Greedy Goblin and WOT “cheats”

Hello everyone,

today, I’ll just post a few links for you. Some of you might already know about them, some of you don’t – the whole thing has been around for about a month, so a lot of players had a chance to have a look at it.

Long story short: a guy (from Hungary it seems), who calls himself Greedy Goblin (apparently he plays on EU server as “Gevlon”), posted 5 articles on his blog, in which he explains at length that he discovered a “cheat” (how to make more money/XP in World of Tanks). He combines it with a conspiracy theory, basically claiming that the game is rigging random battle results in favour of low W/R players, while damaging the high W/R players to keep them close to average.

You can check his articles here:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

On Russian forums, he became quite famous, to the point of people asking SerB, whether the “winrate conspiracy” is true (of course they got trolled as a result).

And my take on it?

While the argumenting is interesting at some points, I am no friend of statistical “proofs”, I leave statistics for real life. In part 5, the great exploit is explained to be…. waaaaaait for it….. playing like a retard (rushing), so the game will carry you via its secret “you shall not drop below certain winrate” mechanism (for example by putting you on better initial spots before the battle), at which point you start gaining more money by playing good, because you’ll have the upper hand (or was it simply continuing playing like that, making games more profitable? Something like that)

Personally, I don’t believe in this. Winrate conspiracy theories are old as the WoT open beta itself (maybe even older, I didn’t play closed beta to confirm that) and even if the results were not rigged by the blogger (and I am not suggesting they are), they ALL have one major flaw: they are based on statistics by one player. That’s obviously not enough. Even if it was a thousand players, it would not be enough. Ten thousand? That would probably suffice, but I think people fail to realize, how HUGE World of Tanks playerbase is. Within that playerbase, statistically anything can happen: one of a million players could probably have a 50 loss streak, even if he wasn’t a totally bad player. And this player will then come out and say “Okay, my results must be rigged, there is NO way I am having THIS many losses.”

Anyway, even so, the articles (and the whole blog in fact!) are interesting to read. Maybe you will come to a different conclusion than I did, who knows.

92 thoughts on “Greedy Goblin and WOT “cheats”

  1. Not believing that neither…He shown the statistics of a part of battles he played, not all.
    Also, that were the stats of a single account out of 500.000(or more) active eu players.
    He could’ve just take a good friend, both start new accounts, one play with that dumb theory, other playing normal, like a good player.Both having the same supplies(no premium vehicles, no other stuff), they could just start the same branch togheter.Reach the tier 10 than compare the results…who reached t10 faster, who got the most credits.
    Even that couldn’t make me believe…There are just too many variables inside the game:MM, Players inside the tanks from your team/enemy team, RNG, Luck, cource of the battles, time you play(day/night) and so on…everything affects the gameplay of a player, no matter how good he is or how bad he is.

    • I don’t think you understand if those variables are independent and identically randomly distributed than after enough battles you will see they shouldn’t matter from player to player.

      • I said those variables are influencing the game in a manner that you can’t have a proper statistical collection to make a statement like Goblin’s one.
        You just can’t…

    • The thing about this “cheat” is: If you google “World of Tanks cheat” Greedy Goblin’s postswill come up near the top, so for calling his little “play like a retard to get lots of credits by fucking your team”-scheme a cheat he gets lots of hits.

      Essentially calling it a cheat over and over again is cheating google’s algorythms…

  2. I have to say Silent Stalker, nice find on a different blog. Win Rate is a tool for the super great players on NA to weed out the people they can kick in the face while doing a round house kick to the moon, weirdest analogy ever.

    Though I have to agree with your assessment SS about your take on it since I believe it the same though I love my Sniper Medals, 1,024. Also I have to agree with Alex as well. =P

  3. It’s an old thing. Basically the dude is lying about how he supposedly rushes.

    His alt accounts name is GevZerg, just for fun check his stats. While he has horrible kills/damage per battle he has 2.5 cap per battle and large amount of spots.

    Basically he aggressively scouts at start and eventually drives into cap. Remember that you cannot get cap points unless you survive in the cap circle at the end of the game. At T4 average it is not that hard to just ninja yourself to cap and win by that.

    • This guy also writes about random factors, the players you get in with are the random factors of any game. But the thing about winning… I think he forgot about the fact that you get with random players.

  4. I do think some sort of manipulation goes on, for the past 7 months i have had only 6 tier 8 tanks in my garage, my W/R 7 months ago after 4k games was 49%, I obvioulsy got better with those 6 tanks and my W/R now is 53%, the problem is I have been on 53% now for 2 months, I use WOT Stats to track each battle, I cannot get my W/R any higher, yet I’m still using the same 6 tanks, I check my W/R all the time, it fluctuates between 53.10 and 53.30, I know a lot of random factors count, but how come i can go from 48% to 53% in 5 months but cannot get any higher (or lower)? i play solo, never platoon. I’m not a consiracy person, just can’t figure it out, I bet if someone did a Six Sigma project on this they would be able to give some answers. The fact that they do not publish the full MM rules is dissapointing, but i could be totally wrong and this is what random really is

    • Well, SerB is pushing his buttons only for you. And you know, that the more games you have played the more wins it takes to raise your winrate?
      A long time ago SS had a funny pic of SerBs ‘developer tool’ with buttons like ‘catch fire every game’, ‘getting ammoracked every second game’, ‘fix winrate at x%’ etc.
      I liked it a lot. Sadly I forgot to save it and now I don’t know how to find it. Maybe Silentstaker can dig it out for us again?

