Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

[jhonyyyrom]

 

each match 4 dd on the team that die in 4 minutes make a maximum of 3

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

The match making monitor is hardly helpful for most people that are using it. Often enough I see someone going in chat "oh great another loss, 60% enemy team we have 40%" or like "wow enemy team has 4 super unicums, this is lost" and then just suicing in. Appart from those guys beeing negativly influenced from that information there is also the psychological factor, when you tell the people on your team this (eventhough only half of them are capable of reading xD - because they disabled the chat I mean ofc ;) )

Yes, I do not use it because it only leads to frustration.

But usually, the prediction is correct. 

 

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

IMO, MMM is only helpful if you dont let it frustrate you and use it to find out, which one is the biggest threat in the enemy team. Ive never used it and I dont think I would be able to cope with the stuff Id see.

You do a similar thing yourself usually. At least  I do.

When I see a TTT or PARAZ division (or NWP) on the reds... 

 

I'm not saying, blunt everything until every team has average 50%. 

I'd say start when the difference is more than 15% (average over 12 players) or so. 

One or two ot three 40%ers wouldn't matter much, neither would 70%ers. 

 

But when you hear your team has six 40%ers... and the reds have five 70%ers...

The ROFLSTOMP... can you feel it...

[Floofz]

I really worry about this games future. It just isnt playable solo this thing, not if you care.

Played Jervis on my alt account a few games this morning, 6 games to be precise. 5 of those games I was in a sub 50% winrate team and lost all 5 of those despite me being 500 xp ahead of the second guy in every one of those matches.

And sure, sometimes you win 5-6 games in a row, thats not the point. The point is that your personal contribution to winning a game is ZERO, absolute ZERO as a solo player. If you end up in the wrong team you WILL lose no matter how good you play.

I stopped playing nothing but 3 man divisions on my main account and Im now rocking an almost 80% WR. Doesnt matter how bad your team is youll win pretty much all of them anyway unless one of us makes a massive mistake (which happens).

Not everyone can make such divisions thou. Many people are in clans that do not have very good players, and I dont blame them, some people are just playing for fun. The problem is that when you are a casual player but you still want to perform well, and you maybe want to be able to play whenever you want and not having to wait for people to get online. Youre gonna have to suffer throu the worst matchmaking system PvP gaming has ever seen. And I still think a large part of players will simply quit playing.

 

And the most worrying part of all this is that WG truely and simply dont care, they seem to have absolutely no grasp of how to run a business. On how to attract customers and how to make those customers stay. Instead its better to inflate the matchmaking pool with bots that are supposedly "players" and ignore the problem in the first place. Theres no point in trying to attract new players with sweet deals, theres no point in giving youtubers press accounts to promote your game when those new players will play 50 battles and then leave and never come back. Instead we have a matchmaking pool of utter r*[edited] and bots, and on the other spectrum we have super unicums playing in full 3 man divisions, and youre all putting them in different teams..... How do you think people will enjoy that?

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, Floofz said:

I really worry about this games future.

No need to worry:

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20200509/eu_week/average_class_u.html

[Floofz]

11 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

No need to worry:

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20200509/eu_week/average_class_u.html

 

Not long enough, show me a years worth if you can.

[ColonelPete]

the first one is two years...

[Floofz]

5 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

the first one is two years...

 

Oh yea I missed that. Well there is quiet a drop lately but I hope it doesnt stay like that. Also it doesnt really tell WHO is playing and sometimes I wonder if our battles are full of actualy real people.

[ColonelPete]

6 minutes ago, Floofz said:

 

Oh yea I missed that. Well there is quiet a drop lately but I hope it doesnt stay like that. Also it doesnt really tell WHO is playing and sometimes I wonder if our battles are full of actualy real people.

When you mean the last three weeks, that is because the lockdowns get partially lifted.

[BLUB__BLUB]

45 minutes ago, Floofz said:

sometimes I wonder if our battles are full of actualy real people.

..play a few co-op battles, you know they are real people.

Because the bots are less insane. I'm sure you heard it before.... 

[ColonelPete]

2 hours ago, Floofz said:

Also it doesnt really tell WHO is playing and sometimes I wonder if our battles are full of actualy real people.

