Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Matchmaking'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 42 results

  1. Or.. You know... rename it to World of Battleships (WOBS?)
  2. _Sigin_

    Matchmaking generally

    Hi ... im playing all ships from tier 5 to tier 8 in regular basis and i was hoping that we could get some kind of matchmaking fix, because right now its pretty bad ... when i play my T5 cruiser im getting T7 vs me in 3/4 cases which is pretty much unplayable to be with koenigsberg vs scharnhorst ... could matchmaking be changed so allowed tiers to matchmaking would be +/- 1 to you, not +/- 2 as its is now? id rather wait 30 more sec to play good battle instead of getting instakill from BB 2 tiers above me ... Also could it be implemented that division tier would be taken as "whole" because right now when you have division of T5 and T6 ship you are pretty likely to end up in battle against T8 with your T5 ... how about divisions where tier difference of ships is 1 would get into battle with +/-1 tier of other ships ....because 3 tiers difference (which is pretty common to see) is too big gap to do something and i would say its bad game design at this point ...
  3. Are you kidding me with the new matchmaking ? How good do you think the atago is ? Can i plz get a refund on the gold i spend in this match .... thats not even a fair fight ...
  4. Aotearas

    Matchmaking botched after patch?

    Soo, supposedly the matchmaking was improved to balance out ship (nationalities), did the recent patch break that? Why do they have both Colorado BBs and we have the Kongou BBs? Shouldn't matchmaking put one Colorado in our team and our other Kongou in theirs to balance the ship distribution (which would also balance the fact they have two t7 BBs when we have none!) ? What about the three Gnevy? Had a bunch of funny match-ups like that today, though only found the screenshot for this one right now. To complete with a rant on the general matchmaking, take a gander at this: I can sort of see the matchmaking not being able to handle the division, but the other one, with our two t7 BBs vs their three t8 BBs, plus a slight DD advantage for the enemy team in a domination match, exactly what was MM thinking?
  5. psykco

    Le Matchmaking, encore

    Hello, Un bug sympa qui mérite des éclaircissements . Je lance en partie avec mon PA IV USA (Langley). Je me retrouve dans une partie impromptue avec un 2eme PA IV Jap vs 1Carrier IV jap + 1 PA V USA... La partie commence et magie : le PA TIER V envoie 2 fighter (prévue par la config du PA) et l'autre PA : 1 fighter (standard). Vous voyez le problème ? non ? : -2 Fighter TIER V + 1 Fighter TIER IV vs 2 Fighter TIER IV ----------> 0% de supériorité aérienne DONC : aucun moyen d'attaquer un bateau ennemi avec ses torpilleurs, aucun moyen de détruire les avions ennemies puis à 3vs2, tout les fighters sont out d'entrée . La partie s'est évidemment soldée sur une défaite avec un résultat déplorable de mon PA et du coupain PA. les PA d'en face étaient juste 1er et 3e. J'ai eu l'occasion de faire une autre partie où la configuration suivante a été pondue par le Matchmaking : Moi (PA TIER IV) vs PA TIER V USA. 1 escouade de fighter de chaque côté. Pour résumer : j'attaque les fighter ennemies afin de les occuper pour mes torpilleurs. Ils se sont tous fait abattre et l'ennemi a perdu 0 avion.... Je suis pas contre être déclassé etc.. mais vu que les avions TIER V auront TOUJOURS la supériorité en 1vs1 contre des TIER IV, bah en gros tu peux pas faire grand-chose. Faut mettre les PA du même TIER sur les matchs . Parce que 1 TIER de différence et c'est fini.. Et me sortez pas "t'as cas coller un croiseur pour utiliser ses DCA." Déjà : -Pendant que je colle mes avions sur les croiseurs alliés, l'ennemi a TOUJOURS la possibilité de faire ce qu'il veut sur 95% du reste de la map. -Vu la puissance des DCA des croiseurs IV/V, ça suffira pas à sauver mon escouade en cas de rush (j'ai essayé. la différence ? 6 avions morts pour moi. 2 pour lui..). Je veux bien que quelqu'un m'explique la technique à adopter parce que c'est 1 game sur 2 où je me retrouve soumis par l'ennemi à cause de ça.. merci d'avance les z'amis. Psykco
  6. FlariuS