    • You have the same win ratio because you stoped improving with those 6 tanks you play…it’s so hard to figure that out?
      Pick another tank to play if you feel you can’t get any better in those tanks and remove your tin-foil hat.

      • Is it possible your winrate is changing slowly because of how many battles you’ve played?

        Take two players with a 50% winrate, one with 100 battles, one with 1000. If each player somehow manages to win 100 battles in a row, the first has a 75% winrate (150 wins out of 200), while the second only has a winrate of 54.5% (600 wins out of 1100).

    • if you would stop trying to find an excuse to why you’re not winning enough and focus on your gameplay, you’d be getting better and thus rising that winrate steadily

  5. This guy (greedy goblin) is true piece of shit, he was making the same kind of articles about different games before ( EVE Online)
    How to get secretly rich , exploits etc. He is trying to look smart but in fact he is just a retard with too much time on his hands…. Just my 2cents

  6. The great RNG conspiracy /yawn
    This shit was old before WoT left closed beta.

  7. Conspiracy theories like that were about in the CB as well SS. Didn’t believe them then, don’t believe them now.

  8. Last night from 13 shots (250 av.pen, tier X gun on T28 prot) 13 hits – 3 penetrations. My targets were KT, VK45A, and Centurion.
    Tell me the game is NOT rigging for noobs!!! Please

    • Tell me, you understand the gamemechanics and that shots not always fly where you aim. Like hitting autobounce areas, only hitting tracks…
      Don’t rage at these hits. Get over them and instead cherish these oneshot ammoracks or torched them and no fire extinguisher moments. You’ll love WoT more than before.

    • If you have no clue about weakspots and you think the 120mm gun on Proto is an auto-penetration gun like Obj.268′s gun it’s not WG conspiracy…
      As Bobby said above, you have to take in account RNG too when you shoot.
      I missed sometimes point-blank shots, but I didn’t complained.And I’ve also hit targets which usually should be impossible to hit(eg:Ferdi 500 m away, only a 1 inch corner of the superstructure shown behind a rock…somehow I penetrated that small area with my KV-1s).
      Stop complaining, live with it.For every shit it happens to you there will happen something amazing sooner or later.

  9. There is no reason not to rig the game to keep players playing.
    It’s simple as that.
    WG would be crazy not to use all possible means to maximize player retention.


      …and the national postal service has no reason to not read all my mail, but doesn’t.

  10. Anyone who has played WoT for any length of time knows that some battles you are just not meant to win. This is the random MM telling you that you’ve won too many games and now you need to lose a few. This is why on your team you will have everyone below 49% w/r while on the enemy team nearly everyone is 50%+; this is a rigged battle.

    The game is designed to keep the maximum number of players playing and having fun. Losing game after game because you are crap doesn’t make it fun and so a poor player is likely to go elsewhere. Good players (50%+) will keep playing because they obviously enjoy the game and are good at it; even if they keep getting shafted by the MM time after time.

    Why do you think 99% of players in WoT have win rates between 40-60%? Its because the game is constantly trying to pull everyone towards the 50% mark.

    • ‘Why do you think 99% of players in WoT have win rates between 40-60%? Its because the game is constantly trying to pull everyone towards the 50% mark.’

      Ever heard about normal distribution? :)

    • Ever heard of the fact, that after a battle (which is not a draw), 50% of the participating players have won and that no more than 50% of the players have lost?

      And it’s funny reading in the forum, that obviously ‘good’ players (they call themselves good), with a WR of less than 50% have loosing streaks of 30 or even 40+ games. While I stop playing the game after 7 losses, if not way earlier and my WR is around 56%. So my conspiracy theory is, that loosing too much affects your gameplay the way, that you loose again. Like a vicious circle.
      So WG is only ruining the lives of these pseudo-good players and not mine? Sounds plausible to me.

      Oh and by the way: When you have a loosing streak of 40 games in a row, while still having a WR of 50% – What does that mean? You had a winning streak of 40 games to even it out, but no one is complaining about them…

    • “Why do you think 99% of players in WoT have win rates between 40-60%?”
      It is because you are playing with 14 other people. No matter how good/bad you are, there is a limit to how much you can consistently influence the battle. Being able to influence 14 random monkeys to the extend you can get them to reliably win even a few percentage points above 50-50 is freaking amazing.
      So yeah, people are pulling you towards 5%. It just is not WG doing it, it is your teammates.

  11. Once I had a really nice ‘set-enemy-KV-3-on-fire’ spree. Was grinding my AMX M4 (VII) then IIRC.
    In 6 games in a row I torched 7 KV-3s each with my first shot.
    Had 58% winrate at this time. So I shouldn’t have been that lucky?! Should I?