When you reach 80%+ solo winrate, you know that you face bots.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

When you reach 80%+ solo winrate, you know that you face bots.

nah man, against bots you'd get 70%. These MUST BE real players. 

[Squarebasher54]

MM needs have an element of player skill added to it simple as.

[ColonelPete]

5 hours ago, Squarebasher54 said:

MM needs have an element of player skill added to it simple as.

There already is.

We have the protection for new players and Tiers. Would be nice if more players saw Tiers not as ship Tiers, but as a difficulty rating. If you ignore it, you might suffer.

[ACe_1983]

So... yeah, I don't really expect to have this fixed, since to my horror I see that this is an issue that is not addressed for quite some time. Still, the least I can do is to vent a little bit.

 

I am playing games since probably some of you (at least) were not even born. '90-ish... Wow, that's like when the Earth Song or Black or White, Home Alone, Jurassic Park were THE thing. So multiplayer games.... let's see: the first I remember is Bomberman. Then Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, One Must Fall, Tyrian? Then I remember getting a bit more serious about multiplayer with Warcraft 2, Heroes of Might and Magic series, Quake, Red Alert, Need for Speed series... Delta Force, F16 vs. MiG29, Diablo 2... Unreal Tournament... Counter Strike. And a lot more... a LOT more.

 

Maybe those games that I've enumerated are not in the correct order, timeline wise. It's been a while... And true, while I'm no competitive gamer, competitive gaming is certainly a thing that I'm no stranger too.

 

So, beside establishing that I'm a pretty old person, what is the point of this? Well... let me tell you something. Those games I've enumerated are old - some or most of them you've never even heard of, or if you'd seen them today you'd LOL all day long at the graphics and the perceived simplicity of the mechanics (which would most of the times be just that, perceived...) - but they all have a thing in common. And it's a thing which should be in common with World of Warships.

 

And that is somehow most of those games tried (and most managed) to ensure a level playing field. Any serious multiplayer games needed to (at least try to) ensure a level playing field. And matchmaking is done in such a way that the opponents, given the same level of knowledge about how the system works - and the system works the same for all the players - make conscious meaningful choices about maximizing their chances of winning. All participants have the same level of access and suffer the same restrictions.

 

Well, World of Warships is making so damn sure that the playing field is NOT equal. That it's infuriating, to say the least. Yes, I know you're out there, you - the player who thinks that some whatever lvl 5 BB "owns" even a lvl 7 whatever, and that if you do this or do that very specific and situational thing you can win bla bla. Yep, those are exceptions. The system, ANY system, should not be built around exceptions. So basically the issue is with +2/-2 matchmaking.

 

Sometimes, quite a lot of times, there's a very big difference even from one level to another. Think Emerald vs Leander... or vs. Fiji! Seriously?!? Furutaka vs whatever-that-lvl4-ship-was. And if you disagree - feel free to do it. Even if subjectively I'm wrong, and even though I agree that sometimes you have downgrades (or maybe they just feel downgrades because of the matchmaking system?), objectively I am right. Better armor. Substantially more range (and that is really crucial). Better guns. Better torps. Better almost everything.

 

Any lvl N is, generally speaking, an improvement over lvl N-1. And the difference between N and N-2 is sometimes (a lot of times I'd dare to guess but I don't have experience with all the nations/lines) simply astonishing. It's like playing Red Alert where one guy is only able to build Infantry. It's like playing Quake where only one person is allowed to use the BFG (yeah, some skilled players would argue it's not such a big f...amous gun after all :) ). It's like playing Counter Strike where only one team has flashbangs and the other team can use only knives. It's like having to PvP while only your sorceress can't use Hydra or FO or Teleport or whatever. That's the issue here. Because this is what +2 lvl is making in effect. The poor lad who's 2 levels below is set up in a fight with one hand tied behind his/her back. 

 

You ask what fair is? In Quake any player could get the BFG if only they could make that grenade + rocket launcher jump ( :)))) ). You don't have players who, at the onset of the mach, are allowed/restricted from getting the BFG in that match. Just like in Counter Strike all weapons were (are? is CS still a thing?) available equally to all players (at least at the start of the match or even if restricted via "credits" AFAIR, at least the restrictions are really minor).

