![](https://i.imgur.com/VObN2e3.png)
Now Test, yeah I'll deal with you first cause I did so earlier and I feel I need to get that out the way fast then so it doesn't lead anywhere bad.
I saw your first post on the thread before it disappeared prior, I did not catch the rest until now and maybe even then still missed one but I think I get now why one of your first things to do was see if I took okay to it all or something along those lines.
The answer still stands, I am fine with it. Criticism is something that needs to be present at almost all times either by the individual themselves or often from someone else's point of view. In which case I am fine with it.
We may not share similar views in everything but to choose not to voice that would be a net loss to both of us rather than a net positive for me somehow. Someone voicing their distaste with me with legitimate reason behind it and willing to discuss about that (More than just say King insulting me on his stream and that sort of thing) is worth reading a lot more than someone who'd even just sit there and praise me for everything I do in the hope of getting on my good side, not realising they're actually the one being annoying in a way.
View it as a bit of rivalry perhaps, someone disagreeing with me on a subject means I need to put more thought into the subject which in turn should make them do the same. But hey this isn't just meant to be some kind of 'farce' of being all goody two shoes just to not offend you, if I'm Ash you aren't my Gary.
We've discussed the Casual Gamer thing a bit in the shoutbox so I feel that in this post where I'm mostly directing to individuals I'd just be repeating myself.
The first half of the signature can come across as elitist yes, in doing so I'd happily say it would serve the purpose of why I took the quote from where I did and kept it in my signature aside from just aligning with my views.
The origin of the quote and I still surprisingly have a link to the thread lying around somewhere is from a PC Thread wherein a player died with not even one-shots worth of damage for the tank he was in, noticed some known unicum in a clan was on the team, top tier and doing as best he could for his tank and all that, and thought he was in the wrong. Proceeding to blame the loss on said unicum and naming and shaming him on the forums for it.
People generally are averse to taking criticism, especially in something like WoT as a free to play, yet competitive video game. More often than not players who to be blunt, lose more games than they win and rarely contribute to the victory in the times they do win like to view themselves as higher than they are, perhaps moreso than the pedestal I don't want people putting me on in cases like King North.
Where I do take pride is being blunt about it, regardless of the outcome. Something I think that some choose not to do on purpose. I don't always choose to be the one person in the room who has to disagree because there will be cases where I do not see fault or cannot disagree but when it does come to in game performance regularly I would like to base what people claim they can do, on what the stats show they can do.
I'm a Stat Shamer, bad players love that term a lot and I'm right there beside them, I love it when they use it, it's fantastic, it gives me a show of their character perhaps even faster than they do of mine from the quote. For example if someone were to say they do good in the 75mm Shermans and then I look up them all, see that the highest is 453 average damage in the 'best' performing one and then I'm name called as a shamer for doing that.
There's also the other great one I enjoy, the yes men. The echo chamber effect if you will, where you have people who refuse to offer criticism or simply are well, incapable of doing so. That will offer praise no matter what. One that I remember vividly was someone with an average game or two in Cromwells with a friend, they had fun in the battles and that is why they recorded and shared them, I do not fault them for having fun, but they were games filled with 'mistakes', shots missed that shouldn't have, shots taken to their tanks that they could have easily avoided, time wasted doing absolute faff.
Nobody else brought it up, in fact every other reply on the thread was about how great they were, and in amusing fashion when I was the only one to say that they were okay games and to then bring up where I saw issues one of the yes men chose to belittle me for doing so even after the creator was happy to finally have someone point out where they could improve. It's why I remember it.
So yes while I can see entirely why some wouldn't take kindly to that specific quote of the signature, I kept it for that as it neither faulted any apparent rules given it was allowed to remain up for so long, and almost if not ever people chose to bring it up until now.
![](https://i.imgur.com/4A0IXdt.png)
Fishfood, you've already proclaimed you are an alt account and I think I know who it is so honestly, you might be one of the few who might actually see this if you are since I imagine that individual still trawls Bunker to this day seeing as they proclaim about how amazing they are for being banned here, for purposely choosing to troll.
