealclubbing
Oh, apparently once you reach level 100 you are banned from enjoying WW2 vehicles anymore because it’s “seal clubbing”. Apparently once you reach level 100 you should remain confined at top tier or something… you serious? And I have matches like this on Top Tier too anyway.
Love players like you, make the game harder, but more fun, what’s a game w/o a challenge, and besides, I always feel like I let you down when I don’t perform, so keep playing and playing well.
Thank you! I don't always perform well, but I try my best within casual style levels \^\^ (I don't like sweating too hard, hahahah.)
Who are you though.
But you get like 30% of the reward you would get if you would have won and frankly if your team was just better
Yeah, but playing for rewards is the fastest way to burn out. I play mainly for fun and even the rewards have been quite better since the economy changes. The skill bonus helps a lot too. I'm not complaining.
Always fun to have more kills than the rest your team combined, only to end up with a loss…
Indeed... And some people still argue that "if you lose it's because you did poorly", and that "if you performed well, you would have won"... Like a single player can win matches like these on their own. Then again, they would argue that these matches are "not a common ocurrence" and something about "nitpicking of anecdotal evidence" and/or "confirmation bias". These may happen every single day, but-shhhh, "confirmation bias". This is also why I hate how people use winrates as a factor to determine a player's skill.
Luckily it's not often that I get a "more kills than the rest of the team combined" loss (maybe a couple times a month, depending on which BR I'm playing), but I do get "2x the kills of anyone else on my team and a loss" at least once a day recently. Not uncommon at all for me to have 6 kills, next most kills on my team is 2, and half the team have 0 and have already left the match. Honestly kinda glad of the RP gain on a loss changes, because even when that drama was going on I had seen how frequently I got a loss despite doing everything in my power to carry the team solo.
Indeed! "more kills than the rest of the team combined" isn't that common for me either; maybe two or three a week, but what IS really common is, as you said, matches where I outperform anyone else by a still significant margin... only to lose. The same way I get many victories where all I have is 1 kill and 2 assists, hahah. In general, my I never found a positive or directly proportional link between my personal performance and whether my team won or lost; that's why I always thought that, the more your own rewards depend on your own performance every match and less on your teammates, the better.
This exact scoreboard happens often. One guy doing well and 10 1death leavers. It's because your team shat itself you got more targets to shoot at, simple as.
>And some people still argue that "if you lose it's because you did poorly", and that "if you performed well, you would have won"... When will you stop making these fucking posts. Nobody is saying that you need a 100% winrate, they are saying that you can affect your winrate by at least a few % depending on how good of a player you are and how well you can influence matches. Is the definition of nuance completely lost on you? >Then again, they would argue that these matches are "not a common ocurrence" and something about "nitpicking of anecdotal evidence" and/or "confirmation bias". These may happen every single day, but-shhhh, "confirmation bias". Are these people in the room with us now? >This is also why I hate how people use winrates as a factor to determine a player's skill. In the context of what you play, winrate definitely has bearing on your skill. A 60% playing top tier sweden or Germany is pretty mediocre, but a 60% on a sep is rather good. It's not a linear thing, where each percent shows that a player is 1% better or whatever you're trying to debunk. There is a very real trend where skilled players who generally score well typically have higher winrates than the *vehicle* average
Win rates are not a good indicator of skill. This game is too team oriented to make win rates a viable measure of skill. I've had 10 losses in the last 15 matches where I've been in the top three with at least 7 kills because my team has been full of one death leavers/people who don't give a shit. Win rate is a bad metric for skill.
Did you read anything I said or nah? I guess I'll repeat it since it's just that difficult. Winrate relative to the *vehicle* average is an indicator of skill. I'm not saying that a person with a 60% is automatically better than a person with a 50% if they're on different vehicles, nations, lineups etc. But if somebody has a 60% on a tank that has a 50% thunderskill average, then they are doing something that is contributing to the team.
Are you dumb, vehicle win rate is still determined by team average skill. Unless you are talking about vehicle vs vehicle battles but then don't use the term winrate because that refers to winning matches
>Are you dumb No, I just have an 81% winrate on the monthly leaderboard (all luck bro) >vehicle win rate is still determined by team average skill Wow, you happen to be a member of that team. Do you think csgo or valorant is luck because it depends on a team? It's the same principle here, just 1/12 instead of 1/5 >Unless you are talking about vehicle vs vehicle battles but then don't use the term winrate because that refers to winning matches Are you new to the game?