 

But as it stands, it's just a spit in the face of lower ranking players. Say you're lvl 5 vs lvl 7, or even worse (it feels worse for me) - lvl 6 vs lvl 8. It's not your choice, you cannot possibly pick up a lvl 7 or 8 ship, because of your progression. You don't own a lvl 7 or 8 ship or you'd be playing in those.

 

So basically you need to progress towards those ships (lvl 7, 8, 9 10), in order to ensure a level playing field (where player skill is the true factor that makes a difference), but in order to do that you need to accept the artificial frustration of... uselessness. Yep, because certainly this is how you feel when your ship gets spotted and even with crazy wasd (or qwes to be more aggressive) you get shred to pieces in one or two salvos without any chance of doing anything about it. Habitually.

 

Related rant: I'm not even going to go into how some people manage to land some shots... I understand aiming, and I'm getting better and better at it, and the better I get at it and at evading nad aiming, the more I become suspicious of how some people keep shooting landing some impossible shots.

 

Anyway. So game starts, and I cant even leave or auto destroy or something. Seriously, I have at least two ships which, if I see a +2 lvl, I know that the only way I can make a difference is to sit it out for 1/2 of the game and IF the game starts going into my team's favor then I can pitch in. But to try to do anything from the start is just a pure suicide. The story unfolds like this every single time. The enemy team usual has a competent CV, your low level AA is trash - not that it would matter much anyway, you get spotted, warning of salvo (if skilled as such) and.. 50% of the time BOOM.

 

I would really hate to come to the point when in such games I simply open my map and start setting some random waypoints TOWARDS the enemy, close map and exit to port. I mean e expect to be having sume fun myself (or the possibility of it), not to the a part of the setting for some other player. I want the game to at least offer a decent possibility of having fun. Having to fight an impossible uphill battle is not really fun, and oddly enough, although this is not the case, the same thing happens with P2W games. I mean the "free" players are there to provide the setting, to source of fun, for the paying players. Essential? Yes, of course, without them there would be no game. Is the system designed to their disadvantage? Yes, of course.

 

Not saying WoWS is P2W. I don't think it is, or at least not that much so far...

 

But really... Sure, use islands as cover. Smoke. Ambush. HE. WASD (QWES?). Support the team. Ask for support. Whatever... you're just dead weight most of the times you end up in a +2 match. Depending on your ship type, not even good for absorbing a good number of hits.That is definitely not fun, unless somehow that's your thing and you get a kick out of it.

 

Size does matter! And the big ship will penetrate the small ship a lot more often and a lot harder then the other way around. And because of the size difference, the smaller ship will not like it, not one bit, while the big ship will most likely not even end up in that scenario.

 

And yes, I would understand a system that is just a weee bit advantageous towards Premium features, since this is where the income comes. But this is not it.

 

+/-2 levels is just insane. And the thing is that the result is an excruciating and frustrating progress towards those ships who WarGaming probably say there are a low number of so they couldn't possibly get matched.

 

And just so that you won't say that it's just whine whine whine - here's a possible solution. At least make it worthwhile for lower level players to participate in such one sided fights. 3x, 4x or even 5x better rewards for smaller level ships. This will fasten their progression, even if they usually get wrecked in those fights. And for the all those players who can actually put up a fight (by means of sheer skill making up for most of the disadvantages) it's even more rewarding. Some might actually find a reason to "grind" in lower level tier ships just for that.

 

So basically, if at least you're not going to fix this otherwise obvious flaw, and it's an objective FACT that it IS an unfair, flawed system, at least make it worthwhile for those that the system has a bias against. If you can't shorten the stick, at least make the carrot bigger.

 

Anyway... /rant Just venting a little... Have a nice day.

 

 

[ColonelPete]

35 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

You ask what fair is? In Quake any player could get the BFG if only they could make that grenade + rocket launcher jump ( :)))) ). You don't have players who, at the onset of the mach, are allowed/restricted from getting the BFG in that match. Just like in Counter Strike all weapons were (are? is CS still a thing?) available equally to all players (at least at the start of the match or even if restricted via "credits" AFAIR, at least the restrictions are really minor).

