Jump to content


Armageddon - Day 1


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
50 replies to this topic

600 #41 Posted 10 June 2015 - 09:34 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 16014 battles
  • 36
  • [CLASS] CLASS
  • Member since:
    12-06-2012

View PostTanitha, on 10 June 2015 - 09:11 PM, said:

 

Thanks for the spam, lols :)

 

Though much work has to be done, it's a vast improvement.

 

Credits has to be given when it's deserved

 


Edited by 600, 10 June 2015 - 09:35 PM.


neokai #42 Posted 10 June 2015 - 10:13 PM

    SealClub Number 9

  • Forum Moderator
  • 32472 battles
  • 6,383
  • [CROWN] CROWN
  • Member since:
    06-07-2013

View PostBinh_An, on 10 June 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

 

According to Fame rule: 

Fame Points = EXP x BTC x SBC x QPC

EXP – average experience a clan got in each battle. Experience counts without premium account coefficients and actions bonuses.

BTC – battle type coefficient.

SBC – quest level coefficient

QPC – battle coefficient, which depends on whether the province is aimed for the clan.

VN-F members had 890. for EXP, 5.0 for BTC, 2.0 for SBC, 5.0 for QPC in one battle. That's how we got our famepoints.

 

 

Ah ok, thanks. +1 for the explanation

 

I forgot to factor the multipliers.

 

View PostZeroPauper, on 10 June 2015 - 07:59 PM, said:

And is there anyone who can explain what the task Belluzzo is?

 

Similar to Control Centre - random province next to your Control Centre becomes the Belluzzo UFO stash point. You have 1 day to attack, win and hold that province.


Spoiler

FendaIton #43 Posted 11 June 2015 - 06:56 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 62 battles
  • 98
  • [PANZX] PANZX
  • Member since:
    04-10-2014

If you turn up with less than 80 points, and you still win, can the other team report you?

 

Or does the battle not start at all?

 

akQJRPo.gif


View PostJezzalenko1978, on 05 June 2015 - 02:50 AM, said:

~neokai

Saying what you can't say counts as saying, just saying.

 


neokai #44 Posted 11 June 2015 - 09:33 AM

    SealClub Number 9

  • Forum Moderator
  • 32472 battles
  • 6,383
  • [CROWN] CROWN
  • Member since:
    06-07-2013

iirc the rules state you need 13 chips to start a battle, and technically coming into the fight with <85 points counts as a violation from the start (win or lose).

 

tl;dr Sounds like a violation, yes.

 

Edit: This counts only if you are the attacker. Defenders are a bit of a gray area because there could be extenuating circumstances (1 chip province, multiple battles queued etc).


Edited by neokai, 11 June 2015 - 09:38 AM.

Spoiler

Tanitha #45 Posted 11 June 2015 - 11:40 AM

    WOT Producer

  • Administrator
  • 4205 battles
  • 7,437
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    02-16-2012

View PostFendaIton, on 11 June 2015 - 06:56 AM, said:

If you turn up with less than 80 points, and you still win, can the other team report you?

 

Or does the battle not start at all?

 

akQJRPo.gif

 

85 not 80, And it doesn't matter if you win or lose. And it doesn't matter if someone report you or not, as we are scanning as well.

 

 

Regards

Tan


 

Feel free to like my Wargaming Facebook Page WGTanitha

 

 


Holeinthehead #46 Posted 12 June 2015 - 11:45 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 44295 battles
  • 858
  • [PANZA] PANZA
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

It's sad that it had to get this way in the first place . There was an opportunity to head this off before it got so bad . Go look under that rug . You will find all those things you sowed so long ago .

 

This horse has long bolted . To little . To late . Perhaps if less time had been spent witch hunting forum users that tried to highlight issues that surfaced over a year ago . ..... Who knows .


Sig number 6 gone . In Armageddon - Day 1.  Note the date .

You're a weird mob . I'd like to go quietly into the night . I understand Mods are here to stay . I understand Mission / SH / CW rigging is here to stay .

