Jump to content

Floofz

Players
  • Content Сount

    1,215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [GRK3N]

About Floofz

  • Rank
    Midshipman
  • Insignia
    [GRK3N]

Recent Profile Visitors

2,018 profile views
  1. I explained to you why it is possible but you completely disregarded that.
  2. I really dont understand why you cant understand that I have never been suggesting to try and get a perfect WR spread across the teams. Im just looking for it to be atleast somewhat more balanced to make games last longer and become more interesting. And yes youre right in one thing. There wont be players with 70% WR anymore, and there wont be players with 40% WR either. But honestly, how is that a bad thing? Is your WR numbers so important to you? Wouldnt you rather have fun, exciting and adrenaline pumping games? Why? The whole point was TO make the teams more even. But not mirror images of eachother. The problem you guys seem to be having is you think people behave like computers. Yes, if you made this into a computer simulation you might be right. But in actual reality when theres so many other factors at play. For example which class youre playing and how big of an impact it has. What ship youre playing etc etc. I know this is completely pointless to write but I actualy discussed this with a friend who holds a degree in advanced mathematics and he does not agree with you. He did say it would balance out somewhat, but it would never become an exact 50/50. And quite honestly I dont understand why this is such a big issue. I dont give a crap if I win or lose (unless I have some mission to complete) if I had a good game. What I care about are blowouts that are impossible to do anything about, especially when they happen over and over again and ESPECIALLY when youre on the losing side over and over again. Does it matter if everyone are around 47-53% WR? Instead of like it is now. I know WOWS has plenty of players and is in no danger of dying but... both me, my entire old clan and most of my current clan has all quit playing. For several different reasons obviously but a lot of my old friends from my older clans quit because of this, the insanly frustrating and imbalanced matchmaker.
  3. No it wouldnt require that. I dont understand why this concept is so difficult for you to grasp. It wont become an exact 50/50 distribution of winrate. it would only somewhat balance it out so the games get a BIT more even. Its not a drastic measure at all. And no it wouldnt push you towards 50%. If youre a 42% winrate player youll get into games as a 42% winrate player, if you play better and help your team youll improve and win more games just as it is now. If you still suck as much as a 42% winrate player would the games could still have any outcome. If youre better on the other hand you need to play well in order to remain in that position, just as it should be.
  4. But the teams wont be at similar strength, it will just be more balanced. I said overall WR, that means one team can have one unicum 60% player and the other team have a bunch of 45%s. Also shipclasses are not taken into account so one team can have better DD players and vice versa. And as I also said, the WR is affected less with the more battles youve played. Do you want me to make up an equation to prove that youre wrong or what?
  5. Its you who dont understand because you didnt read the entire post, you just jumped to conclusions yet I tried to explain it in detail twice. Let me try again. As the MM works now (supposedly) it takes players in the queue at completely random and puts them into two teams, being balanced only by ship type and tier. What I said was, take the SAME PLAYERS in those teams. Dont take other players from the queue, take the SAME players, and then distribute them as evenly as possible so that the average WR on both TEAMS sort of matches. The WR will never be exact, it can differ a few % because of the players in the actual queue, but atleast you wont get two unicum divisions in one team and the other team having only solo players below 50% WR. It will not push people towards 50%. And even your idea would still not push people towards 50% for the exact same reason as the average WR of all players in europe is something like 48%. Because changes in WR affects players differently per game depending on how many battles in total youve played.
  6. Why would all the 65-70% people be in the same battles? Did you not read what I wrote twice?
  7. It wouldnt. Not only could the MM never make teams exactly equal, because as I said, use the same players, just distribute them evenly, or as evenly as possible. But also because not every player plays exactly the same every game, were not robots, we have bad days and good days. We have days where we try as hard as possible and we have days where we just want to chill out. But also the WR would only be distributed amoung the team equally, not per class. So one team might have a decent DD player while the other team might have one unicum BB player and a terrible CV player, etc. It is a complete fallacy that it would push people towards 50%. The only situation where an MM would push everyone towards 50% is if you constantly put people above 50% in terrible teams and vice versa, but that wasnt what I was proposing, and it wouldnt even be possible. We can discuss if WG is losing money from the terrible MM or not, but it doesnt change my own status, or my friends. We dont play anymore, Ive played one random battle in 2 years and I havent spent a dime on the game since then. I used to love this game and Ive spent a LOT of money on it, and I would do so again, if the game was fun again. But the blatantly rigged games that causes steamroll wins or losses to one side, often you lose the majority of your games for a week and then you go back to winning for a week, it just isnt fun and its not something I would ever take part of because there is no skill involved. And listen, Im not a bad player either, I have an almost 60% Solo WR, yes I hid my stats because I tried to make myself less focused on stats so I could maybe enjoy the game while not stressing (it didnt help). But most people on this forum knows by now that Im not a bad player. I got that WR thou when the game actualy worked, and once these landslides started I quickly went from 60ish% solo WR down to 57-58 where I am now. Im not going to argue about if the game is rigged or not, in my belief it is, I dont care what your belief is and its not going to affect anything or anyone. The game isnt fun for ME, or my friends, we all stopped playing for the same reason. Fix the MM and Ill come back as a paying customer, Ive said this for a long time.
  8. I dont see why this is such a difficult concept to grasp. A fully skillbased MM wont work, for reasons previously stated in this thread. And random battles are supposed to be randombattles. But as the battleresults lately in both WOWS and WOT has become truely awful, as most games are pure landslides somethhing should be done. Ive said this many times before, the solution is simple. If the MM assembles two teams randomly based on shiptypes and tiers, just as before why can it not then distribute the players evenly in both teams so that the average WR of both teams are more similar? There wouldnt be any longer queues and it wouldnt push everyone to 50% WR. Itd only make the matches more even, and better. It will obviously never be perfect, but it would be miles better than it is now.
  9. Floofz