How is that more fair, when one team has players who can headshot you from the other side of the map?

These games had no MM. In CS the better team was quickly better equiped.

 

Even when both teams were equal, players had different equipment for different roles, making them worse or better equipped than their enemy in a specific situation.

The same applies to WoWs.

[DFens_666]

55 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

Anyway... /rant Just venting a little... Have a nice day.

 

Im not gonna quote any specific part, will just answer the various things in your post

 

- You cant compare those games the way you do it here. In WoWs, you play a T5 ships, the enemies also have a T5. Thats why its not imbalanced. You arent fighting T7 ships when you are a T5 ship, there is another T5 ship on the other side aswell. You do better than him, you have a better chance to win on average.

- Fighting higher tier ships if possible in wows, but if you do it on their terms, sure you will lose. You simply lack experience to do it correctly. If you want an enjoying experience, you have to analyse your mistakes and find out what works and what doesnt. Your claim "fighting highertier ships is impossible" is simply not true, and for those who are willing to learn game mechanics its not impossible.

- Fighting higher tier ships gets you more XP, so what you asked for already exist.

- You were comparing sizes of ships: Lowertier ships are smaller in size than highertier ships, thus its actually more likely that shells will not hit your ship. We kinda tried that in a training room, with a T9 ship shooting a T5 one, its very hard to hit.

- Going up through tiers wont help you if you dont learn the basics. You think, if you are a T10 ship, you will automatically win... couldnt be further away from the truth. A good player in a T8 ship will defeat a badly played T10 ship. So its still about personal skilla and knowledge about game mechanics.

- You said, you played a lot of games, well maybe WOWs is not for you then... also, this is a f2p game, you dont have to pay anything to play it, unlike lets say Diablo2, which you needed to buy.

- This game is not p2w, and im a f2p player. I dont feel betrayed by those who want to invest money - there are far worse games out there than this one.

[ForlornSailor]

1 hour ago, ACe_1983 said:

here's a possible solution. At least make it worthwhile for lower level players to participate in such one sided fights. 3x, 4x or even 5x better rewards for smaller level ships.

 

Big surprise: you get more XP and credits for dealing damage to higher tier ships. Maybe do some research first before you critize things and rant-suggest to "fix" things that arent broken in the first place...

[ACe_1983]

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

How is that more fair, when one team has players who can headshot you from the other side of the map?

These games had no MM. In CS the better team was quickly better equiped.

 

Even when both teams were equal, players had different equipment for different roles, making them worse or better equipped than their enemy in a specific situation.

The same applies to WoWs.

 

Quote

How is that more fair, when one team has players who can headshot you from the other side of the map?

Well I'll be damned, you saying it's not fair because some team has a guy with that kind of skill? I never complained about this. It's normal, and that IS fair.

 

Quote

These games had no MM. In CS the better team was quickly better equiped.

I don't know what kind of CS you played, but in the one I did skill (reflex, tactics, teamwork, how well you know the map and a lot of other stuff) comes before equipment. And this leads me to the next thing you said which makes me realize you just don't get it.

 

Quote

Even when both teams were equal, players had different equipment for different roles, making them worse or better equipped than their enemy in a specific situation.

The same applies to WoWs.

So what? Its not about the situation, its not about the skills. It's about that if I chose to be a sniper, no matter how successful I am at it, I simply don't have access to that Super-Mega-AWS that the another sniper has, which allows him to HS through walls for example. So... how is that fair? 

 

MM in WoWS, if it would be done respecting same tier ships, would be exactly like any CS MM. Like any sane MM. Your ship, modules, camo, signals, consumables etc. would be the equivalent of buying any of the available equipment in CS. Everyone would start from a level playing field. And since this a progression-based game, it's obvious that having anyone at the same level, "equipment" wise is to limit the MM selection of players to the same tier.

 

If you were right then basically the MM system in WoWS should not account for tier at all. Does that sound smart to you?

