Personal oppression / spinning mode in WoT: truth or myth?
All avid tankers in one way or another have heard about twists and the mode of personal oppression in World of Tanks. Thoughts on this matter are completely different, some insist on the presence of this algorithm, and the second on its absence. Well, it’s time to share my observations and thoughts on this matter.
Evidence for a personal oppression regime
To be honest, randomness has always been one of the key ingredients for winning. If he works for someone, logically, at the same time randomness works against your opponents. It is extremely difficult to check exactly how the game algorithms work, because all the miscalculations of events take place on the servers. However, there is a general trend and it can be analyzed.
Here is a video of the popular YouTube player WoT (of course, this is in the past), which was released 5 years ago, but so far the meaning of all the problems is true. Eir is not a proof, but rather an explanation of the problem.
The main argument is Victor Kisly and Ivan Mikhnevich’s patent about maintaining interest in the game. There it is practically in plain text about the existence of this regime.
The official doc says:
“In another aspect, the matchmaking server can store the win / lose percentage for each user (or vehicle) at a given battle level. As the player’s win / lose ratio decreases, the likelihood of a player entering battles in which the combat levels are at the lower end of the acceptable range increases, while as the player’s win / loss ratio increases, the likelihood that he will hit the battle is increasing. battles in which the battle levels are at the upper limit of the acceptable range. Thus, when the player has repeatedly engaged in too many difficult battles, balancing is done in favor of lighter combat sessions, thereby rewarding the player by providing an easier playing environment. Likewise, when a player has repeatedly participated in too many easy battles, balancing is done in favor of more difficult combat sessions, thereby keeping the player on their toes instead of letting them get bored in easy games. “
Another quote from the developers, which, unfortunately, was deleted in the original source:
“There are server rules prescribed at the software level, including misses, ricochets, and penetrations. There is no accident. As soon as you go through a series of defeats, your tank starts shooting with 100% penetration and without ricochets, and on the contrary, if you often win, then you become easy prey for your enemies, and you yourself are incapable of causing any harm. “
The official position of WarGaming denies such tricks and the existence of a personal oppression regime. As the developers say, now their algorithm is such that to interrupt the streak of victories, they move the player from the bottom of the list to the TOP.
Does RPU exist?
People who talk about this are quickly overgrown with dislikes. This is due to the fact that in the CIS there are a lot of those who like to humiliate another. “Cancer”, “you just don’t know how to play”, “even the premium does not help you,” etc. As long as it does not concern the person personally. In truth, many players do not encounter such a system, since they have an average level of skills and by themselves drain, and also pick up levels without needing additional twists. Those who play “very tightly” with tanks are more likely to encounter twists.
Our opinion is that there are some twists. Why:
- Firstly, it is easy to notice when the system behaves in a strange way, despite the fact that the player does all the same actions that usually bring him victory.
- Secondly, WarGaming has all the necessary tools for this. All calculations, all “accidents” are very easy to tweak.
- Thirdly, documentary evidence of twists.
- Fourthly, the most important argument for us is profit. WarGaming needs revenue, and if experienced players take out all the newcomers with a couple of shots, they will lose the audience. The most important thing for a company is to maintain balance.
What do you think about the personal oppression regime?