EdiJo

What "evidence"? You have screenshots even in this thread. It is not "insanely" rare, people really are in such games. "Clan stacking" happening in the same team is de-facto a 4..6-member single division. Don't you see anything contradictory with "3-max division limit"? It is not "HECK" me who tells you how you can play and how can't. It's the game rules. Division is triple max (stacking in the same team violates this), MM is random (stacking in the opposite team makes it non-random, random games don't have voice chat with opponent team). If it's so incredibly rare, why the HECK are you so angry about proposing to eliminate this from RANDOM games? You still can make a "legal" triple division or arrange intra-clan party to fight your clanmates. This persisting makes me think there is something in those X-files about seal-clubbing clans crowding in random games to mass-murder poor seals

Nothing is black & white. Each class has its role. One of CV responsibilities is also scouting - "strike" configs tend to forget about that. Especially lower-tier CV is mainly useful as a scout or scout-preventing unit. Yet you often have some 'striker' who just flies back & forth until his planes are shot down... Regarding "DM whining" - again not so simple. For example I have great AA in my Neptune, yet I still want to use it when I am SAFE, because everyone instantly focuses a Neptune and AA range on that boat is larger than AA spotting circle Neptune is also a big boat, so it is not so easy to be spotted before reaching the position (island or place for smoking up). Similarly in a stealthy DD. Yet our CV happily circles his planes over his a$$ slowly thinking what to "strike", while enemy CV is scouting us. As about "AA cover" by the CV - it is usually more important on higher tiers and during the endgame. Sorry - when you have a few ships left all over the map, frequently damaged, they can't defend themselves. Regarding "clear-sky masters" - I recently called noobnames at one such CV, I admit ;) He got his clear-sky (fighter-based US), but enemy IJN CV got high caliber... which means our CV focused on plane kills not on preventing enemy CV attacks. At the end we almost lost because he stopped spotting enemy CV which was in range of my charging Lanta (and it was last banzai in front of enemy BB...). Sure, CV is not a servant or something - but he is usually THE ONLY carrier in the team. Similarly the only DD is overflown with whines regarding "cap this, scout that", lone cruiser is expected to "support DD everywhere" and the only BB would be expected to push & tank everything & die for his team in flames. Just that last situation is a bit rare nowadays ;)

I still don't have anything parsing my replays, and I don't record much. I can try to look. I recall ~10 multiple clan divisions in one game during last month or so. It's often subject on chat, most of the time jokingly ;) 1/40 games ... is it still "insanely" rare? Filter based on similarity in clan tags is quite simple and not computing intensive: CLAN, ACLAN, CLAN2. Sure, there will be false positives, but it doesn't matter much. Basing on being together in recent ~20 games is a bit more complicated, but still we are talking only about choosing 2x12 from ~20k population. I don't feel why could it be a big database problem for the server? Checking whether new being-assembled guy is on a blacklist for already-teamed players? One more field in the table. Why? Because it is RANDOM? And you are stacking MM making it non-random? Want to play with your clan mates? Make a division! There is a reason why only max triple division is allowed, right? Want to play against your clan? Arrange a clan tournament, why involve random guys in that... Sure, like I said, from my experience there was usually nothing wrong - just some jokes on chat. A few times there was a doubt expressed by one or another player, that's all. Just like in this thread. Anyway it could be reasonable just to cut & fix those doubts, imvho...

The thing is not about one particular "international" clan, don't take all this personally ;) MM selection can be based on queuing time, or it may be based also on similar ping, or something else. But the chance is not "insanely" low - I've seen quite many games with "dual divisions". Maybe it's the divisioning which has some influence on MM - we can only guess. Anyhow - why not just correct the issue? Based on clan tag similarity and history of multiple common recent games?

You continue assuming I said something which I did not. I've seen clans "stacking" and being matched both in the same and in the opposite teams. This seems random. Most of the times even if they are matched in the same team there is no reasons to think they were rigging the game. But - at some cases there is a doubt. That doubt can easily be eliminated (or greatly reduced) by MM - so why not to do that? MM stacking is a fact - and the fact that even I saw this myself several times during last few hundred games means that MM is not random. Otherwise with 10k+ server population it would be much more rare than it is. This is the logic part. MM selectivity can be intentionally built-in to optimize assembling games, or this may be a side effect. Anyhow this can be easily corrected and all the doubts can be resolved. You didn't give any argument why not to do that. Assuming that reporting players based on "he didn't shoot that Moines" and manual checking suspected behavior by WG "moderator" will be effective is not very rational... I also don't think this issue is the most important to make games fair (+/-1 tier MM or partial skill-based MM is much more important, for example) - but this is the thread about it, so I am talking about it here. No whining, no crying - stop exaggerating pls.