    It’s just game. Sometime you have luck, sometimes not! Thats it!

    • I once ammo racked four tanks in a row in the good old op Tier5 KV-2. ;)

      Yeah with so many games played each day, even the most unpropable events are propable and will happen eventually.

      And by the way I never even managed two ammo racks in a row since then.

    • i had this crazy VK 3601 H game where i set three tier 8 tanks on fire – one of them twice.

      turns out 4.8k damage amounts to 3k experience ^.^

  12. That is the whole problem about this story. People who believe is the obviously never had any statistic basics on math. Statistics from one player when there are over 500.000 is just not enough.

  13. The weird thing about this is, that if you said the US is paying on everyone you where a whacky conspiracy theorist. Then prism came out ..
    You can’t be sure about anything. I for example find it very suspicious that even insanely low WR potatoes reach T10 in like really little games. I remember, I needed about 10k games no prem to get my first T10 tank back then (granted I played 4 trees simultaneously, but still ..)

    • You just said it in the end.It took you 10k battles but you grinded 4 branches at the same time.
      If you’re good, and you play without premium, you’ll reach a tier 10 in max 2000 battles.(judging you’re doing it right, no stock grinds, having enough credits)

      Those tomatoes, due to having a lower wr, but not much lower than yours(I think you have between 50-60% like other good players), need around 3-4k battles to reach a tier 10, 2-3k if they’re wallet warriors and 5-6k if they’re bots.
      They’re just rushing trought tiers, like blind horses.

  14. “Even if it was a thousand players, it would not be enough. Ten thousand? That would probably suffice”

    You’re completely wrong. A representative sample of 1000 players would give valid results and would be enough to prove whether the game is rigged or not.

    • You are wrong, if you want to get serious results than 1000 is not enough. Take a class in statistics.

      Just take a look on the election estimates, they are often wrong by 5-10% in their numbers.

    • Duh…and how you know that those 1000 dudes asked are representative for other 500.000 players?
      As I said in my first post.Everybody is different, with different ways of thinking.
      You can’t just nail a collective question by just “selecting” few persons from a sea of them to ask for it.

      Let’s take an absurd example:
      You want to make a world survey about which players will leave WoT when ground units arrive in WT.
      You take 10000 players from all WoT servers but somehow theyall answer they’ll leave WoT.
      Now, you’ll come up saying that all players will leave WoT just because 10.000 said yes out of 3-4 millions?

      • Typo*:
        “You can’t just nail a collective question by “selecting” few persons from a sea of them to *answer* for it.

  15. So, he concludes that “results are clearly manipulated” when winrate gets closer to 50% with more games you play? That’s like complaining that the more times you toss a coin, the closer to 50% amount of times you get heads gets.

  16. the problem about his statistical arguments is that they are mostly completely wrong! this guy has a very basic understanding of statistic – if at all – so his methods are not to be taken serious. i do know something about statistic (had my part in the WN7 formula) and it pains me to see someone using such weird and wrong methods to seed confusion. on the other hand he presents trivial statistical results from what one would expect from random battles and frames them into a conspiracy theory…. arghh

  17. I just love when ppl with like 45% wr think they are uber pro awesome skills, but blaming everything around for them not playing good, searching excuses and conspiracy theories, first arties op, now tds op, matchmaking hating them. What will be next ? Ninja added different versions of new patch installer ? Its bs all the time, ppl who believe it should get back to playing sims.

  18. I’m not convinced at all. Some of his claims seem pretty forced to me, and honestly, I haven’t experienced any of his statements after ~5000 battles. Sure, there are winning streaks and losing streaks, but their probability is totally believable. My WR has been constantly raising since I started playing this game. Sometimes I get into battles with retards, sometimes with pros, but come on, there are thousands of players playing this game, it cannot be that surprising…

  19. This is big BS and nothing more.

    Greedy Goblin has no idea about statistics. His “followers” also do not understand statistics and very often they also have no idea about game mechanics and MM.

    When average win ratio is around 49 then it is normal that most players are between 45-55 win ratio. It is natural, normal and logical. And in this game average win ratio will be always around 49, because there is always the same number of people who lose and win in one battle and from time to time we have draw.

    It is also normal that the higher win ratio you have, the slower you improve it. Just to keep 60 prc. win ratio you have to win 6 battles in 10, which is not easy in randoms. If you want to increse your win ratio above 60 , you have to start to win 7 battles in 10 which is extremely hard and rather impossible in randoms without platoon. Even with platoon it is hard to do with exception for low tiers.

    Also the more battles you have on your account, the more battles you need to influance global win ratio.

    I have currently 56,3 win ratio and it is all the time slowly growing. I didn’t notice that “the game is constantly trying to pull me towards the 50% mark”. In 18 battles (today and yesterday) I won 14. All were played in randoms, without platoon, in tiers V and VI. Thanks to noobmeter I know that in last 2500 battles I have 60 prc win ratio, so nothing is dragging me down to 50 win ratio.