Which is why I admit, I really don't know if you said what you did just to get a ruse out of others in the thread. Or if that was you choosing to speak your mind, I do wish you would've done so to me earlier I'm sure we could have an enjoyable time.
You claim that I've apparently done it to you, presumably more than once, I really couldn't say I mean I don't know which account I did it to either if I did. And what leads me to believe you're just doing it for a ruse is how you then go at Joco for 'being the same as me' after previously claiming that I also wouldn't believe someone like Joco on something because he 'isn't as good as me'.
I like Joco, he can be quite as blunt as me at times and his way with the 'British Language' in our glorious way of making up fluff is fantastic and certainly better than mine, quite a damn shame I didn't just save some of the best ones I'd seen when I did. Also played with him in a few platoons prior to finally losing interest in the game itself.
But I think my favourite bit is "Yes he did try and help people, but that doesn't change his attitude...' Dandy yes, just doing one good deed doesn't make someone great. But then we get to 'It does beg the question on his motivations for helping people.' I love this, it's great.
I'd love to hear back on what it is apparently meant to imply, that there's some sort of secret reason I would choose to help people who were willing for it either because they didn't go at me immediately for being blunt, or simply by asking for it in some way or another. Cause I could just come up with theories and I'm just a derogatory and ignorant person so I don't know the answer.
I would make no attempt to sugar coat my words, and if someone were to not take that well that would be absolutely fine by me, and depending on how it would go from there would undoubtedly help decide how I viewed and treated the individual however I would not judge someone's 'worth' entirely on how they played, what reasons that could be for, I'll look forward to you showing how often it is that good players are wrong and bad players are right.
No, that sort of perspective does not mean that every single good player would agree on everything, but I mean hey, if we disagree on something chances are we could settle the disagreement in a much more civil way than what seemingly transpired between me and you.
![](https://i.imgur.com/KleuoSi.png)
Mikkoj.
'Who would keep adding sig after mod tells you it is not ok'. This guy right here fam.
Though I should point out they never explicitly told me what was not okay about it, the person who decided it wasn't simply told me they had took it off and when I put it back and asked them why they did they just tossed the issue aside to people who didn't know the answer nor were meant to find out the reason. Which was nice of them.
I mean hey if they had asked, and told me what needed to be rephrased to follow rules, I'd be up for suggestions but then they weren't really up for actually giving me any now were they.
If WG tells me to jump, my first thought would and in this was to not jump, and ask why I was supposed to. If their reaction as it was was to simply keep telling me to jump then I was just gonna keep on not jumping and asking why I should. If that means that I have to be taken away then so be it.
All I'd like to know is why and if they are afraid to answer and instead start threatening me to jump because of that then it seems all the wiser for me to keep refusing to jump.
![](https://i.imgur.com/kjmSZki.png)
TemplarKnight.
If I was letting my 'stubborn pride' do anything, it was deciding that I said no. Was this an issue worth being banned over, well it could have not been if the Community Manager was willing to actually listen to the members of the Community that they don't just hold in favourable regard. I'd like to be treated like a person rather than dirt just because I ask why I should get on my knees and open my mouth.
Now as we get to the skill bit, being able to adapt and plan in a game run by numbers and equations is in fact, a skill. And in a type of game like WoT matters a bit more than your say, reflexes would in something like an FPS.
When it comes to that sort of thing in a video game, there is very little if ever cases where you have someone who understands how the game works to a T, be able to teach people in such a great way and yet, be unable to do so themselves.
Understanding the game only goes so far, you have to be able to read situations, react to changes and plan so many ahead as each match progresses depending on so many variables that are ever-changing, explaining that in general isn't that easy, trying to explain it in a way for others to be able to grasp, learn from and use themselves usually doesn't go well since it's sort of just like, well, a big ball of wibbly wobbly, timey wimey...stuff. Even I don't do that well at explaining it given how it is, and how everyone's so different and I'm sure some unicums don't even view it the way I do.
