Thursday, April 5, 2012

WoT rigged from the start?

An interesting read for those who are not satisfied with the bullshit WG feeds us for the last 2 years:

- link
[...]I started to get data about the misses and ineffective hits of me and my girlfriend while using the best cannon of the game, BL-10. It wasn't easy to get the data as the game has no combat log and the developers explicitly told that they never put in any. I had to make marks on a paper during battles, so probably made mistakes. This data is not at all accurate, but the result is so big that the signal-noise ratio is probably good enough: On battles that we won 13% of the hits were ineffective. On battles that we lost, 29% of the hits were ineffective.
Now my tinfoil hat explanation: the matchmaker decides who needs a win to not fall too far from the average and who needs a defeat to not elevate too far from it and assemble the teams accordingly. The "winner" team gets a bonus to its penetration chance, the "loser" team gets a penalty. While you can make a miracle and with awesome play you can win even these battles, or lose a "won" battle to griefers or 6+ AFK-ers, but the bonus/penalty on average works, making sure that everyone is just slightly away from average. After the victory is decided, the players do the rest. As I already found, on the winner side the kills are much more distributed, half of the winner team scores at least one kill. So while in every battle the good ones "pwn", the "good ones" change from battle to battle.[...]



  2. Yup, rigged. I noticed this right away. Some games I would be knocked out with very few hits, and would shoot a lot of misses or ricochets. Other times I would take many hits with little to no damage and we would win by 5 to 12 tanks. It would seem like we just walked right through the opponents.

    At first I thought I was just biased and mad about losing. But over time I noticed how my team would get creamed in a battle and then turn around and annihilate the next team. Honestly I notice it more when we win, many times it seems way to easy.

  3. Certainly 100% rigged. If the games were totally random you would have win, loss, loss, loss, win, loss, win or similar results and not loss, loss, loss, loss, loss, loss, win, win, win, loss and so on. But the biggest things which identifies this as rigged is the majority of games that end in 15-1, 15-2, 15-3 losses because if the players were all randomised with the pool they have to draw from the games would be a lot tighter and a hell of a lot more fun. 1 in 20 games is now close or a draw and the rest are mainly massive losses, there is hardly an inbetween, this is not chance that ti happens this often, the game is rigged just like slot machines in a casino

  4. As per Dogtags comment

    It was noted last year in the WoT forums that you'd expect a win loss win loss etc if you were on a 505 win rate, but that the streaks were something more than just streaks.... This was all rubbished last year even when someone analysed the stats and picked out the flip/flop in the matchmaking machine that either sent you up or down.

    Now we've got the info from the patent, and I've just been flamed on the forum for suggesting WoT is rigged/adjusted or whatever you would like to call it.

    Why do these guys just take it as a personal insult to suggest a game we all very much would like to enjoy has a less savoury aspect?

    Thanks Z - great blog

    1. because people can't comprehend or accept the fact that they're not in control
      that a machine decides for them, it decides if they win or lose if they penetrate or no and how much dmg that shot will do to the opponent's tank

      might be also because people are just morons .. who knows