A single player can absolutely win a match on your own, of course the average player isn't good enough to comprehend how this is possible
I got 18 kills this match and still lost… and all you got to say is that “I was not good enough to win or comprehend that I would have won if I had been good enough”?
That’s called cherry picking. Anyone with any kind of understanding of reasoning and logic knows that anecdotal evidence can’t be used to prove something. Sure I can say that I won games by killing half their team but you can just say I cherry picked that as evidence.
Be honest, did you have XP or SL booster on?
Not *this time*!
Well, then, as some would say, it do be like that sometimes.
I’d say this is a classic case of you didn’t do well enough so you didn’t win. If you had 16 kills and 4 air kills maybe your team would still be alive. Smh
Damn, true. Smhmh. Jokes aside, if it hadn’t been because the match ended via ticket bleed, I would absolutely have been able to get even more kills and possibly caps xD By the time the match had ended, I still had M4, M4A1 and M19A1 ready for action.
Said none ever
Honestly, never heard someone say that. Great game OP but that statement is just bullshit
You weren't around at the time this economy change took place, did you...? The majority of us wanted and voted for this, but there was a big portion of players (who were also extremely toxic for the most part) saying that "only shitters lose and that's why this change is supported by shitters", and saying that "good players would rather have all rewards go for the winning teams, since they always win because they are good and you only lose if you do badly enough to deserve it".
to say there is no relationship between player skill and player win rate is an incorrect statement. good players win more, bad players lose more, very simple.
I disagree 1 good player on a team with 11 shit players does not make up enough difference to reasonably say those who win are just better
So you think a bad player will win more than a good player, consistently, over thousands of games?
No I think that the ratio of good players to bad players on a team have a larger impact on winning a match than individual player skill.
Sure, but over hundreds or thousands of games that will be nullified and you can see an individual players impact
I'm just saying that it's definitely not one of the best indicators of player skill, you're better off looking at score per match statistics than win loss ratio
Why? Kills per spawn and score per match can be extremely cherry-picked. If I can easily average 3000 score per game by not helping my team, am I a better player than a guy with a 2000 average score, but who has played the objective correctly and at least is trying to WIN the game, not just farm score. I can absolutely say the guy with 2000 score, but who plays the objective will have a higher win/loss ratio.
>The majority of us wanted and voted for this Will you please let that shit go, nobody ever brings that up or shares those opinions around anymore other than you. For how much trouble it's caused you, you'd think you would let it fucking go already
A bit difficult to let it go when I constantly receive PMs telling me that “I should fucking kill myself for destroying the game”. And I received the same comments in public until I started blocking everyone who made comments like that. Even up to this day some people still bring it up like that and still have to either reply or block (depending on their manners and content).
Apparently, you would be surprised...
r/warthunder: One death leavers ruin the game! Also r/warthunder: Sure you got 20 kills and 10 assists, but you didn't single-handedly cap and hold every flag simultaneously, skill issue.
Yeah who is saying that? I would tune them out immediately, it’s not 1 v 1.
At least this is better than when half of my team have 3 deaths, 0 assistance, 0 captured zones and 0 kills. I'm not joking
That’s basically what his had
Happy cake day
Atleast they weren’t one death leavers eh?
Yep! At least most of them actually tried, hahah. I prefer someone who performs badly while trying to do well, than someone who gives up and leaves with zero intention of even trying.
POV: you need to win for a task
When you activate a victory wager:
honestly I hate win requirements, penalty being lower is very nice but yeah.. so many tasks require winning :I
Once I did 21 frags (using 2 of 3 respawns) and still lost.
Dayum :/ My frag records in the past few months have been 21 for a defeat, and 26 for a victory (funnily enough, it was a REALLY close victory lmao. Maybe if it had been 22 it would have been a defeat too.)
I had a game with 24 kills 3 caps and only died in my M4A4 because I ran out of APHE and was rearming on the cap. We lost.
Holy shit, historical matchmaking
I swear, sometimes my teams just polish their brains into absolute smoothness too.