    Of course Greedy Goblin fans can try to convince me that I am such exceptional unicum that even WG’s rigging can’t stopp me, but I think it is not the reason ;).

  20. but this story is over a year old and Greedy Goblins articles were quite popular on WoT forum like a year ago *when Snib was still updating his statistcs thread).
    I see this is an expansion so few quick comments in chronological order

    1. analyzing trends compared 80 battles intervals? with 80 battles the statistical uncertaintity is circa 11%.
    In greedy goblins example:
    First 29 battles: 24%
    Next 71 battles: 65%
    Next 86 battles:57%
    198 most recent battles: 66%

    it should be written
    First 29 battles: 5.5% – 42,5%
    Next 71 battles: 53,2% – 76.8%
    Next 86 battles: 46.2% – 67.8%
    198 most recent battles: 58.9% – 73.1%

    as you all can see those results are useless, since all they show is that after first 30 battles his win ratio is somewhere in between 58% – 68%
    It’s even worse, those ranges contain only 19 out of 20 possible random distribution. It means that if he is playing 40 different tanks at leas 2 of them will show randomly generated even greater variation.

    my comment:

    Part 2
    Correlation doesn’t mean causation.
    Greedy Goblin wants to believe that the match is rigged for him to win or lose and according to that hits are lucky or unlucky.
    Considering on average he shots between 10 and 15 shots in game, those shots being lucky or not should change the outcome of the game.
    It’s even more so. Hit points of tanks on specific tier and alpha damage of the guns are quite often set in such way, that lucky/unlucky hits mean difference between killing opponents tank for example in 4 shots or 5 shots (20% difference)

    the last paragraph of part 2 is just hilarious. It’s a circumstantial story of t-50-2 which got potential damage 3.4 times it’s HP.
    I’ve seen a battle where t-50-2 bounced a shot, was hit in a tracks twice (490+750+750 potential damage) then was hit by AMX 50B (400 potential damage) and finally finished by lucky direct shot from t92 (2250 potential damage) – overall 4640 potential damage.
    This statistic is calculated quite specific and extreme results are bound to happen.

    Part 3
    That is the only part so far that I am happy to read.
    initial placement really often is a key to the match result.
    As this part is focused only on showing a mechanism between initial placement and result, even if it’s not sufficiently proven, I like that part very much.

    Part 4
    Complete bollocks.
    Greedy goblin makes some too simplifying assumptions (kills are not proportionate to income) and assumes that t8 is supposed to give money (without premium it is supposed to sink money of average player already).
    He neglects differences between tanks even of the same tier.

    This whole part is completely useless.

    Part 5
    There are some flaws in his reasoning.
    Rushing is a great tool to gain credits on premium tanks and low tier tanks. Because quite big part of your income does not depend solely on your actions, so reducing your income per battle by 30% (after reducing your personal achievements by 50-60%) is ok when your costs are 20% of your battle income, but it’s counter productive if your costs are close to 60% of your battle income.

    Credit/Xp as limiting factor depends on several elements – premium has much greater effect on credits then on XP, the higher the tier, the more difficult earning credits become, XP and credits change differently with different playstyle.

    The mechanism for balancing win ratio around 50% has (imo) nothing to do with cheat or conspiracy. It’s only all the random elements in this game. You are a top tier tank only in approx 35% battles you play. Even in those battles you are almost never more then 20% of your team strength. Your performance has to have limited influence on the battle result. That’s all.

    However, Greedy Goblin is right with effectivness of mindless rushing. Most people don’t realise the difference between gain/battle and gain/hour. Also most people have a fetish of statpadding, they care about their win ratio, damage per battle and other stuff, which definitely suffer from mindless rushing.

    But as long as you farm credits with up to tier 5 tank or premium tank, the fastest way to earn money are 3 battles with 30k net income instead of 1 battle with 70k net income (tier 8 premiums) if played in the same tanks.

    To be honest that is usually my playstyle. Always on the move, always pushing forward, not caring to be the last man standing, only to maximize fun – and fun is in driving, shooting, fighting – not waiting. Fun is in trying new stuff, even if it fails (constantly), instead of doing always the same thing over and over.
    It also gives more credits per hour then careful playstyle (except high tier non premium tanks of course)
    It also has 1 other advantage – people tend to underestimate the “moron” with 53% WR, 1400 WN6, 27% survival and below average damage per battle. Good for me :D

    • Here’s our captain Wall O’Text for ya. How long did it take to type all this? :o

      Since I believed this “MM conspiracy” to be true when I started to play wot, but some better players enlightened me, I’d like to share my thoughts.

