Jump to content


Would WG Post Total Numbers of Tournament Participants?

Tank Madness

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

Schiavoser #1 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:01 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26974 battles
  • 279
  • Member since:
    09-21-2016

First of all, I had fun in Tank Madness in general and enjoyed the Final IV round. Also, I'm not disappointed that I did not win a Hammer Tiger I. The tank was not the reason I competed.

 

With that said, I am concerned with the formula used to determine a winner of the competition. If a distinct minority is crowned champion, it has the potential to alienate the majority. I gives me this feeling like my "vote" doesn't really count. I completed the Op 20+ times, and maybe it barely moved the needle in terms of average score. Instead of having an effect on destiny, the tourney seems more like a lottery. I might not participate in the same way next time around. Not sure if WG cares, but there it is.

 

Admittedly, I don't know for certain that a distinct minority of participants rolled with China. Would WG post the total numbers for the sake of discussing the future of tournaments like these?



vHD JOKERZ #2 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:07 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28598 battles
  • 680
  • [IMTLS]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013
They would have to show participants and completions for each nation. The only way they can get an avergae over such a large playerbase.

Spoiler

 


Danomite07 #3 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:10 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26657 battles
  • 309
  • Member since:
    04-21-2014

In to the breach

 

  

 


Coupdeteat #4 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:10 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24695 battles
  • 700
  • [HIRAM]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2014
Does it really matter? At all?

Schiavoser #5 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:11 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26974 battles
  • 279
  • Member since:
    09-21-2016

View PostvHD JOKERZ, on 03 April 2018 - 07:07 PM, said:

They would have to show participants and completions for each nation. The only way they can get an avergae over such a large playerbase.

 

Yes, that is what I meant. Total participants + total completions rather than the underwhelming list of averages.

vHD JOKERZ #6 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:14 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 28598 battles
  • 680
  • [IMTLS]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013
Would still probably find that the number lined up. The other problem that arise with this is "Did they take the number of paticipants with atleast one completion" or "The amount of people who only did the choose nation op". Reason for the second one being is that people may have selected a nation to play but never did a single completion for said nation.

View PostSchiavoser, on 03 April 2018 - 07:11 PM, said:

 

Yes, that is what I meant. Total participants + total completions rather than the underwhelming list of averages.

 


Spoiler

 


Schiavoser #7 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:14 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26974 battles
  • 279
  • Member since:
    09-21-2016

View PostCoupdeteat, on 03 April 2018 - 07:10 PM, said:

Does it really matter? At all?

 

Yes, it matters to me. I'm not bummed that Germany lost. Just not satisfied with the scoring system.

 

Are you sore because your team lost?



Coupdeteat #8 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:31 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24695 battles
  • 700
  • [HIRAM]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2014

Well, yeah of course. 

Spent a month participating in an op that really one has no personal control over.

other than the op that gave out intermittent rewards this is about the worst thing ever. 

Rewards should be based on personal performance, at least in my opinion.

it took way too long for an op with really a pretty random chance of winning. 

I wont be bothering to participate if it’s set up like this again.

oh, and the prizes were kinda weak for the large amount of people who already had 1 or more of the tanks already. 

 

 



TemplarKnight75 #9 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:44 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15297 battles
  • 1,549
  • [OJD]
  • Member since:
    12-05-2015

Except Your "votes" DID count all those 1 and done votes brought the team down. The fault is 100%  on the lazy players. 



Pit Friend #10 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:51 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 29175 battles
  • 14,554
  • [PTATO]
  • Member since:
    07-14-2014
They will never, ever do that. Because reasons. Those reasons being that actual numbers having to do with the game must always be kept secret at all times no matter how innocuous. 

I hope to one day be wealthy enough to be considered eccentric rather than just plain nuts.  


DefiantSpurr #11 Posted 03 April 2018 - 07:51 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12062 battles
  • 1,644
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    11-11-2014

View PostTemplarKnight75, on 03 April 2018 - 07:44 PM, said:

Except Your "votes" DID count all those 1 and done votes brought the team down. The fault is 100%  on the lazy players. 

 

​As bitter a pill it may be for some to swallow. This is the truth.

everything i say is my own opinion.

 

Hi, my name is Defiantspurr My voice is my passport. Verify Me.


 


Schiavoser #12 Posted 03 April 2018 - 08:08 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 26974 battles
  • 279
  • Member since:
    09-21-2016

I had fun and appreciate the per-completion rewards I got. The way results are weighed just makes me a little less excited for the next event that operates under this same system. I'll probably opt-out unless they tweak it.







Also tagged with Tank Madness

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users