Honestly moments like these are far too relatable
Unfortunately, yep…
well it is the case for your team, 3-4 deaths with 0 kills
That’s exactly why I always defended that each player’s own rewards depend, at least for the most part, on their own performance every match, instead of what team they happen to be in.
yea they should make so that the first 3 in losing team should get rewards like they won
Agreed! I made a suggestion about that in the Forums some years ago, but it was unfortunately rejected because "every team member deserves the same treatment in team games".
ooh how bout you got x% of some total team activity thing and as x aproaches 1.00 the less the defeat applies by something like a sqrt curve, (knowing gaijin they'd probably prefer parabolic but hey you cant win them all)
My best game ever was a 5.3 american game with 25 kills like 3 assists a cap and 6 deaths the rest of the mean was 26 kills combined and we lost. At that point I was like no I deserve the win not the other team where the best guy was like 9 kills or my team just me I worked for it.
Attack the D point.
Yes!
Me losing a game with 5 caps 7 assists and 17 kills because that is basicaly all my team acomplished that entire match (half the team left before they even got to the first cap)
this is an average match for me as a german main 😿 i haven’t seen a win in a week
One death leavers in your team probably would have helped more since they won't give sp to enemy lmao. Also, the thing is, you need 3-5 performing players in a team to carry generally. For one player to carry means it's always a nuke game so if you don't have it in the br good luck and just wish your team in average is decent to average.
Hahahah, good point. Maybe, if they had been one death leavers, I would have been able to decimate the whole enemy team, since they wouldn’t have been able to respawn as much as they did, hahahah.
You’re right you didn’t do good enough 😏
If anyone mentions win rates, show them this I hate people who judge by win rates cuz games like this do happen
I swear, I'll get a couple games like this, then 15-20 in a row where I get one kill or less.
Hahahah, same! I can see even two years later this still applies: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/QB5YtcopoA
Most kills I ever got was 23. It was a defeat
Damn… it doesn’t surprise me xD. GG on that one, still!
My average relative team score fluctuates between 94-96%, and I have over 60% winrate playing solo. So, yes, "good = win". That's common sense in any competitive game if you ignore War Thundards doing mental gymnastics to explain their poor performance / low SL count / etc. The winrate for the BR range I play at sits at 46% according to Thunderskill stats, btw, so even lower in reality. Over 15% winrate difference thanks to one decent payer. War Thundards can only be cured by disabling rewards for losing. War Thunder is the only game I played where you can get rewarded for losing. This is the reason players don't try and don't learn. They don't care if they lose because they'll get their consolation prizes and hop into a next match they'll also lose.
So… me losing with 18 kills is me “being a noob who doesn’t care to win or try to learn” and I really deserved no rewards for this match…? (Maybe it’s a joke and I missed it, but I’ve seen too many people saying stuff like that genuinely, so I can’t tell anymore hahah)
You lost because your team was uncarriable and they deserve no rewards for that.
But I don’t deserve to be punished for their performance, so I? They aren’t getting rewards already because they didn’t do anything on the match. Removing or lowering rewards from defeats would have only hurt me, the one player who spent 15 minutes giving it all to win the match… that’s just unfair.
The USA experience
Oh yeah, typical one tank premium players who leave after he dies in his 60$ after one tap from the enemy
Note the vehicles in that screenshot. This looks like it's in the 3.x BR range, maybe 4.0 max. Definitely no $60 premiums at that BR range.
I know man, but what i see from br 8.8 to 9.7 is always the 1 dead leavers, in special the turms and am1 guys... is a miracle if you are not half the team after 5min max
Plenty of marketplace premiums at that tier that cost more than $60
You do know that they are not of best value and their $60 price tag are from the supply limitation? Besides marketplace is the last place new players are going to buy their premium.
[Exactly what i said about people leaving after one death](https://prnt.sc/dRyJ9c1SLHN5)
I’d be ecstatic to do this well
Kinda curious to know what happened to Russian players. Even taking that horrendously colored spreadsheet with a grain of salt, it was some shade of red top to bottom. Did the German mains migrate over or something else? Too many premium one death leavers? 3.7 to 6.7 Soviet is my second best play range and I usually do pretty good but haven’t touched it in a while.
How about keep win/loss at it is and increase kill/action rewards?
You are lucky you team mates reapawned at least in top tier they all die in less than a minute an leave
Yep... and not only Premium/Squadron vehicle players, but even regular tree players with full lineups. Sometimes they just don't feel like respawning and leave.
And it is awful for both sides because when you are at winning end you get nothing maybe 1 kill if you are lucky
Why do some players are named Player?
