Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Imbalance'.
Found 3 results
Vattle posted a question in Q&A SectionI have a very small clan of only 2 members. Despite our very small size, we are very active in Naval Battles and have been slowly but consistently developing our base week after week, month after month with our results on naval battles. It might not be very impressive but it works for us, and we are happy with this arrangement. At this point we don't want to expand the clan size. So far we have always been paired to clans of our same size (2 members) in every naval battle engagement stage and everything was fine, until this weekend. This weekend, for the first time, our clan of 2 was set to compete against a clan of 5. No big deal, right? After all, as long as you play well you should have a chance to win, even if you go against larger clans. At least that's what I thought. WRONG. As the rules are set it turns out that the larger clan ALWAYS wins and the smaller clan has no chance at winning a naval battle engagement. Let me explain why: -Each member on a clan has 10 attempts to win a battle, achieve a certain base XP and then win a corresponding star. -The clan that collects more stars wins the engagement stage. Since my clan has only 2 members, our maximum number of attempts combined is 20, hence the max amount of stars we can collect is 20 stars, and that would mean 20 perfectly flawless naval battles without a single mistake. A top score, for a small clan like ours. As the opposing clan has 5 members, their total attempts will be 50, making it potentially possible for them to obtain 50 stars. Since the clan that collects more stars wins the engagement stage, 50 stars will always beat 20 stars. As things are set right now, the smaller clan ALWAYS LOSES. This actually happened to my clan this weekend. Before we even had the chance to play our first battle, our rival clan (of 5 members) had already achieved 21 stars. Since we can never get more than 20 stars max, it was lost before we even played a single battle. Extremely fair, right? You might think this is not a real problem since very small clans are not so common. But this issue affects every clan: Every clan paired against a larger clan will potentially lose on naval battles, as the larger clan has always more attempts. An easy solution would be to equalize attempts: When two clans of different size are matched, the number of attempts for both will be those of the larger clan. This measure would restore the balance again. In my own example my clan (despite having only 2 members) would now have 50 attempts (same number of attempts as the larger clan) and could now compete in all fairness. The winner would be the better clan and not necessarily the larger clan anymore. Anyway, this is just a suggestion and I certainly hope the devs will check this post and fix this huge unbalance about naval battles. I already filled a ticket and complained with support. Support did absolutely nothing and suggested addressing this issue to the forum in the hope that devs would see it and fix this issue, that is why I am posting here. I have no high hopes, but here it is just in case a dev actually reads this and does something about it. After all, It would be nice to have a chance of actually wining naval battles when you play better than your opponent, independently of the size of the clan. I am attaching a picture just to prove my claims: 1) My clan has only 2 members and can reach a max of 20 stars. 2) A rival clan of 5 members had already scored more than 20 stars (actually 21 stars) before we even had a chance to play our first battle. Please note that the rival clan is picked randomly, so my beef is not with them at all: They bear no responsibility in this whatsoever. My issue is with the current rules that allow for larger clans to always win. The rival clan appears here merely as an example, where you can confirm they have more than 2 members and that is why they reach a higher score. They might be very skilled or not, but that is not the reason of their victory. They are winning solely due to their larger size (larger number of members).
MrRobin667Cc posted a topic in General DiscussionI've been playing the game for almost a year now and my biggest issue are the amount of imbalanced games which usually end after 10 minutes in a crushing defeat of either your team or the enemy team. I feel the primary reason for this is the imbalanced MM, which only considers ship tier and type; not player experience. As a result it often happens that there is an imbalance between teams in terms of player experience which is the cause of these games where the outcome is predictable after only 4 or 5 minutes into the game. I presume I don't have to mention that these kind of games are far less interesting and satisfying than close games, where every maneuver your team does counts. So, I recently had an idea which I'd just like to put out there for discussion (please feel free to seek out weak points of my idea or factors that I didn't consider and don't be afraid to critizise): How about they introduce an option which puts only experienced players against each other (for instance a "Champions-League-Mode") that you can enable before you queue up for battle? Of course in order to access this mode, a player has to meet certain criteria (like no TK-status; minimum winrate; minimum average dmg;...) to ensure only experienced players can participate. They could even go further and make it necessary for a player to unlock this option for every ship individually. Mind that I'm aware of the existance of team battles, but these are not always accessible and not everyone has a team; additionally it requires a certain amount of organization and planning to arrange these battles. I propose this because in my experience, player skill can only have an effect on the outcome of a game if the teams are balanced (you can't do much as a skilled player if your team dies like flies or your team wins after 10 minutes). Player skill has more impact if the game is close and every players action counts. I feel the game would be much more enjoyable if the skilled players get matched up with equally skilled players (the same goes for less skilled players) as it provides a more challenging approach for good players and elongates the avg lifespan of less skilled players. Please give feedback and thanks for taking the time to read my post.
I don't know if this suggestion has been discussed already, but I tried to search for it. - so forgive me If that's the case. Sometimes weekends are horrible, and this one is no exception. Yesterday my two div buddies and I, had quite a few tier X battles that lasted like 7-10 minutes. Its actually much much shorter than most tier 1-2 matches. When looking at the scoreboard after the game, either team had any player who made anything remarkable, in fact it was poor allover. The top player on the winning team had like 1300 XP´ish - in a tier X game! I doubt its satisfactory for any player, winning or losing regardless. Suggestion: If the game lasts XX minutes, under the full 20 minutes, then boost the XP proportionally, with xx percent. Maybe it could be tweaked, so the boost would not be 200% if the game only lasts 10 minutes, but 180%, as some games lasts 18 minutes.- It should be based on average/expected match duration. - I assume the credits, is linked to the base XP? I'm not a math guy, but I'm sure somebody here could make an equation, of how it should be calculated. Another solution could be a better and more fair matchmaking, but that's probably not gonna happen...