 

So basically if you complain that CS had no MM, then newsflash - neither does WoWS. Since from what I understood player skill has no impact on MM, it means the only criteria is to pick the right amount of players within brackets. But whereas in CS you only have 1 "bracket" (from an equipment point of view), here you have 10.

[GarrusBrutus]

2 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

So basically you need to progress towards those ships (lvl 7, 8, 9 10), in order to ensure a level playing field (where player skill is the true factor that makes a difference), but in order to do that you need to accept the artificial frustration of... uselessness. Yep, because certainly this is how you feel when your ship gets spotted and even with crazy wasd (or qwes to be more aggressive) you get shred to pieces in one or two salvos without any chance of doing anything about it. Habitually.

Hey,

 

you are still quite new to the game. Give yourself some time to get familiar with the intricacies of this game. ->

2 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

the perceived simplicity of the mechanics (which would most of the times be just that, perceived...)

There is a lot a player can learn about the game in order to improve himself.

I can imagine that you feel useless at times when playing +2 tiers, but let me tell you one thing: If you cannot hold your own against +2 tiers you havent really learned enough to progress to the next tier.

An Emerald is not a good ship per se, but if you find yourself doing close to zero game after game you sure as hell will not fare any better in the Leander. This continues all the way up to tier 10.

Most bad players do not bother learning along the way because they think that once they hit Tier 10 they'll suddenly become gods to all other players.

This game can feel overwhelming to new players but it really pays off to familiarise yourself with all details. Your experience will improve significantly.

 

Also think about the +2/-2 MM as this: There is always a guy on the opposite side in the same shiptype of the same tier. If you beat him in xp/dmg/kills, you improve your teams chance to win.

[ACe_1983]

1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Im not gonna quote any specific part, will just answer the various things in your post

 

- You cant compare those games the way you do it here. In WoWs, you play a T5 ships, the enemies also have a T5. Thats why its not imbalanced. You arent fighting T7 ships when you are a T5 ship, there is another T5 ship on the other side aswell. You do better than him, you have a better chance to win on average.

So your argument is that it's OK, the enemy also has some grunts who are going to get penetrated a lot.

 

Quote

- Fighting higher tier ships if possible in wows, but if you do it on their terms, sure you will lose. You simply lack experience to do it correctly. If you want an enjoying experience, you have to analyse your mistakes and find out what works and what doesnt. Your claim "fighting highertier ships is impossible" is simply not true, and for those who are willing to learn game mechanics its not impossible.

Yeah, I did mention "impossible uphill battle" so OK. I'll give you that, of course it's not impossible. But patronizing me really is not the answer. First of all I stated upfont, and you can see from my stats, I am no expert yet. I am learning :) So your advice, thank you, but it seems like you give it to make yourself feel good and that it. Anyway, you base your "observation" on some huge fallacy which I'll get to next. Remember, my rant is that having a MM system where you're thrown in a game with ships 2 tiers above you is not fun. Ok?

 

Quote

- Fighting higher tier ships gets you more XP, so what you asked for already exist.

So, just like the other chap, you probably need to read again. I said to increase those to 3x, 5x, I donno. Whatever they are. I just came from 8 straight games, 2 in T5 matched with T6 and 6 in T6 matched in T8. You know how much f..un that was? I mean really, I just cant believe a rational person cannot see the problem here... or maybe... Hmm, how many games did you play lately with +2 Tier ships above yours?

 

Quote

- You were comparing sizes of ships: Lowertier ships are smaller in size than highertier ships, thus its actually more likely that shells will not hit your ship. We kinda tried that in a training room, with a T9 ship shooting a T5 one, its very hard to hit.

I see, care to provide the details? T9 doesn't get matched with T5. T5 gets matched with T7, and how does it compare to shoot a T7 vs a T5? And no, I wasn't actually comparing the size of ships, but please provide the quote.

Quote

 

- Going up through tiers wont help you if you dont learn the basics. You think, if you are a T10 ship, you will automatically win... couldnt be further away from the truth. A good player in a T8 ship will defeat a badly played T10 ship. So its still about personal skilla and knowledge about game mechanics.