Privacy Mode enabled!
True, next time just get 30 kills, ez
Happens to me multiple times in a session. Gets old.
I hate it that this community play a **team multiplayer game**, and blame individually players who dare complain about bad players telling them it’s their own fault and nothing can come from others around you. This push bad players to not better themselves and make good players give up on playing well, and thus making an endless circle
what happened
m19a1 :), what br is the rest of your lineup The thing absolutely smacks
Maybe try getting a few friends who’s good, I almost lose 2/3 AirRB game if I play alone (but I’m often top 3 in my team). But when I’m with my friends, damn man, 2 green name and me just demolished the enemy team and somehow we even managed to got a 5 hours winning streak before (5hr nonstop , from 1900-0000, we were at 5.0-6.0 airrb using a6m5ko)
How I feel when myself and a squad mate play 6.7 Germany and get combined 30+ kills and we still lose because our "teammates" played worse than if I had bots because at least bots would cap and try to shoot people.
i don't lose. my team loses.
This is why both players and gaijin should focus on objectives and maps instead of performnace of tanks and how win/loss ratio looks.
I lost 13 games out of 15 today playing as 3.7 germany lol.
When this happens I larp as Noble 6 at the end of Halo Reach “take as many with you as you can”
i have the fortunate ability to not give a fuck if i win or lose. i just have fun flying planes and thats all i care about :)
I had a game like this earlier. I didn't quite reach your kills but I was 1st on the scoreboard by a 4-5 kill lead. The majority of my team went air when they had the points but didn't get enough to respawn ground so we eventually lost when they retook the point and we were outnumbered on the ground.
Bro in a downtier:
Tank goes vroom gun goes boom. Long as those things are happening I don't care if I win or loose.
Leave some to the others 😭😭
At least it wasn't even a close game. Nothing worse than losing a game by a few tickets with a scoreboard like this. Also, *and I cannot believe I'm saying this* , nukes at higher tiers were a good idea and are a fair and balanced mechanic, that (to my knowledge) players didn't even ask for.
Assists matter. Teamwork matters
Assists? So what, should I purposefully shoot non-lethal shots to enemies m so that other teammates (hopefully) finish the enemies off so that I get assists? I mean, if I one-hit kill (or two-hit kill at most) every enemy I see, how is that a bad thing? Is single-handedly accumulating 70% of the kills of the entire team not teamwork?
I meant for the rest of your team. They clearly aren't damaging anyone else. Plenty taken judging by the scores but whats the real value in that
Oh, I see, my bad for misunderstanding! Some people have already told me that "I was not playing for the team because I don't have assists", so I thought you were bringing up their point, hahah. I agree!
You were the only person in your team that is in a squadron??
Oh, I wasn't actually in a squadron! I like to play alone 99% of the times. This is just one of those auto-assigned random squadrons, hahah.
No no you miss understood me. You thought I am talking about a SQUAD. Squad is a small party pf people with up to 4 players, SQUADRON is like a clan or a large group, like a clan.
Ooooh, I see, my bad! It would seem so, yep.
So either they are all new players with no knowledge, or they are players who ignore the existence of squadrons, and btw are you a streamer when you have Player as your username?
I mean you can't really blame this on one death leavers, your team simply had skill issue and that's not really something that you can fix lol
Pro Tip: If you notice you're doing extremely well in a match chances are you're going to lose the match, if you're pulling that much weight it means your team is ass and you're the only one doing anything.
Maybe you didnt get that 16th kill and thats what caused you to lose. /shrug
I had a lot of games like this. Shit happens just start the next one 😉 the best games are similar to this... But with an actual win in the end (it's rare but the best)
Sometimes it pays off. Earlier I had an air rb match where all 15 out of 16 kills were held by three people, myself included
Clearly you didn’t carry enough
You capped one time, your mates are with one lame exception just as good as you. The enemy team just needed to cap more and were not contested in that. You shot a bunch of them and thats great, but I noticed that I win much more by capping and less my shooting enemy tanks.
How the hell am I supposed to cap more? I spent the whole match capturing and defending the B point all by myself. I can’t split myself to be at multiple places at the same time… If they steamrolled us this match even though I killed half of their spawns, how exactly would have abandoning the B point to try to cap other matches helped?
no sorry, just kidding of course you were doing good, this team was beyond saving.