    Carrier for 2 Battleships

    Now i playes some games and i can say that no carrier is worth 2 battleships in matchmaking. Matchmaking need more balance. Some times it is one tier 9 against 2 tier 8's, and that is not fair. Hope that in a release state this game will have better MM...
  7. QuentinEverettDeverill

    El matchmaking no funciona

    Sinceramente me estoy empezando a hartar. Espero que el parche del día 14 incluya una revisión del Mm porque hoy está siendo demencial: 1ª Partida: vale que pueda haber partidas en las que un equipo tenga 1 portaaviones y el otro no, pero lo que ya es abusar es que en tier 5 además del portaaviones tier 5 que no tenemos que no tenemos tengan otros 3 tier 5 de ventaja eso no es una partida equilibrada por mucho que vengan aquí los community managers a venderme historias. 2ª Partida: nuevamente ellos tienen un portaaviones, Tier 7, nosotros no tenemos ninguno pero es que además tienen un acorazado Tier 7 y un destructor tier 7, nuestros tier 7? Un atlanta y un sims ¿me van a decir que la partida estaba equilibrada? Una m.... 3ªPartida: ahora si tenemos portaaviones, nosotros 1 tier 7 y ellos 2 portaaviones tier 7, pero la broma es que ellos tienen un peloton de tier 9 (cruceros japos para más señas) y nosotros no tenemos absolutamente ningún tier 9, vale nosotros tenemos tier 8 que ellos no tienen, concretamente 3 cruceros tier 8, pero es que ellos tienen un acorazado tier 7 y nosotros no tenemos ningún acorazado tier 7, me van a justificar que 3 cruceros tier 8 compensan 3 cruceros tier 9, un portaaviones menos y no tener acorazado de tier 7. Todas esas partidas me las he encontrado de una tacada y lógicamente no han durado ni 10 minutos. Vale que hubiese problemas de mm en la beta cerrada porque había poca gente pero ahora esto me parece simple y llanamente una broma de mal gusto, no puede ser que haya muchas partidas en que la victoria ya está adjudicada de antemano por el balance de los barcos.
  8. AnimalMuppet

    Match making ridiculous.

    I just don't get it. It was a lost game. Every time I division with my friend we are punished for that, this time it did't apply for enemy. Anyone ?
  9. DragonSkyLP

    Matchmaking Diskussion

    Hallo Zusammen Ich wollte mich heute mal wieder was wahrscheinlich schon öfter geschrieben wurde über das Wunderbare Matchmaking System von Wargaming bedanke in einem Game die Hosho gegen die Essex was ganz Fair ist im system also ich sage nur dazu das ich es deinstallieren könnte. DragonSky
  10. fatmonk

    Double the base XP

    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...
  11. I'll make it short. Context: Stock Bogue CV, matched up against another Bogue that was running the Air Superiourity loadout and from looking how quickly my fighters dropped in the dogfights (dog fights, not Barrage!) also had the upgraded fighters too. Question: What in the seven seas am I supposed to do in this situation? This guy could just lock me down indefinately with his two fighter squadrons vs my lone one and either deter me from sending my planes outside my teammates supportive AA, or plain dogpile my squadrons when they ventured beyond it. It was either wait and do nothing, or have all my planes shot down and then wait and do nothing a couple minutes later. For all the good I did (a couple shot down fighters and three torpedo hits on a very gung-ho enemy cruiser that got close enough so I could sic my torpedo bombers on him without leaving the protective AA cover from teammates), might aswell been fiddling my thumbs or play solitaire. Is there something I could've done and I just don#t see it because I'm too inexperienced with CV gameplay, or is this match-up really so absurdly unfair as I think it is?
  12. I don't like to gripe but this was a little silly, 4 x Shimakaze plus 2 other DD and all 3 platoons on the other team. Our team was strong in terms of Battleships but if you can't see it, you can't shoot it. You couldn't keep guns on target as you were trying to find the water around the torps. Surely it can be made to be a little more balanced than this?
  13. Noodles123