      1) Streaks.
      We all know this. One day you’re winning like a boss and another you get roflstomped. Seems pretty unnatural, eh? Actually this IS natural.
      One day I started to play *coughcough* Pokemon Black 2 (female protagonist and some female npcs are great fapping material btw) and after some time I noticed something – gender rates for most pokemanz is 50/50, but in boxes that weren’t used by me (I didn’t withdraw/deposit or change order of pokemanz in any way) there were long streaks of one gender, like (M – male, F- female) MMMMMMFMMMMFFFFFFF. Hell, some boxes were full of one gender only, while the next one could be full of the opposite! Don’t tell me mah pokemanz were rigged too…

      2) Balancing misconception – misunderstanding that lead to raging.
      During my noob days, when I believed the “49% wr balancing theory” some player(s) made simulations that proved that the average of 49% wr is natural. Anyway – there’s this thing – every single conspiracy theorist says that it’s wg scheme. It gets repeated in each and every of these threads. I even said that wg admitted that it balances player win ratios.
      Then one of these guys who made the simulation asked me for proof…

      After some intense digging the only thing I found was – sure wg does balance win ratio to more or less 49%…. But it’s a TANK global win ratio. If some >tank< has more/less than 49% wr nerf/buff ensues.
      Yup, that's it. The whole 49% wr balance thingy is one hell of a misunderstanding. Or is it? Maybe it's a case of "a lie repeated a thousand times becomes the truth"? Maybe some day instead telling grandchildrean about knights and dragons, people will tell "ze fairytale of ze big bad wg that rigged zeir game"?

      3) Know your enemy!
      0 dmg shots, getting killed by invisible enemy, getting one shot killed? Sorry – this is not some hax or rigged mechanics, this is how it works. Learn armor layouts, especially places with spaced armor and no damage zones, listen to advice of better players and there will be no more mysteries.

      Just my 2$.

      Oh, dear – I produced quite a wall myself… -_-'

  21. I used to read Gevlin’s blog when he wrote about WoW mostly. Some stuff was interesting but the fact is he sometimes writes categorical statements about thinks he has no experience with. For example nobody was able to explain him why top guilds in WoW use Teamspeak and called it “boosting”.
    The WoT articles are complete nonsense. I was expecting him to provide at least some statictical data but he posted none. He even claimed the game is messing with penetration values because he was unable with AT15 penetrate the SP and posted a picture were it was clear he was shooting the SP lower plate. After me and two other people pointed it out he removed it from the article.
    In the part about WoT economy he even claimed the game is rigged because he can’t make a profit with AT15 while he was able to do it with AT8. Clearly he is obssesed with his idea.

  22. Greedy Goblin became rather “famous” for playing the auction house in world of warcraft. I first heard of him when he started playing eve-online. Basically he had a plan to earn a lot of money on the market and then enter one of the major alliances through wealth. The first part of it worked out fine but the last part of it didn’t go so well. Long story short he became the laughing stock of most eve players who heard of him, largely due to how much of a tool he is.

    His claims of a WoT conspiracy is just as silly. I’ve been playing with XVM for a while and I’m swimming between 60 and 61% wins so I’m in the target zone of being fucked over. I actually did a little statistical research on team composition around Christmas, and I got just as many good teams as bad teams.

    Further more, games are actually mainly decided by 1-3 good players on each team, and being one of those players is the key to a good win rate. ;)

    Of course this guy based his original assumptions on tier 2-3, and we all know what happens in low tiers.

    • In WoW, he did buy his way into a raiding guild, paying them 5000g a week for his raid spot. After a few months, when they didn’t need his money any more, they kicked him out and gave his spot to someone else. He correlates money with skill, always has.

  23. I’m not sure how his cheat system works logically.

    As I under stand it he’s claiming that you get an advantage by playing really really bad. But how does this work exactly? If you play really horrible and the MM tries to carry you by putting you on a team of good players against a team of bad players…. then wouldn’t this also give an advantage to the 14 good players carrying you?

    Sounds like he went full retard.

    • His described “advantage” is that he spends less time in game, participates in more games – gets exp and credits. If he is really doing it, then he is no better then a bot.

  24. So I looked up his EU profile and with an average XP of 469 it doesn’t look like his XP cheat is working.

    • Hehe, and he also likes to dump comments that are agianst his beliefs.

      ‘Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.’

  25. i believe it..
    couple of times i did write in game soemthing like
    ‘the game forces you to lose sometimes”

  26. Saw an example of this in my own play in the past 2 weeks, I couldn’t get a decent team unless i platooned and even then it was iffy. All my numbers were exactly the same as they were for the previous few months, 2k damage 1k xp, spotting/capping/resets/kills all in line but I was losing. Starting this weekend it was all wins, all my numbers are the same and yet the teams i’m on were mostly 67%+ winrate chances on xvm before that in the week it was the other side with 33% chance. Both days this weekend finished over 80% winrate, it’s not streaks it’s the patented mm features that make the game more “fun” so that players don’t get too bored of it.

    • Hey look, it’s been raining for 2 weeks, and now it is sunny again! What a CONSPIRACY !!! How Terrible!


      • You’re a 12 year old idiot, how terrible. I would wager money on the fact you are at the server avg of 49% and have no idea how to play.

        • lol 56%

          any real arguments besides calling others idiots? oh c’mon you can do better than this (waiting for another invective :-) )

          • Yeah, yeah, everything is rigged… You have good winrate – wg wants to make it worse – SerB uses dark ritual – voila – low win chance, zero dmg penetretions, etc. etc….

