Admiral_noodle

I think you're missing his point. I don't like the idea of skill based MM because I don't think it will work. As in I don't think it will achieve better game play. Mostly because at the moment I don't think there is a way of accurately determining skill. However there are two kinds of complaints. The people who rage about potatoes and the people who - like me - would like more coordinated gameplay more reliably. When it happens in games it's amazing. I really enjoy it and find the games where it doesn't happen disappointing. Sometimes if I've died and the enemy team are coordinated and acting together I'll simply go into free camera and watch. Sometimes (just yesterday in fact) both teams come together in a coordinated way and you find yourself immersed in a fleet action suddenly. THAT is what he is asking for. If there was a reliable way to split the wows population based on coordinated team play ability I'd be all for it.

15 containers later I got a supercontainer and 20 million credits

What? This makes no sense. Are you arguing for or against a skill based MM here - but your point I think makes some sense. In skill balanced MM just play like a potato. You'll get as many wins

Jeez. I've got nothing good from try your luck... But. With the missions I would get things I didn't need or want. Now you get to choose. My friend is going extra credits because he needs cash. I'm going try your luck because I need nothing. However now I get to play a lottery instead of getting "50,000 credits for shooting down 10 planes" pointlessness.

Yeah. Because games involving dice don't require any skill obviously...

Odd. I can usually tell if a match is going to be easy or hard in a couple of minutes, but my mindset is "how can I win this despite my team" I am a lazy player. If my team are running away with a win I'll go defensive - fire support - protect base - make sure we don't accidentally lose. If we are losing I'll try to work out ways to reverse the slide. Cap? Kill a few low health targets to give my team a chance? So my stats are average to good - not Unicum - but by obsessively focussing on how to win even when the team potates - I get a decent WR. Now up to 60.9% (it was 42% after 350 games then I came to the forum...)

There is the question of whether it's entertaining to watch. I didn't think it would be. Then I watched some OMC games and they were fascinating. I liked Flamu commentary too.

You know. This isn't half bad. You could rank up for consistently coming top X in a ship then earn multiple marks of distinction for that ship. You could apply this in MM. either by ensuring people with marks are distributed equally and/or trying to separate out people with marks vs. People without them. Over time you could get quite sophisticated by use of this simple mechanic. I'd certainly do it by ship only. Positives - anti seal clubbing measure too. Of course it would need to be flexible so if no one else has a mark tough. You aren't waiting in queue forever. But it's something that could be worked on. I like the idea of ships getting marks of distinction too.

And my original point is I don't see why a team based esport can't have lots of RNG. Like dice based games which are competitive. Or are esports limited to no RNG like chess.

Pointless argument is pointless My point about "we all have streaks of bad RNG" means: we all go through periods where we *percieve* we are having bad RNG. For example in Gneisenau: In one game I can't hit anything or everything is overpens. Next game I do ridiculous damage and citadel everything even from range. This is what I perceive. Mmmbeer says this is because some games there is an RNG blessing and in others a curse. However. Firstly my perception is wrong. In battle 1 let's say I had 20 salvoes. I get good dispersion in 5 of them but mess up my aim or the enemy WASD hacks. Another 10 are ok dispersion but I manage to slightly miss my aim and get overpens. Then I get 5 great shots in but dispersion is poor and the shells go everywhere. Perception: RNG is trolling me. Next game: 5 shots Have bad dispersion but the enemy moves or I miss. I don't notice the bad dispersion. 10 ok shots but I am lucky or a good aim today and I get a few citadels (best achieved when the enemy WASD hacks into your shots). 5 good dispersion AND this time it's when I aim well. Or when the target is grounded etc. Massive damage. Wow! RNG is being a god to me today! No it isn't. In both games the dispersion and RNG were the same in this example. But the lining up of good shots with good dispersion rather than the other way round completely changes the perception of the same RNG.

Of a sort of course if anyone else finds such mods feel free to pm myself, a WG staff member or send a support ticket in..,

No im not. Your perception of a bad battle is affected by the relative number of bad vs good salvoes. Which is by definition random. Yes. I have had battles where I perceived all my shots were bad and others where I couldn't miss. However on playback I noticed my perception didn't match reality. In the good games I still had bad shots and in the bad games I had good salvoes... usually when I missed Its interesting you use my descriptions which are all about *perception* to add to your theory though

I suppose it depends on the definition and how esports work. Mmmbeer - I'm not "certain" but based on reasonable evidence, my own experiences and what the devs have said, I am satisfied RNG is as random as it can ever get. No point in discussing further without some serious discussion on randomness. Which I don't want to get into now We all have days/battles/5 minutes/3 hours of bad and good RNG. I don't convince myself it's bad/good luck. I am satisfied that it's consistent with "luck" until someone shows good evidence to the contrary.

If you have evidence of such a mod then please let me know where I can find it. By PM. Thanks

It doesn't exist. But it's pointless discussing if you've decided it does. I can't prove it isn't there because random will deliver the same results. I.e. There is no hypothesis we can test to differentiate between the two theories. However my argument is such a mechanic is itself not required since random will deliver the same results... over time. And your last point is completely wrong. Random does not even out over the course of a battle. It doesn't have to even out at all. Ever. However it becomes less and less likely you will be consistently lucky or lucky over time. That is all. And it's a fundamental misunderstanding of randomness you have there.

It's a poor and pointless mechanic because random will deliver exactly the same effect with zero effort. It is also uneccesary and difficult code. Systematic "trolling" of RNG would be very detectable. Coding anything subtle to convince you it's not there... while still being there... would be difficult. Why bother. So WG don't bother. There is no point. They let RNG troll however it feels like. Randomly. As for an esport... I don't see why RNG precludes it. First it's a team game. Team play is more important than RNG. Second real life sports have RNG. Or rather they have real randomness. Like bad bounces, net cords, other examples. One of the things I like with RNG is it differentiates the game from other point and click games. And gives an added sense of realism by modelling the real world...somewhat.

There is no such thing as cursed or blessed RNG. There is only RNG. Every salvo you fire is random and knows nothing of what went before.

...still only small numbers of flags for me...

The game is management of RNG at its heart. It's no different from dice based tabletop Wargames. Which there are also tournaments for. Sometimes skill is managing risk vs. Reward.

Well I had my daily game in her today. Pulled the team with me this time in standard battle. Well, the dds followed anyway. Ended up dying in the enemy cap on new dawn. Secured a confederate and 120k damage before my demise and the team managed to win. I feel she is best played in division with her sister and a dd to scout for you.

I always shoot into smoke if I've nothing better to do. Since playing RNCL and some dds now I also have a better idea of where to shoot in that smoke. Dds also have a habit of either sitting still in their last smoke puff or reversing into the one before, equidistant from the front and back of the smoke. In other words in the middle of the smoke. Not on an edge. Very few players ever consider being at the front or back of their smokescreen so firing at likely positions often yields positive results

I did not spot you sorry Gneisenau has a habit of making me grumpy. I apologise. I believe this was the match where we all decided to go into the cap, but then someone shot at the cruisers and they ran off leaving me to fend for myself. Oh well I delayed the enemy team and didn't totally suck.

---> animate small objects in settings. But they still don't animate as much as they could.

Or gift to a friend

Perhaps. But it comes down to what graphics cards and computer setups can handle. Before I upgraded my of struggled with animations of small objects and FPS. Now it's fine but this level of detail will be a struggle for low end pcs.