 

Oh, thanks Chief. I mean sure, I complained a LOT that I'm a newb and all those l33ts out ther eare mean and whatever... You don't get it do you? I did not say a good player in a T8 will not beat a bad player in a T10 ship. But thank you for making my point about the level playing field.

So... how about a good player in T8 vs a good player in T10. Same role ship. Heck, same nation/line. How would that play out?

 

Again, the fact that you came up with things like "a good player in T8 beats a bad player in T10" shows just how skewed the system is.

 

Quote

- You said, you played a lot of games, well maybe WOWs is not for you then... also, this is a f2p game, you dont have to pay anything to play it, unlike lets say Diablo2, which you needed to buy.

Well, you know, I'll just buy that premium account. So now my argument will carry more weight? Because it seems like this is what you're saying.

 

Quote

- This game is not p2w, and im a f2p player. I dont feel betrayed by those who want to invest money - there are far worse games out there than this one.

Did not say it's a P2W game (not yet at least, but who knows).

Quote

Not saying WoWS is P2W. I don't think it is, or at least not that much so far... 

I actually specifically said this (^^^^^^^^^). But that doesn't mean that the MM system is fine. Because it's not.

[ColonelPete]

7 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

Well I'll be damned, you saying it's not fair because some team has a guy with that kind of skill? I never complained about this. It's normal, and that IS fair.

You did...

2 hours ago, ACe_1983 said:

Well, World of Warships is making so damn sure that the playing field is NOT equal. That it's infuriating, to say the least. Yes, I know you're out there, you - the player who thinks that some whatever lvl 5 BB "owns" even a lvl 7 whatever, and that if you do this or do that very specific and situational thing you can win bla bla. Yep, those are exceptions.

You were also talking about fairness...

12 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

I don't know what kind of CS you played, but in the one I did skill (reflex, tactics, teamwork, how well you know the map and a lot of other stuff) comes before equipment.

Exactly like WoWs...

... to a degree. +3 or more Tier difference would be too much. Still, back in the day, when it was allowed, we had Tier II ships trolling Tier X ships. Admittedly, the game was different back then. This would be extremly hard today.

The same with a CS player with a handgun and no armor vs a player with a M4, vest and helmet. It can be done, but it is challenging.

13 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

So what? Its not about the situation, its not about the skills. It's about that if I chose to be a sniper, no matter how successful I am at it, I simply don't have access to that Super-Mega-AWS that the another sniper has, which allows him to HS through walls for example. So... how is that fair? 

 

MM in WoWS, if it would be done respecting same tier ships, would be exactly like any CS MM. Like any sane MM. Your ship, modules, camo, signals, consumables etc. would be the equivalent of buying any of the available equipment in CS. Everyone would start from a level playing field. And since this a progression-based game, it's obvious that having anyone at the same level, "equipment" wise is to limit the MM selection of players to the same tier.

 

If you were right then basically the MM system in WoWS should not account for tier at all. Does that sound smart to you?

 

So basically if you complain that CS had no MM, then newsflash - neither does WoWS. Since from what I understood player skill has no impact on MM, it means the only criteria is to pick the right amount of players within brackets. But whereas in CS you only have 1 "bracket" (from an equipment point of view), here you have 10.

You take out the people you can, and leave the sniper to the teamate who sneaks up behind him.

Back in the day, when you joined a CS server, you usually did not start with new teams, you joined a battle with existing teams, who already played for some time and were equpped properly, while you started with a handgun...

 

If WoWs has no MM, why do Tier I ships not meet Tier X ships? They do not, since WoWs has a MM.

Back in the day. CS teams were often unequal in size.

[ACe_1983]

15 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Hey,

 

you are still quite new to the game. Give yourself some time to get familiar with the intricacies of this game. ->

There is a lot a player can learn about the game in order to improve himself.

I can imagine that you feel useless at times when playing +2 tiers, but let me tell you one thing: If you cannot hold your own against +2 tiers you havent really learned enough to progress to the next tier.

An Emerald is not a good ship per se, but if you find yourself doing close to zero game after game you sure as hell will not fare any better in the Leander. This continues all the way up to tier 10.

Most bad players do not bother learning along the way because they think that once they hit Tier 10 they'll suddenly become gods to all other players.