            I wish the people who carried you and gave you that winrate will bitchslap the shit out of you.

            Whine on, cutie…

  27. Sorry about all of the retards from my country… I am very shamed about it….

  28. Seriously? This guy obviously has no clue…

    I wanted to stop rating when he mentioned league of legends and skill. A game that is just meant to be the garbage yard for people who are too incompetent to play dota. Then it gets even worse and he claims ratings based of random, uncontrolled and usually uneven idiot distribution skill?

    I tell you how easy it is to cheat in a few steps:
    -be stupid, if necesarry use chemicals to get there
    -lose every kind of 1on1 situations
    -play something that makes personal skill irrelevant such as matchmaking pubs

    Well, people are pretty pathetic… Blaming RNGs for messing games up or overrandomizing it… Accuracy, criticals and whatever there is in games, but the by far worst random factor aka matchmaking is considered OK. Just read the Alfred Hoche book to understand that kind of person…

    • wanted to stop reading** <—- typo

      Some people in this game should learn some basics such as driving straight forward for a few seconds instead of discussing their meaningless stats.

    • LOL the second part is a very bad excuse for being unable to accomplish things without external assistence… Just random numbers and probably not even aware of “weakspots”, “spaced armor”, “autobounce” and some more :)

  29. Well after actually reading a little bit of his theories and after 3 or 4 tries to stop laughing, it struck me:

    Every high advanced technology seems like magic.

    Which means in WoT:

    Every high advanced game-mechanic seems like magic.

    Well, the fact, that he’s inventing a conspiracy theory/blaming WG, because he’s losing money without prem in a Tier8 non-prem-tank, while not considering the fact, that he only got 23 penetrating hits out of 42 shots total, [this fact] reminded me of the Aztec-warriors fighting the conquistadors with their pointy-sticks, which make a loud noise right before a Jaguar warrior at your side dies…

    And thanks SS for digging this theory up and for sweetening my afternoon with a lot of laughter.

  30. FTR just hit an all time low.

    I can’t believe you are giving this idiot attention, that’s all he is an attention seeker. And now he will use those clicks you generated for him as “proof” that he is right, just like he has done in the past.

    • If he actually does that – it’ll just proove how retarded he is. The whole comment part from SS is kinda like “yeah,sure,still sounds stupid to me” =)

      • Look though his older stuff (actually don’t, it will only boost his ego), he has directly quoted the visitor stats of his pages as proof that he is right.

        I’m not going to go find it and quote it because that will just generate even more traffic.

        He has been linked on the WoT forum many times before, I can’t believe that SS only just heard about him.

  31. Part 1: He makes clear that he has no knowledge of statistics.

    Part 2: He confirms that he has no knowledge of statistics.

    Part 3: He has a point there. While I don’t believe in his “Lemming train” theory, a better spawn distribution is obviously an advantage. Since tanks aren’t equally fast and have different roles on the battlefield, the multiple spawn system should be reconsidered.

    Part 4: His theory about “free-play line” and “scrub line” is wrong. He does not consider the 1.85 multiplier to base-credits for winning. He does not consider credit farming to be part of the game. He does not understand that every missing/bouncing shot costs you money.

    Part 5: He confirms that he does not know about the base-credit amount for joining a battle. He does not understand that initial spotting/suicide spotting is not useless.

    • The lemming theory is somewhat correct – there are people that won’t cross the whole spawn-base to the other side so they would get a clear andvantage, mostly it’s the same people that autoaim in an is-3 against a maus =)
      Same with the reconsideration – most tanks have large differences in the long run, but it doesn’t really matter at the start – the worst that can happen is you getting 0 enemies on your side while the other side is getting torn to shreds in your T95 that will never make it there.

      The theory about playing skill is somewhat correct too – there are players that play 9+ tiers with prem-accs and still ask in battle about “does the is-8 farm with prem?” or stuff like that, exactly the same as there being a few players that farm in tier-10 vehicles (for example i can farm pretty easy in the E-100, but i don’t get that lucky in the 183 or E-50m), albeit you are right about him having piss-poor knowledge of the mechanics.

      Suicide-scouting has become more or less useless in the higher tier battles – either the slow big targets are already in cover or the faster guys have left by the time shooting starts. Malinovka is sort of an exception in this case.

      • A similar thing to the spawn distribution which isn’t huge isn’t mentioned, but somewhat similar… If you consider random stats balancing the two main strength factors of the tank are difficulty level (less is better) and map-independency. In a CW you can chose adequate tanks for a map while the Maus isn’t good on all of them…

        How suitable tanks are for the “present” map can do a lot… No heavy armor on ruinberg, nothing for hills on mines/karelia… All of that shit can do a lot and is entirely random, not evenly random. This concerns getting good maps for the own specialist tank and how good the team tanks are for the “present” map… Not to forget the top tier or +2 mm distribution.

    • Suicide-scouting is not about spotting damage. It’s about knowing where the enemy is going. This gives your team an advantage.