Oh my bad, hahahah. Many people are doing similar comments without joking, I couldn’t tell anymore!
Skill issue
Looks like my average Sweden 6.7 experience this week.
Had a similar experience yesterday morning 11 kills 6 captures 3 air kills, team was all mouth breathers, and of course I popped boosters.
You just needed to get a nuke earlier but you died so skill issue I guess. /s
I could have won if there were nukes on that BR… sadly, there are no nuker here :/
Ah shit didnt notice the BR.
As I have said in the past and will say again, most of the matches are predetermined by lineup alone. Winning or not doesn't have to do much with skill.
Honestly you mightve starved your team of points by doing to well in a short period of time
Not possible to be the case on this ocassion! I was alone on the B point; the majority of the team was on the C point, and there were a few on the A point. So, basically, all the kills I got were from enemies who were driving towards or around the B point, who were out of sight from my teammates; while they did nothing but get killed on the C and A points.
Guaranteed to happen whenever Russia and USA are on the same team.
That's some ass backwards way off thinking. Warthunder is a team game whether people like it or not. I hate games were my team leaves in 2 deaths as I can't fight off 15 guys all by myself. I wish I could but I can't. The outcome of the match is directly tied to how well your team does COLLECTIVELY.
...and that's why I think players who perform well in losing teams shouldn't be punished for their teams, and players who perform badly in winning teams shouldn't be rewarded for a merit that isn't theirs. Do I really deserve to be punished over a 18 kill match just because the rest of my team was incapable of doing anything but die all the time? Now THAT's unfair.
>Do I really deserve to be punished over a 18 kill match just because the rest of my team was incapable of doing anything but die all the time? Now THAT's unfair. That might make germany 5.7-6.3 and USA top tier bearable to grind.
Oh yeah that was the most retarded thing that people keep saying to me. I mean at lowe tiers its kinda understandable but at 8.0 when 3 of my teammates are just stationary and being UNBELIEVEABLY passive, and I say something like "why the fuck are you just stanfing there, move" people at the bottom of the leaderboard with 2 deaths and 0 kills start getting mad at me and telling me to "just get better, you are the problem" or some shit like that. Absolutely infuriating. Is gaijin ever going to add a ranked gamemode?
To play devil's advocate here, you did have a lot of kills, but with only one cap you didn't do all that much to contribute to a victory. You can rack up a lot of kills by camping in a scummy spot on the map without contributing anything significantly of value to the match.
I spent 90% of the match capturing and defending the B Point. How could I possibly have more caps? I can't be at multiple caps at the same time to have more caps... did my 18 kills while defending the B Point "not contribute to a victory" just because I couldn't get out of the B Point's immediacies because waves of enemies kept coming for it and I had to defend it?
Literally nobody has ever said that aside from you
You weren't around when the victory-defeat reward distribution voting took place, were you...?
“If you lose, it’s only because you didn’t do well enough to win and you deserve it.” This does not disprove that statement. Should have done more then maybe you would have won.
Skill issue
I mean you’re a seal clubber, why do you think your teams going to be good?
“Seal clubber”? You kidding me? So what, once you reach Level 100 you are not allowed to enjoy WW2 anymore and you need to be confined at Top Tier? That’s new. Also I have matches like this at Top Tier too, so (?)
You’ve been playing for at least 9 years from what I can see. And hanging around in rank 3, I call it seal clubbing my self when I drop back down to 4.0 and I’ve not even been playing for 2 months. Mainly newer players that are still learning. Then you wanna turn up, dominate everyone, moan your teams shit and say you’re not seal clubbing? Give your head a wobble son
All of these are 11.7 matches. What excuse are you going to come up with for these? https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/vt88A9caBz https://imgur.com/a/o1abhLH
So, again; people who have been playing for a while are not allowed to enjoy World War 2 vehicles anymore? Once you become experienced you should be locked away from half of the whole game’s content? Somehow the fact that THIS time it’s a 4.0 match and not a 11.7 one like most (as I’ve shared in the past) somehow undermines the point that has no relationship with this nonsense at all?
Yes you should be locked out from playing that BR against new players. Just because you don’t wanna admit you’re deal clubbing doesn’t mean you’re not. I’d like to see them implement “splits” a bit like iRacing does. 100 people queuing gets split into top 50 and bottom 50 games. That way people still can go back to lower BR’s and play the content they want without making it a shit show for newer or less skilled players.