    Improvements to the MM needed like now

    With 25k+ people online an MM such as this one in my opinion CANNOT be justified. Also in general when there is one carrier on each side, same tier - thats fine. But two carriers against one and two of them being higher tier than the opponent ... ok is there an additional RNGzus we need to pray to ?
  14. Hip_van_Acab


    hallo zusammen, erst mal großes lob für dieses spiel - fetzt richtig!!! wollte kurz meinen senf zu dem matchmaking loswerden, habe bisher kein topic entdeckt.. sollte ich falsch posten bitte ich um entschuldigung. 1.carrier sind leicht besser in balance zu bekommen wenn nur gleiche tier und anzahl an carrier in das gefecht können. 2.da eh ab tier 4, 5 meist zwei carrier auftauchen wäre es spitze die division für max 2 carrier zu öffnen. nur wenn es gleichzeitig gewährleistet ist das es im match gegen eine andere 2er carrier divison geht. immer carrier division vs carrier division, um der idee der carrier noch mehr realismus sowie teamgame zu verpassen ...die setups (welche anzahl welcher flieger packe ich ein) wirken sonst wie ein glücksrad außer man nimmt luftüberlegene setups bis der doktor kommt. selbst bei über 30 abgeschossenen fliegern gibt es weniger punkte als ein einziger guter torpedoangriff.. (?) 3.scheint so das die balance auf der gleich großen summe aller tiers pro seite basiert, dass kann dazu führen das ein team mit bis zu 2 schiffen weniger ins rennen geht. in dem screenshot haben beide teams summarum summarum 48 tierpunkte, ich denke bei der zusammenführung von jeweils 1 (oder 2) divisionen pro match ensteht das problem.
  15. Hi all, In case some of you missed this very important info inside most excellent: "Some interesting info from RU" http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-from-ru/ Carnotzet (thank him ) posted: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-from-ru/page__st__800__pid__861058#entry861058 Leo "Apollo11"
  16. Guten Tag Community, Ich habe eine Frage über das Matchmaking, im Bezug auf die Verteilung von Divisionen und den Einfluss von Top-Tier Spielern, die im Ranked Stufe 1 erreicht haben. Und zwar ist mir aufgefallen, dass seitdem die Season zu Ende ist, die Verteilung der richtig guten Spieler (Rang 1-6) sehr ungleich ist. Da diese jetzt nach dem Ende der gewerteten Gefechte ja wieder Zufallsgefechte spielen, macht sich das erst jetzt bemerkbar. Bei mir äußert sich das darin, dass ich entweder 6 Spiele hintereinander gewinne oder verliere, je nachdem wie die Verteilung der Top-Spieler ist. So hatte ich Spiele in denen in einem Team 4 Spieler waren, die Rang 1 hatten, der Gegner aber keinen einzigen und auch sonst weniger Spieler mit besseren Rangstufen. Auch die Anzahl der Divisionen schwankte stark. Die Spieler im Gegnerteam haben sich, wie ich finde, auch zurecht darüber beschwert. In der Endabrechnung konnte man auch sehr gut sehen, dass die Top-Spieler verständlicherweise auf Platz 1-4 waren. Ist euch auch ähnliches aufgefallen oder ist das bei mir nur eine Anomalie bzw. ein Hirngespinst?
  17. SyberriaVI

    Bon ,y'en a marre.