I'll not bother the forums with these things . Let me go in peace . Not sure though why I cannot try and get cheap gold if it's ok for others to do .


Hilly #47 Posted 12 June 2015 - 12:29 PM

    Captain

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 10674 battles
  • 1,837
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostHoleinthehead, on 12 June 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

It's sad that it had to get this way in the first place . There was an opportunity to head this off before it got so bad . Go look under that rug . You will find all those things you sowed so long ago .

 

This horse has long bolted . To little . To late . Perhaps if less time had been spent witch hunting forum users that tried to highlight issues that surfaced over a year ago . ..... Who knows .

 

It is sad mate. but as we know, some clans just take the p*ss and don't play in the spirit of the game.  They find a loophole in the rules and blatantly use it to their advantage.

I like this current setup, it stops chip spamming, sub clans chip spamming as well.  If you go through the last 3 days violations you can see which clans are abusing the system and to be honest have always abused the system in some regards.  Naming and shaming even might have a good effect on the game.

 

 

 

 



Pyromaniacs [PYRO] is recruiting now. Please email/pm me if you are interested.


hate_pubbehs #48 Posted 12 June 2015 - 01:49 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 58382 battles
  • 5,379
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012

View PostHilly, on 12 June 2015 - 04:29 PM, said:

Naming and shaming even might have a good effect on the game.

It serves a very real purpose for clans, when a dedicated forum is made for it to be done properly.

 

Also i would argue for individuals cheating missions or being racist in pube games. We need a way to publicly name and flame and shame those kind of things too.


Edited by timwahoo, 12 June 2015 - 01:50 PM.

SOLOPUBE. 3 MoE: T54E1, Lowe, FV4202, M46KR, IS-2, AMX M4 45, FV201, Panther M10, ARL 44, Heavy Tank VI, VK 30.01 D, Excelsior, Renault G1R


aurora97 #49 Posted 12 June 2015 - 02:21 PM

    Major

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 27314 battles
  • 2,053
  • [CALM] CALM
  • Member since:
    09-07-2012

View Posttimwahoo, on 12 June 2015 - 01:49 PM, said:

It serves a very real purpose for clans, when a dedicated forum is made for it to be done properly.

 

Also i would argue for individuals cheating missions or being racist in pube games. We need a way to publicly name and flame and shame those kind of things too.

I agree with naming part but I don't think we should resort to vigilantism. 


Edited by aurora97, 12 June 2015 - 02:30 PM.

 
 

thommo_nz #50 Posted 12 June 2015 - 06:43 PM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 41466 battles
  • 167
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

From what I've read with this campaign its hats off to WG for developing automated systems (with manual support mechanisms) for trying to tackle what forum dwellers have been talking about for ages. This Armageddon event is the systems proving ground and with any new developments in automated systems, there will be some tweaking that is required.

 

 

 

As for comments about naming shaming and flaming, IMHO such an approach will make little difference. Those that have the gall not to play in the spirit of the game or in fairness to others or lack a moral compass, will NOT be concerned about being named in game or in forums such as these.. they will simply go into iggy mode and let it wash over them.

Warnings and genuine consequences for repeat offenders is a great step forward.

As for someone deliberately hunting out games where Tech Victories have occurred, I'm not so sure..  Let those who feel they are victims come forward..  If they win a tech victory or come up against an understrength team and revel in the victory and are happy with the situation - let it stand. Else there will be a desire to have every single battle reviewed goodness help us.


 



hate_pubbehs #51 Posted 12 June 2015 - 06:47 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 58382 battles
  • 5,379
  • Member since:
    09-30-2012
Name shame = consequences i would hope

SOLOPUBE. 3 MoE: T54E1, Lowe, FV4202, M46KR, IS-2, AMX M4 45, FV201, Panther M10, ARL 44, Heavy Tank VI, VK 30.01 D, Excelsior, Renault G1R





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users