If "SCRUBS" are in "totally different countries" then their connection & assembly is random, and unless there is like 100 or so people on the server it is hard to explain 7/12 of the team from a single clan. We are talking now about MM stacking, happening even when the server isn't deserted, right? It is quite obvious that it has to be fixed, because 7/12 of one team in a common voice chat is an obvious advantage, and this makes the game not fair. "Reporting actual rigging" is a useless advice, because you usually can't prove anything. Good luck getting someone punished for "not shooting at that Moines" lol. That is exactly why MM has to prevent this from happening in the first place. And who's crying here? I hear only whines that "it is not forbidden!!111" as opposed to logic.

and TIX exclusive for TVIII and TIX, TVIII exclusive for TVIII and TVII lol It is called +/-1 tier MM, and yes, it should be done LONG LONG ago. yeah. keep grinding just keep grinding. Like the only playable tier should be T10... Just keep paying... Nope. Important thing is that also T9 never meets +2 and T10 even never meets +1 Nobody here cares about "-" T5-T8 are the cannon fodder in this game. WG had to "protect" T1-T4 because noobs were slaughtered too soon - before being addicted enough. Oh they care, very much. The cash must flow... Sure you may be ok. You play 2/3 of your games in a 2-3 player divisions, which 1) makes things easier 2) triple divisions (1/3 of your games) are rarely dragged into being -2 tier. 3) you are a good player so can't compare much to an average Steve ;) Even if SOME people in SOME ships in SOME circumstances (division, premium, advanced captain) can enjoy being -2, it is far from fair game for almost everybody. That's why MM should be +/-1 tier, with an OPTION for allowing being matched as -2, if someone really feels ready and wants variety + challenge. But not +2, sorry seal-clubbers.

It is quite obvious that this should be eliminated by MM algorithm, even if in fact most of the time there is no sign of real cheating (even if the clan has common voice chat). Frequency of "MM stacking" suggests that MM tries to assemble teams based on some network connection properties - maybe similar ping, maybe similar "distance" like number of packet hops, or just based on geolocation by IP. WG definitely should work on a solution - based on: clan tag similarities, history of common games in recent history, similar network connection, etc. This is not the most important thing to fix in the game, but it is also easy to implement.

What are you talking about? I finished the 1st stage of Yamamoto campaign quite some time ago, got 2 containers from it and have zero "Yamamoto collection" items. Another paytowin thing?

That really really reminds me that (with no relation to the topic subject...): :)

It is an "Atlanta family", so you hug some island, create insane AA bubble protecting nearby caps, predict broadside-parading targets and ambush them from smoke, area-deny passages with 10km torps... and murder careless DD ;) Anyway, yes - you definitely need some cover to survive, because every ship in range will try to kill you on sight

I just had quite unusual brawl in my Atlanta. I engaged almost-dead LaGallisonniere and... HE did not work. Simply many zero dmg hits. I landed 35 hits in those few seconds -- but... did pitiful 297 dmg (+1 fire finally did remaining 1701 dmg) It was with IFHE ofcoz. In return, he got 16 hits dealing 7986 dmg to me. Anyone offering any explanation?

Then you'd say: "it bounced, ofcoz, you stupid" Better tell me why HE didn't do the job. 2k HP should be over in a few hits, even HE ... Look at the movie - I don't think my aim was so good. He was being sprinkled all over, maybe apart from the very bow. He was changing course, and so was I (keeping angle to the BB)... Yup. In the same game I came out from behind my cozy island to face 35k HP NewMex - he barely managed to turn guns & himself and fire one salvo before being melted. And regarding "hungry AA" - it was only 1 hit which destroyed AA, what about other 34 then

So far the only kinda logical explanation is given above by BruceForce - that the baguette was saturated. And this is really "RNGESUS" will to hit almost all from randomly sprinkled 35 hits into those "saturated" parts. Baguette had ~8% health at the start, and most of it had to be taken by fire dmg. This was some Undead Baguette ("how do you kill that which has no life?...")

