thiextar

We have already been through this tho, such a system would eventually give everyone a 50% win rate and now your mm is broken. Simple statistics Also, monkeys don't affect anyone's win rate so long as the mm is random. See my post above about the dice throwing

So quick question: I know i cant go nose in, cause then he will overmatch my armor and frontal cit me, nor can i angle too much, or he will citadel my cheeks. So what is the optimal way to angle a yama vs another yama? If someone could draw a quick pic or just straight up tell me an angle in degrees or something, that would be awesome, cause im currently struggling with doing this consistently well. Cheers

But that is exactly what solo wr means tho, how big of an impact that a player has on the outcome of the match. That is a pure skill meassure, nothing else. And it has nothing to do with what teams you get, as that becomes completeley irrelevant over a large enough sample size. Let me give you an example from the magical world of dice throwing: This is how the average value of dice rolls equalizes to the average value on the dice over a large enough sample size, in exactly the same way that winrate stabilize with sample size. So this chart straightens out on the dice averege value over a large enough quantity of rolls, lets translate this avarege value of 3,5 into a 50% winrate. Now lets translate this into matchmaking: the dice rolls determines victories, where 1-3 is a loss, and 4-6 is a win, very random right, how could one player possibly do anything meaningful to impact such randomness? Lets add a constant factor of 0,5 that we add to the total every time we throw the dice, now all of a sudden, the graph starts to stabilize on an avarege value of "4" . That 0,5 constant, is in this example nothing other than player skill. This number can be positive and very high if you are a good player, and negative if you are a bad player. This is the simplest way i can explain why your skill has such an influence over your winrate, since over a large sample size, all of the other ranbdomness cancels out, and the only constant left, is you. Sure, that 0,5 constant is not enough to carry every loss, its not even enought to cary most of the losses, but it is enough to carry some losses, and its enough to not throw some wins, and thats what ultimately makes it the best measure of skill in the game.

None of this matters tho, because you just cant balance randoms after skill, cause then everyone will have 50% wr and two things will happen: Your matchmaker will stop working, since everyone has the exact same wr. and people will stop trying to get good at the game, because it wont matter anymore. The current system simply works, as it rewards good players, punishes bad players, and on averege, will give you just as many good teams as bad teams, and that is a fact, based on simple statistics over large sample sizes. I dont see the problem.

The issue is tho that your core argument is invalid, as it is straight up incorrect. You should take a math course and learn how statistics work, and how they behave using large sample sizes. This is not a discussion thread, this is a classroom.

So, with everyone playing versus players that are just as bad/good as them, how exactly do you expect the bad players to ever get better? If all they see around them are other bad players?

Except that there are only two things that there is only one thing that can scew solo winrate: Sealclubbing at low tiers Other than that, there is no flaw in solo winrate, see my earlier comment as to why, but really, its just simple statistics. Anyways, why dont you focus on actually getting bettter at the game rather than arguing why you should be good? Or m i confusied with what exactly you are trying to accomplish?

Solo winrate is 100% based on your own skill. The only single factor, that remains in ALL of your games, is you. Its not 12 vs 12, its 12 vs 11 and YOU. And with several thousand battles, the other 23 players in tha match will average out, so that you yourself is the only constant factor for your winrate. Of course you can lose matches due to bad teams, but just as many times, this will happen to the enemy team, because thats how statistics works. The only single constant factor in all of your games is your own skill.

No one is saying that spotting is the primary role(atleast im not). The primary role will always be securing caps, but spotting is defenitely the secondary role for all but a few dds, and it should defenitely be rewarded. Can we agree on that?

Spotting should be rewarded for all classes, dds are just the class that will benefit the most from it. I said it earlier in the thread, but 50% of the xp should go to the spotter, and 50% to the guy who does the damage, unless the damage dealer would see his target without the help of allies, in that case he gets 100% of the xp from the damage. This is how it works in world of tanks, and quite frankly this system works great in that game. No reason to not bring the same system here. It will encourage spotting and discourage damage farming, which is exactly what we need in this game. In fact, i cant think of a single bad effect that this system would have on the quality of play in this game.

The problem with rebalancing ifhe, is that you would also need to rebalance all the ships that are balanced around ifhe. Lots of work

Well, if it was superior to kron, it would be super op, and keep the power creep going. If it was equal to kron it would be op. Better to let the mistake die in the past than to keep feeding it(powercreep)

I gotta say, I see his point with that, the ship could do with some better rudder shift at the least. Considering the awful traverse angles

So wargaming managed to balance something? Great

All we need is to implement spotting damage. If a dd spots a target, and a bb does 10k damage to it, then the dd should get xp for 5k of that damage, and the bb should xp for the other 5k. Aka spotting a target gives you half of the spotting damage as xp, and takes away that half from the damage dealer. Decourages damage farming, encourages spotting. No need for different xp equations for different ships, as they should all fall into their roles based on their strengths.

Add an option for cautious optimism. I dont mind playing against carriers as they are now, i actually like it, but they do have a way to big impact on the outcome of the battle. Dont really like playing them atm either, so if the rework goes trhough, and they become fun to play for me, great. Just very cautious in my hopes that wargaming will manage to balance them, and not make them too idiot proof, so yeah. Cautious optimism

basically, i have zero interest in upcoming alaska as i really dont like the usn cruisers. I might be interested in a kronny, but ive heard such differing opinions on this ship, and i think that it would need a dedicated captain right? Dunno what to do with my free xp really, do we have any idea what is coming in the future? Other than alaska and jean bart?

Yeah, of course i dont wanna end up like that in the first place, but sometimes you just end up in fights against yamatos, and when that happends, i need to know how to win it. And vs a conq, pretty much whatever he does, ill do more damage to him than he will do to me in a yama/musashi

Well, vs conq, theres only really two choices, go nose in to give him a smaller target, or try to get all three turrets firing and hope he doesnt load ap. Anyhow, i guess ill try out a few training battles vs yamas and try to figure out if nose in or a slight angle is best from there. Cheers

This is your issue:

^^ This right here is the answer you want :D Watch all of these videos, just a few videos a day, say one for breakfast one for supper, they are entertaining and highly analytical. Flamu has a habbit of telling you not just what he is doing, but also why he is doing it, great guy to learn wowships from ;)

You dont need to get better in the montana, you need to get better, period. Your misfortune has nothing to do with the montana, its all based on the fact that you cant read the flow of battle, you dont know all the game mechanics, and you cant predict stuff thats happening. Also knowing when to retreat, when to push, where to push, which ship to focus fire, etc etc etc, i could make this list twice as long if i wanted to, but these are all skills that transfer between every ship and tier in the game, and these are the skills you need to learn.

How could you possibly determine the battle outcome from checking the teamlists after 85 battles? Not even the very best super-unicums can do that. Seriously tho, you didnt lose because they had a few clan players on their team, the real reason why you lost is probably because you/your team positioned and played badly, simple as that.

Its probably intentional to try and improve the overall quality of the playerbase

You really should watch these tutorials tho, the amount of players that plays this game without having the first clue about the game mechanics is staggering, and of course they all end up ruining matches in high tier games when they have failed their way up the tiers. Seriously, watch them.