ricksbt

I am having the same problem on the EU server. It occurs both when I have already been already signed in to Wargaming and when I have not. I need to renew/activate my stats. PS: This was working a few weeks ago URL I get directed to is: http://eu.wargaming.net/#9753567651997095175 OK - Confirmed that this is one of my Browser Mods causing problems. Will now try and track down which one. ------ Confirmed that, in my case, it was an issue with the NoScript addon which was fixed by updating to the latest version.

You could also add an alternative set of 'flags' with just the code letters for the language rather than the flags. Flags imply Nationality, letters like RU, FR and EN imply something else, in this case Language. A more advanced version of this idea would be to have the colour of the 'letter-flag' background be different if it matches one of a set of languages noted in the XVM users config file (or personal cabinet). This way an XVM user could set the languages they spoke well enough to use in-game and have a quick way of identifying players who spoke those languages in game. Obviously the system should use any languages set by players who are XVM users over the client language settings. In fact, if you were going to go as far as the version suggested above you could allow XVM users to set Nationality as well as Language data in their configuration data (cabinet or file) and do something like lower the Alpha for Nationality flags derived from WoT data rather than XVM settings. Meanwhile, back in the 'real world', just adding an optional set of 'letter flags' would be reasonably quick and easy to implement.

This is based on a post I made on the WN8 developers thread over on WotLabs. The XVM '100 point scale' WN6 variant and a possible update for WN8 was being discussed and seriych posted: . This was my response, lightly edited: . Just to say that I like this - with one reservation and a couple of comments. . As you can see from my stats I'm a mid-tier player. I found the standard Performance Descriptor (can I suggest this, in the absence of any other term, as a name for the the 'Bad to Super Unicum' scale) data wasn't helping me much, in that it lumped most of the players in the games I was playing into a few categories and carefully distinguished between players who, to me, were lumped into the 'ScaryGood' category. However I was noticing significant differences in play style and skill level within all those 'Bad' players. Not having access to a detailed set of data I devised my own scale based on the EU player base, without any prior filtering. I also added two more categories. In play I have found it very useful, with clear divisions between players at all tiers played so far and identifiable skill differences between the Descriptors - for example, keep Very Bad players the other side of the map, expect Low Average players to be basically competent but to make lots of errors. . Getting to the point, the scale is based on the proportion of players with a score below a given level. The point is my personal scale works very like the XVM 100 point scale so I have considered the related issues. . Firstly, I understand (no evidence except people postings) that the play style differs between the servers and the proportion of skillful players to ordinary players also differs, with, for example, proportionately more 'Purple' players on the NA server. I got a (admittedly) subjective feeling that this was so when I tried using the, RU based, 100 point scale. So I would suggest a scale for each group of servers, EU-100, NA-100, RU-100, EA-100. . Secondly, as a personal comment, I would find it useful if the XX-100 scales were available, as an option, with the figures rounded to 2, rather than 0, decimal places as this would help me with my personal scale where the top two classifications are Expert - 1 in 1000 players and Ace, 1 in 10,000 players. Ideally XVM would do this (BTW - Python Programmer, amongst many other things, here - hopefully if the official XVM doesn't do this the new API system will allow me to write an add-on that does.) . Thirdly, I strongly agree that as much of the active player base as possible (the issue is who counts as 'active') should be included - otherwise the XX-100 scale risks becoming a 'Good Players only' thing. It should be useful to players at all levels, both for assessing teams in game and for monitoring your own development.