    Bon ,j'en est marre. Il y'a un nouveau bug qui est apparues avec la dernière versions ,ce bug a pour effet de mélanger au pif les file de matchmaking de partie coopération, partie aléatoire et partie classé. Le bug a toujours lieux au moment ou on relance une nouvelle partie depuis la tableau des score de la partie précédente sans repassé sur le port. J'ai déja étais victime au moin 3 fois de ce bug, je l'ai déja signalé via un ticket support (ou on m'a gentiment dit que tout mes consomables ne pouvait être remboursé ,donc dans mon cul mon dragon flag) et dans une autre section du forum ,mais personne vas la bas. donc je post ici ,car là ,ça me gave. Je sort donc d'un game de Bot avec mon hypper don voila le résulat donc voila ,j'en est marre ,je post ici histoire qu'un max de personne qui on étais victime de ce bug s'en plaigne et que WG [édité] nous fixe ça. C'étai pas là avant l’event d'halloween donc ça devrais être assez facile a réparé je pense. Ha et aussi ,remboursé les consommables qui partes en fumé pour rien sur des partie NON VOULUE. Bon j'edit ce post ,car visiblement ,quand je poste a chaud ,je ne suis pas très claire. Le bug est donc le suivant: Quand on relance une game depuis le tableau des scores de la précédente, sans passé part le port, on peut être rebalancé dans la file d'un autre mode de jeu que celui désiré (cela m'ai arrivé a chaque fois en sortant d'une partie aléatoire et une fois j'ai faillit partir en classé ,2 autres fois je suis partie en coopérations contre les bot alors que normalement j'aurai du faire 3 partie aléatoire normal). Le soucis c'est que ce bug peut nous amener a utilisé des consommable que l'on aurai préféré gardé pour autre chose (encore une fois ,le dragons flaf de ma partie en chapayev, la 1er fois, bah j'aurai aimé l’utilisé dans une game avec des gains intéressant en xp, hors le vs bot a des gains réduit) ou encore tout bêtement nos bonus de victoire journalier ce qui nuis a notre progéssions (que se soit dans les recherches des nousveau navires, l'entrainement de nos capitaine et pour nos conteneurs du jours) voirs un *100% qui part sur un pauvre 349 d'xp alors que qu'en temps normal vs joueurs, j'ai une moyenne de 1k xp avec ce ship je l'ai un peut mauvaise.
  18. PhantomSailor

    Ideas for World of Warships (Discussions)

    Karma System: Rework the system, instead of only rely on compliments by players of the match.There should be a baseline of earned points every match.Players who complement you gives extra points to your Karma.As the system is now people can just abuse the system and report everyone for nothing.I don't like the system as it is now, doesn't encourage people of being polite and playing well.There should be a reward system if you are doing well. As I read it, only those who have really high Karma get's some kind of reward for it.If you did really well that match, you shouldn't be reported, those who complain would abuse the system. Matchmaking System: Have a skill point system, that can separate low and high skilled players.There is no fun playing with people who can't listen to the team and what we should do.The lack of teamwork makes the matches really hard.Endless matches like 7vs0 is ruining the mood to play for several hours. Matchmaking as of now makes no sense, and people who can't play their Tiers respectably shouldn't be queued up with good players.I know people can have a terrible match, being unlucky or push to much..But when half of the team doesn't care, there isn't a mood for teamwork when it continues with the same behaviour.Matchmaking system NEEDS to be reworked.I don't know if it should be based upon avg XP or battles played. But let's say battles played, you can have a system like this: Battles 1-300, Battles 300-700, Battles 700-1500, Battles 1500+ When there is not enough people the system can widen a bit for the matchmaking to work faster. As this game grows you can expand to higher battle count.I know this will put SOME restraints on the queue timer.I rather wanna wait a minute more than to queue up with people who can't play their respectable Tiers. Containers: I think there should be a little adjustment to the Signals.Bumping these up to 10x Signals instead of 5 would be a good boost. An option to those who don't want the animation of the Containers. Also the Credits I think it will be useful to have Doubloons in this rotation more often.Doesn't have to be in a Supercontainer, 100 Doubloons will be more appealing for those who have credits.This also serves the purpose of converting to credits if necessary. I really like some input on what people think about this, I know I'm not the only one feeling like this. But let's have a discussion about this, be polite and respectful!
  19. Hi @ all, ich finde dieses Spiel echt genial doch langsam wird es mir zuwieder gegen andere Spieler zuspielen. Seit dem großen neuen *Matchmaking*-Update habe ich mich wahnsinnig gefreut und gehofft das WG es vielleicht ja hinbekommen hat das Matchmaking halbwegs zu balancen aber nach weitern Spielen ist keine große Veränderung sichtbar. Meiner Meinung müssten die Betreiber doch ihre eigenen Schiffe kennen und wissen das ab t5 zu t7 ein riesen Sprung in Reichweite etc kommt. Wie soll man es da bitte mit einem T5 Schiff schaffen gegen leute die einen ohne Probleme aus 4km mehr Reichweite beschießen können? Der Ansatz eines überarbeiteten Matchmaking ist da aber die Gruppierungen sind meiner meinung nach sehr bescheiden gewählt. (Bsp.: Cruiser T5 Omaha 12,7km gegen T7 Pensacola 15,7km) unmöglich. Ich hoffe das dies mal noch im laufe der Zeit gepacht wird da es einem massiv die Laune verhagelt wenn man, ohne auch nur einen Hit landen zu können umgeschossen wird..... LG PS: trotzdem geiles Spiel/Spielprinzip
  20. AdmiralAjax