  32. He is right about one thing, regardless of all his conspiracy theory crap, kamikaze runs over and over earn more credits and xp quicker than any other method of playing, especially in premium tanks. When I need cash fast, I just start suicide running in my 9 premiums, and I rake in the dough. It is terrible for your stats though :)

    • Doing a lot of damage fast earns you the shitload of credits compared to anything else… If you die, but did a lot of damage it is clearly a lot of contribution and usually more than most people camping 15 minutes… If you get really lucky in your heavy armor premiums and get a lot of +0 matches on himmelsdorf you can do your damage very fast and out-earn any suicide rusher heavily in terms of credits per time.

  33. Fuck Gevlon. He is a WoW hero who thinks of himself as money making god of MMOs and now he plays WoT?? fuck it i’m out

  34. He starts of nicely – but then… Well: (fame-)greedy goblin I guess.
    Whenever he uses number in details, he gets it all wrong.

    “Rushing and dealing damage earns more XP/cred per time”: OH REALLY? I would have never expected this from a game that pays damage and spotted damage, but gives nothing for sitting in a bush and waiting. [/sarcasm] No matter how strategical important it is to cover the area in front of that bush – the fact remains that a careful player spends half his time watching the screen and WG doenst pay you for using your brain to think up strategies.

    “Different tanks earn different amount of money”: Well, acutally he claims different income ratios depending on playstyle, but then he tests it with vehicles of different classes. No comment necessary.

    “WG manipulates starting positions”: I just one a Himmelsdorf encounter with my arty at top of the hill. Actually quite good position for an arty to start this map. And in general: In his first or second article he mentions that WG won’t rig MM to put weak players into one team. And hes completely right there: Punishing the whole team would mean to mess the stats of 29 players to “correct” these of a single player. That can’t work out, no matter wether you rig the team by MM or by placing. Thats true random and as the WoT community contains aproximately 90% retards, its very easy to have a bad start with your team.
    But it’s just as likely to happen to the enemy and if you consider this, you can still win. (e.g. lemming trains: Follow them. A person who understands the game would know that you can’t hold one flank alone anyway. And in an assaulting team you don’t have to defend anyway. So go with the lemmings – they can suicide spot and catch bullets like anyone else, allowing the good player behind them to kill more and probaly enough enemys.

    However: He started of good. And was RIGHT about a few things:

    “Wargaming has a reason to rig games”: Oh yes. Not to direct people into the “should buy premium”-zone. That’s a question of balancing and WG balances tiers 5 to 8 in a way that will keep the maximum amount of players in that zone all by itself. But they need to rig the stats to get as much people into the game in the first place. Because no one enjoys a game he looses all the time. On the other hand, people winning more then average can’t be more then “a player”. To maximize the amount of players, all should be rather equally successful.
    The extreme oppiste are games, where experienced and/or good players own Newbies all the time. Think e.g. of CounterStrike, which is fully unrigged and skillbased. And has hardly attrackted any new players for a long time because the just die like jellyfish in a desert. For months. No one could earn money with free to play CounterStrike.

    The rigging reacts to a players history. I don’t know, wether it is winrate itself, but as any factor of successful gameplay is reflected in the winrate, there should be some form of correlation. AND IT IS. The effect might even be subdivided into tank classes, tiers and/or individual vehicles. So being bad in a tier5 scout won’t give you a big boost in a tier10 heavy. But IT WILL GIVE YOU A BOOST in that tier5 scout (and probably other scouts and/or tier5 vehicles, though to a lesser degree)
    I’ve checked myself and taken some rather weak low tier tank (pls don’t do this above tier4. You will ruin the battles of people who are more then just checking out the game) and botted the hell out if. The results after probably over a thousand AFK battles?
    1. there is no effective system against botters :-) (at least not against people who mix in battles they actually play)
    2. players with 3X% winrate must be worse then abyssmal. Because a non-player can stay above 40%
    3. botting has NO (or very little) negative effect on total winrate. Despite having spend a guestimate of 20% of my battles AFK in over a period of months and loosing a lot of them, my total winrate stayed the same. I just got more “lucky” with my other tanks
    4. if I know use this miserable tank and actually play it, I’m very, very likely to win.

    Which leds to the question “how is it one?”. And again, the Goblin got a part
    “lucky shots depend on lack of success, unlucky tanks can take a whole lot of potential damage”. Thats exactly what I found during my botting sessions. I had (randomly) chosen a tank with rather lacking penetration for its tier. And not exactly perfect precission. And it just felt like this type of tank before botting: Better at catching bullets then hurting anyone. After botting the winrate into the low fourties this tank is now a pure beast. I can reliably penetrate areas that are in the upper range of its shell capabilities, shells hit almost always the inner third of the aiming circle (post 0.8.6 : the inner quarter) and it deals above “average” damage on average. It also seems rather good at spotting (can’t judge “being spotted”, as I took camo as skill. But it works surprisingly well ;-) ) and it bounces better then ever.