    My very first NSFW post :)

    To be fair Wargaming products have MILES better hitboxes and collisionmodels than Warthunder ever will. Its the one thing that annoys me about Warthunder.
  10. Floofz

    Tier 10 is boring - thoughts on why

    My biggest gripe with T10 is that its filled with fictional ships. I prefer T8 with a much higher number of actual real historical ships
  11. Floofz

    Are WG running out of ship types?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cruisers_of_the_United_States_Navy Just read this and shut up
  12. Floofz

    Are WG running out of ship types?

    Yes I was wrong that "C" never existed but I was right that "HC" never existed. Also you werent the one that made the original comment. Its not wrong according to Wikipedia thou. There were 13 ships originally called SCR, 3 of which are actualy in the game. USS Chester, USS Omaha and USS Marblehead. These 3 ships were later classified as CL. Not entirely sure what your point is here. Im not wrong, you even said yourself that Northampton had the classification CC or actualy CLC-1. Where as USS Wright and USS Saipan who were both converted light carriers (Saipan wasnt finished) were called CC-2 and CC-3 Once again not sure what you think is "wrong". You say Im wrong and then proceed to say exactly what I say? Youre now talking about ships built in the 1880s. Obviously ships that were disused, scrapped or sunk before they were reclassified never were reclassified.... I dont really understand what your point is, do you just want to argue for no reason? This is the dumbest discussion Ive had so far on this forum and I really cant be bothered to continue it so. Were arguing for the sake of arguing right now.
  13. Floofz

    Are WG running out of ship types?

    Youre technically right but the last ship to be given the "C" designation was in 1905, before there was a distinction of light and heavy cruisers so. Back then Armored cruisers were called ACR and light cruisers or scout cruisers as they were called were designated with SCR. There has been other designations aswell, for example the Alaska class was called CB. Theres also Command Cruisers called CC or guided missile cruisers with designations like CAG, CLG or CG. USS Long Beach which was a nuclear powered guided missile cruiser was called CGN. It should also be noted that all of the ships with the previous designations like C, ACR or SCR were later renamed CL or CA.
  14. Floofz

    ranked - rewarding loosing/passive play

    Maybe change it so that only the top 3 players on the winning team will get a star and the top 1 player on the losing team will get a star and then it would be impossible to actualy lose a star at all but it would require less time and more stars to rank up. That way you couldnt just grind your way to the top rank you actualy have to be good but its less frustrating.
  15. Floofz

    ranked - rewarding loosing/passive play

    Ive always thought the entire idea of advancing in ranked by winning when the team is completely random is idiotic to me. You cant pick your team. Ive had almost 3k PR in this ranked season yet I only have 46% WR and cant get out of bronze because half the time I lose theres always some backliner that farmed damage and got 1 xp more than me. The entire ranked system should be heavely overhauled (again), it needs to be more fair and less frustrating.
×