    Matchmaking at high tiers, struggle?

    Now then hardy sea capt'n! Just food for thought, but as I've climbed the tiers and currently at 8 with both Destroyers and Cruisers. Does anyone find the matchmaking troublesome at high tiers? It's not a complaint, more of a 'discussion' starter but I found if I was in the now Tier 8 Kagero and I got into a mainly Tier X game, I just get bitchslapped in around 8 seconds, but not through my own stupidity (Broadside on or just sailing in straight lines without changing it up). I found one game with a particular heavy amount of Tiers X's (T-X for short) I used an allied smoke screen as cover as i try and pick of a lonesome BB to which I got detected. Before I knew it I had every ship and their grandmother firing from the limits of their range and I just get deleted. Just to compare, I even found that with a game heavy in T-IX' and no T-X's it was fair game, I just always find that last tier makes all the difference! Anyone else find this?
  21. ABED1984

    Matchmaking needs adjustment

    I really hope WG lower the limit of tiers in matchmaking so it doesn't exceed 1 tier difference. Having T8 ships in a T10 battle is so unfair and makes you know the end of battle before it starts.
  22. I'm the proud owner of my Arizona and I've got no complaints about the ship at all. But there is one issue that bugs me badly, and that is how often I get into extremely lopsided battles where I'm nothing but XP pinata for other ships to munch on. Wargaming is no stranger to giving preferential matchmaking for premium stuff, and I find that in the case of the battleships Arizona and Warspite both ships could really do with some MM help to prevent them from getting into impossible battles. Battles like running into North Carolinas and Amagis and generally any ship that is Tier 8. Dealing with Colorado and Nagato is already dangerous enough because Arizona's armor cannot take 16-inch alpha damage hits well when angled and will get absolutely massacred if I show my broadside (as I rightly should be punished for!), the last thing I need is to get into a battle with a North Carolina on the other side with 21+km range compared to mine which is barely 16km without range module upgrades. And don't even get me started on going against CVs, Arizona already has weak AA due to her following historical layouts that never saw her AA systems upgraded, so dealing with T6 CVs is already a pain in the arse. I really don't need to have some Lexington or Shokaku ROFLSTOMP all over me when they see me in their match because they know their planes are too fast for me to dodge, my AA guns can't kill their planes, and even with cruiser support one or two torps/bombs will always get through and deal severe damage to me. I believe the same grievances are faced by Warspite captains too. I mean hey, we could try our best to make things work out, but more often than not we get impossible match situations where we don't have the speed to keep up with the fleet, we can't adequately defend ourselves against other ships who massively outrange us making kiting impossible. And so what if I manage to run towards my teammates, by the time the cavalry arrives to the rescue (assuming they do at all) I'm already dead and the enemy player's already made a profit from killing a battleship. Of course we could do island hopping and hiding moves but that means we don't get to contribute as much to our team's firepower since half the time is spent hiding, and what's the point of that in a battleship with all those guns being useless? Any thoughts?
  23. LordoftheLavalamp

    Momentane DD Balance..