    And, btw, I also noticed the opposite on my “good” tanks. Thats one of the reasons I started my little experiment: The tanks I was overall most successful in were also the tanks most likely to percieve lol bouncers, 0dmg hits, low dmg series (in 7.x times I even had some below-min-AP-hits), inexplainable spots, etc.)

    My personal conclusion (yes, this is another “single player” verdict – anyone who can provide data from 10.000 players may step forward, because right now we only have a handful of people who actually ran tests. Note that “I don’t win as often as I would like to” ain’t a test ;-) ):

    - Gameplay is rigged
    - Gameplay is rigged to prevent good players from dominating the hell out of bad players (which, btw, ain’t necesarrily bad. But I would like to be open about this and tell me my “handicap”)
    - Rigging is based on past success (measured by winrate or other means), most likely in several categories
    - Rigging influences a huge number of non measurable stats a bit, so it does nudge a players success, but is not easily detected or even proveable. (Imho this also explains overall Winrate-distribution: There seems to be a pretty clear decline in numbers of players with 50%, 51%, 52%, 53% and 54% winrate. But 59% aren’t that much less common then 61% or even better. This would be expected of a rigging system with limited capabilities, which gives an increasing handicap from 49% onwards, but reaches the maximum allowed handicap in the mid-fifties. So to get from 53% to 54%, one would need to play 1% better AND overcome additional handicap, but to get from 60% to 61%, one would “only” need to play 1% better, the handicap stays the same)

    Now some of the very few people who read all this will say “WAY TOO COMPLICATED, they would never do this”.
    But it ain’t complicated. One easy implementation:
    - take the number of victories on a vehicle in the last 24h, the last week and the last month.
    - do the same for all vehicles of that class, all of that tier and all of the vehicles of the player
    Sum up these 12 numbers of victories – this is your “general handicap”. You may repeat the processes every battle, after a number of battles or within a timeframe. The latter two would explain “streaks” as well.

    Now, before each battle (real battles only – not active in training rooms where it could be tested, probably not in CW), this “general handicap” gets compared with a reference value (so you get below and above average) and then converted into positive/negative points for various stats. E.g. the player receives a -5% on maximum penetration (also moving the average down by 2.5%), a +4% on damage for hits received, etc. . Or, if the player is bad, he gets +10% on his camo factor.
    The absolute values of course have to be balanced and have to stay small enough to not be obviously detectable, but these are the only limits. They may very likely affect stats, that are not even supposed to be RNG based like armor effectiveness. It is recommendable though to keep the “various” in front of the stats. A nerf of ALL stats would imply an ongoing, predictable nerf. So two players might easily compare their results on certain tanks. If one only chooses a random four out of e.g. eight stats, it will only seem to be “a bad luck battle”, when every other shot deals 0dmg.

    (some might note that I did NOT count the losses, but only the victories. This must not be the case, but it is easier then using winrates and it has nice side effect: Players who simply a whole lot get overnerfed. These are the players most likely to gain skills and then start seal clubbing. On the other hand, players who rarely play will find themselves quite successful. And success is fun. So they might start playing more – enough to buy prem?…)

  35. Of course the game cheats, it is very obvious after a while if you are non prem player who has ground their way up from to tier 8.
    In T44 I suddenly get ammo rack explode every other game usually front armour shots) and if ammo doesn’t go up first hit then turret is jammed. Shots miss for no reason far more frequently I get ricochet every other shot when firing at weak spots even tanks lower tiers. Max damage per shot is about 15hp no matter where I aim if I damage at all and best of all it cheats on kills by simply saying critical hit and doing zero damage when I get tanks below 10HP by whittling them down targeting same spot and getting damage all the time previously, once I got 4 CH’s running and no damage when guy was 1 HP LOL – how much more blatant can it be?
    And it is the same again and again and again and again.
    Funny thing though if I haven’t yet targeted a tank with low HP the game will behave normally and I can kill.
    Also the wins and losses are far more streaky than I would expect with streaks of 10 losses with team losing 15-3 and such are quite common.

    I ground my way up US, Russia and German to tier 7 and 8 and can no longer stand to play it because of the blatant cheating.
    If your experience is different as non prem then great – have fun.

  36. Conspiracy Theories are as old as Mankind. Even the “God’s” and “Religion” is based on Conspiracy Theorie.. There must be something higher that created us, this can’t be coincidence.. my fate is manipulated.. and so on!

    One does not want to be fooled, one want to be smart as hell, and x-ray analyze everything that is not in your control and proove that it’s rigged. 911 was rigged, everything… coincidence is sometimes hard to accept.

    But there is the Probability Theory that is not fully fitting in our understanding i think. We know what it is, but we struggle sometimes to fully understand how big coincidence still can be, without that stuff is manipulated.

    Well, the day it would be known that WoT is manipulated – Noobs get bonuses or WR is manipulated to keep as many Players active as possible. I think it would be the day that WoT will start do die.. It’s the worst Thing you can do to fool people, they loose the confidence.. they loose motivation, they quit…

    I personally don’t think Wargaming is doing that, and i rather think Wargaming is respecting the Community that is feeding them, if not.. they would be utter fools! ;)