Fires are nice, but usually in a glass ship you need raw dmg to "kill him before he kills you". Also, pens on 25mm armor are quite good source of dmg which a cruiser or BB can't "extinguish"... In this game I dealt ~105k dmg in which only 26k was fire. Yup, with DE, total 4% fire chance. Old Cleveland captain. Consolation is also OK, but I would prefer to simply finish the baguette as fast as it was foreseen and have time to deal with nearby CV before that Nagato kills me

30+ times from 35-hit sprinkler? That would mean he was ALL saturated ;)

After IJN DD, time for cruisers? All for BBabies, they are so scared of torps & fire. Another example of WG doing "fine-tuning" with a butcher's axe. This "idea" would be (barely) justifiable ONLY if cruiser could CHOOSE DURING BATTLE which ammo to use. For now, this being a permanent skill which costs $$$ to change... GET OFF MY CRUISER LAWN.

In a tier 6-7 game there was Texas+Kaiser+Kaiser division in my "team" ... consisting of three 30-40% WR guys, with zero idea about what where why or when. Why at all WG allows to bring T4 ships driven by noobs into T7 battles?

Thanks for careful evaluation, mister. No, BB is not the only threat to BB. Cruiser can avoid being exploded if there are no 5-6 BB trying to kill him from all over the map. CV, DD love battleships, too. Sometimes you have games with 1-3 BB vs multiple cruisers and they are not massacring anything (well, Scharnhorst may be a special case). Population doesn't matter, when you allow 7vs7 games.

My feeling is that it should be set somewhat realistically - so: single CV, 2-3 BB, small division of destroyers (3-4) and most numerous: cruisers. 4BB is already slightly too many - although at lower tiers that still may be ok. Rock-paper-scissors thing doesn't require exactly equal numbers - I would rather think of area covered CA are also good CA counters - and less numerous BB to be a threat will require protection, so this will promote team play. For sure there ALWAYS should be equal number of each class in both teams. No more "+/-1" giving sometimes 0 DD in domination mode lol. And 7BB vs 7BB, 7CA vs 7CA, 7DD vs 7DD all sound fun (well, the last one not equally for all DD, so requires balancing :P ) For now we get sometimes 6BB + 5DD + poor cruiser - and this is just sick.

How can I now include youtube video as a miniature?

Again same topic, same misjudging of the problem. The problem is too many battleships, not too accurate battleships. The solution is limit number of battleships in a team to 3, not to nerf them. Unload queues by assembling 7BB vs 7BB battles. So easy. This goes for months and months already, there are no logical arguments against, yet the inertia of WG is simply amazing.

You are kidding, right? Of your 12-ship "team", usually 3-4 don't speak English enough to understand "organizing", 2-3 ignore chat completely, and 3-4 have different ideas, but don't waste their effort to disclose them to you. Overlay this with usual 3/4 casuals/potatoes which have little clue about what the game is about, and you typically end with maybe 1-2 guys which at least TRY to make (and execute) some strategy. If you happen to be close to each other and make a force which will visually attract your team-potatoes to follow your goals, there can be some influence. But it is rare, so damn rare. People don't know how to play this game, don't care about learning ("I play for fun!"), don't give a f*k about the result (both "I'm drunk" + "I play for fun" types), don't acknowledge their lack of knowledge and are easily offended by any suggestion of their failures ("I have 20km range" + "I came (10km) back (behind you) to reload torps" combined with "who are you to give me orders" types). Plus they load 1,2,3 minutes after the game started. Play on some ancient crap/misconfigured machines?, wanted another beer?, mum shouted? nature called? Who knows. When I hear WG representatives talking about targeting "e-sport", this makes me laugh. They can't implement the simplest things proposed long ago, like - different set of F-key commands, useful ones, not "have luck!" nonsense - proper in-game playable tutorials ("scenarios" are step in good direction, but this has to start much earlier than in T5-T6 and be easier, more strictly targeted towards particular ship roles: scouting, dealing damage, escorting/supporting teammates, using the smoke etc etc.). How can one expect a "random Kevin" to do "strategy" if he doesn't know the basics: maneuvering, angling, positioning, shooting. - simple chat or minimap configuration took ages to be just taken from modders - proper reward calculation, which will not punish those who try to play not selfishly. - eliminating TK - eliminating AFK - proper report system (and moderation...) - yes, it requires manpower, but sorry: WG isn't a cheap game and current "/dev/null frustration vents" pretending to be "moderation" are not acceptable. And so on, and so forth. Beautiful, visually attractive game, with lot of effort put into models, sounds, graphics - but totally forgetting about balancing and rewarding good play.

WG needs this as an excuse for nerfing Hosho and Zuiho which alone cannot do anything when placed vs Langley or Bogue fighters. No strafe = 100% lost fighter duels = free reign of the Yankee CV even when having only 1 fighter squad not 2.

... but still you wouldn't consider you have equal chances when dueling an Agent with your pistol or that it would be fun, right?