    Moin Moin Leute.. Ich weiß ja nicht wie es euch geht bzw. wie eure Lobbys so aussehen. Ich habe seid den letzten gefühlten 50 Games fast immer 10 DD´s in einer Lobby. Dann aber nicht 5 pro Team sondern Grundsätzlich 6/4 bzw 4/6. Hieß es nicht im letzten Patch dass, das MM für DD angepasst werden sollte ? Bei 3 Shimakaze im Gegnerteam kann man seinen Kurs/Geschwindigkeit anpassen wie man will man entkommt so nem Teppich nicht.. Das nimmt mir teilweise den kompletten Spielspaß.. Desweiteren kann man die Idee nicht mal verbreiten die DD's pro Team zu begrenzen? 3 Stück sollten eigentlich genügen.. Besonders T8 aufwärts ..
  24. LeonardoBlue

    Division Tier limitation

    Hi there you guys, today I've noticed that one of the usual queue combo of one Tier VIII (Premium) and a Tier X ship is impossible now. Alhough you always get matchmaked with the Tiers so why can't you form a Division with these? The more fun thing was the ability to queue up with a Tier X and a Tier II. When my buddy selected a Tier II the "Battle" button was available to click - sorry, I horribly messed up with the other sentence. But we should still get the message that tells us we can't queue up this way - right? However we didn't get the message, so maybe it's restricted but the "Battle" button does not show the message in this case? I would suggest to adapt the Tier difference that is allowed in divisions to the rules of the matchmaker, just to be fair n' square. And maybe cruisers should also be able to equip both hydro and AA defensive fire. They already have a hard time out there and some Tier VIII can't handle tier IX and X Aircraft at all. Oh my I was kind of salty there. But I think a lot of you are aware how cruisers suffer a bit overall. Even though I think armour changes or anything like that to increase their survivability are by far out of question - even if our game happens to be arcade, there is inspiration from the real word.
  25. Saludos! En esta otra adaptación de otro post de nuestro buen amigo Sharana describiré las tablas de Matchmaking en las que se muestran los Tier máximos de batalla en los que puede entrar un navío en el juego. Es importante tener varias cosas en cuenta: El MM es diferente para cada clase. Cuando se entra con división, todo el grupo se clasificará según el MM del navío que puede ver el Tier más alto La cantidad de veces que se es "Top Tier" (Tier más alto en batalla) o "Bottom Tier" (Tier más bajo en batalla), es aleatoria y se entrará en aquella batalla que permita rellenar la susodicha más rápidamente Hay planes para limitar las veces que se es "Bottom Tier" después de haberlo sido varias veces consecutivas A continuación las tablas de MM (con los Tier + que podrá encontrar un navío): Acorazados Tier del Barco / Tier de Batalla I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X I II III ♦ ♦ IV ♦ ♦ V ♦ ♦ ♦ VI ♦ ♦ ♦ VII ♦ ♦ ♦ VIII ♦ ♦ ♦ IX ♦ ♦ X ♦ Cruceros Tier del Barco / Tier de Batalla I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X I ♦ ♦ II ♦ ♦ III ♦ ♦ ♦ IV ♦ ♦ ♦ V ♦ ♦ ♦ VI ♦ ♦ ♦ VII ♦ ♦ ♦ VIII ♦ ♦ ♦ IX ♦ ♦ X ♦ Destructores Tier del Barco / Tier de Batalla I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X I II ♦ ♦ III ♦ ♦ IV ♦ ♦ ♦ V ♦ ♦ ♦ VI ♦ ♦ ♦ VII ♦ ♦ ♦ VIII ♦ ♦ ♦ IX ♦ ♦ X ♦ Portaaviones Tier del Barco / Tier de Batalla I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X I II III IV ♦ ♦ V ♦ ♦ VI ♦ ♦ ♦ VII ♦ ♦ ♦ VIII ♦ ♦ ♦ IX ♦ ♦ X ♦ Navíos con Matchmaking especial y premiums: Tachibana (II): II-III Albany (II): II-III Mikasa (II): II-III Diana (II): II-III Aurora (III): III-IV Iwaki (IV) : IV-V Yūbari (IV) : IV-V Ishizuchi (IV) : IV-V Arkansas (IV): IV-V Warspite (VI): VI-VII Sims (VII): VII-VIII Atlanta (VII): VII-IX Atago (VIII): VIII-X Kitakami (VIII): VIII-IX Tirpitz (VIII): VIII-X IMPORTANTE: Toda esta información estará sujeta a cambios y correcciones que sean necesarios para mantenerla actualizada