Theoretically the same thing could apply in sports, how a game could be ever changing with maybe a few definite things such as whatshisface diving on the floor mid match to fake an injury for the fifth time that match. But if someone has the talent to teach all of that, they're doing it for a professional team, who will be facing other professionals.
As opposed to y'know WoT where you've got varying players with all kinds of different skill level, view of how to play the game, tanks they're in, crews they have and the list continues. Some people just will have their ceiling lower due to physical problems, maybe they had a hand injury, perhaps they're just older and can't react as fast as others but generally a lot of people that I'd say are problematic and in the realm of 'lose more than they win', it isn't so much that they are handicapped for some reason they can't change but rather that they just choose not to, because they just view it as a simple video game or think themselves in the right.
Opinions are valuable, and experience can be garnered even if they aren't exactly the most skillful but then it comes down to the way both are 'used'. Someone like King North's opinion that the game is rigged and that y'know he's found Atlantis kinda becomes a bit less valuable when he's spouting that despite his 'experience' in the game. Even moreso when he purposely starts trying to target newer players to also convince them with his lies as with less experience, they are less likely to know if he is actually off his rocker or not.
As for hard proof and evidence always trumps skill, yeah kinda not in a way when usually the people who have went and got hard proof and evidence, are those with skill. Because they know they would need the hard proof and evidence to prove their claims are valid.
If the Forums were exclusively only about how to win then yes, theoretically 'only unicums could have a conversation' except for the fact that 'non-unicums' shall we refer to them as in this example could still hold a conversation, they just couldn't be going on about how to win from their own findings with evidence that doesn't hold up.
Alternatively if they just are saying what tanks they find fun, that's totally fine. I mean for chrissake I regard the ARL V39 as the most enjoyable VI TD played and it's safe to say it's a right PoS. I'd say I'd enjoy it but I would gladly make it apparent if I'm saying it is actually good I'm doing so in humour for the lovely notion of banter.
I hang around a good lot of people who aren't 'as good as me', doesn't make them any less good company but it isn't that uncommon that when it comes down to the finer details they're willing to bring up that they might not know it fully.
Generally the people with the skill, experience and all that, wont also be getting on someone's case like me because they are in the wrong and they don't like it when they get called out on that, usually it's those without the skill and experience doing that.
To end it off, I debated a fair bit as to whether I should keep these names hidden as well, but chose not to because unlike the person who shared the images and the other who suggested I get in contact with Rai, I don't see much risk to it and I feel that choosing not to would be to treat them the same way as I got treated, and rather that when it came to directly responding to them, I should say who they are and treat them as individuals rather than just text on a screen with no name to it.
As opposed to those who I feel could be hit by WG or their brigade of defenders, I feel that those I've responded to and named in doing so are unlikely to get hit in any way, contrary to the popular belief by at least two I can name who think I have some sort of fan club I just sic on who I want, I do not.
I do have people who agree with me, and are willing to defend me because they choose to do so of their own accord but with those in mind I would like to believe that if they are choosing to do that in the thread prior to its removal, they are also willing to look at this as my response to these point of views, and that this is where I draw the line.
I choose to name them and respond to them to refer directly to them, not so that some absolute twat can go and decide to attack them 'for me'.
Now there were plenty of responses that were people in support of what I did, or sad to see me go, they exist, I'm thankful for them, truly. It isn't the case that I chose not to post or respond to them to ignore them nor to try to make up a narrative of how evil everyone was, no, for how 'prideful' I am I find it difficult to respond to praise or that sort of thing. Looking it as sort of just saying thank you that someone said thank you or along those lines.
So yeah, I guess the best I can do is...
Mockney, JediAL, Spurr, R35T, M4ntiX, Ewok, Rubbelito, UltimoPit, Tubsta, WidowMaker, Donny, ezti0, ATHF, drewp, Morpheus, Finland, Joco and I'm sure there are some others I missed from the list.
![](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5c/c7/4c/5cc74c97d5ec5667105df026feb65877.gif)