This game can feel overwhelming to new players but it really pays off to familiarise yourself with all details. Your experience will improve significantly.

 

Also think about the +2/-2 MM as this: There is always a guy on the opposite side in the same shiptype of the same tier. If you beat him in xp/dmg/kills, you improve your teams chance to win.

Thank you for a sensible post.

 

Yes, I am new to the game, and certainly did not want to imply otherwise. Also, and i think I need to go back and underline that part. I did say I am learning this. I am getting better at it (like for example, in that Emerald, I had a really good game yesterday when I managed to get two higher tier BBs in a row with some nice ambush (I mean they were asking for it... coming through a canal, both of them... I just crossed the T :) ). Gotta love those individually fired torps of the RN Light Cruisers and frankly I was appalled that the Leander has only 4 :(((( ).

 

The problem is that I feel useless, and not necessarily in the Emerald / Leander (I also have 1 DD line progressing, 1 heavy cruiser and 1 bb line too). So basically, since I am new, I wanted to get a feel for all those ships before I settle on one or more as favourite, plus knowing how to counter them is best achieved by actually playing them and seeing their weaknesses (that and lots of youtube i guess).

 

So yeah, I am trying. And I realize that I have a lot to learn, and I did not pretend otherwise. But that doesn't make it all right. As some other guy said it... "a good player in T8 can bead a bad player in T10". Yeah? Ok... sounds fine, but how about a good player in a T8 vs a good player in T10? Scale that too 1k, 10k, 100k games. How many times will the T8 player feel over-matched, artificially. How much fun will the T8 player have going against similarly skilled T10 player?

 

Quote

Also think about the +2/-2 MM as this: There is always a guy on the opposite side in the same shiptype of the same tier. If you beat him in xp/dmg/kills, you improve your teams chance to win.

On the surface of it, you might be right. But individually, most of the times, I cant (and nobody can, unless the enemy team cooperates) simply wait for the similar tier ship to nicely come into view and start dueling or something. Most of the times you get wrecked (same as the opposite unlucky player) or you have to sit tight and do nothing, wait it out until it's rarely not late enough for you to have any significant impact on the battle.

 

The problem is that this (^^^) is the norm. The norm is to play the role of cannon-fodder. Worse than a bot frankly. Yeah, you might get some nice games in a while (like the one I described above - I actually felt good about myself that I managed to plan and pull that off, even if luck of course also played a part). So this is what I'm talking about. The point is that OK - I get it, I need to learn. But on the way I also want to know that it's possible to have fun. Not that I start at a disadvantage (and it really does not make me feel better that there's 3 more guys, 1 in my team and 2 in the other team, just like me).

[ForlornSailor]

22 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

Most of the times you get wrecked

 

Not true

 

22 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

or you have to sit tight and do nothing, wait it out until it's rarely not late enough for you to have any significant impact on the battle.

 

Also not true.

 

You can write as much as you want but your view on the game is lacking experiance. Its as simple as that.

[GarrusBrutus]

17 minutes ago, ACe_1983 said:

how about a good player in a T8 vs a good player in T10? Scale that too 1k, 10k, 100k games. How many times will the T8 player feel over-matched, artificially. How much fun will the T8 player have going against similarly skilled T10 player?

Okay, please do not feel offended by this but your thought process about the +2-2 MM is totally wrong. Because you see it as a 1 versus 1. Which this game is not.

You're both part of a team of twelve, consisting of players with a wide variety of skill.

This game is all about "pulling your weight" for the team. Meaning you can do reasonable damage, play the objective, maybe get a kill, etc.

A tier 8 player with skill will do these things and help the team win (most of the time...)

A tier 10 player that cant tell which side of his ship is the front will not do these things and will just be detrimental to his teams chances on a victory.

Now to compare a Tier 8 player with roughly the same skill as a T10 player on the other side: Both players will have the same impact on their teams chances albeit that the T10 player can probably get more done in the same time (more hp, better guns, etc. etc. etc.).

 

You call this unfair. But it really isnt.

The gamemode is RANDOM battles. One game you're uptiered against ships two tiers higher and you have to play careful, the next you're toptier yourself and you can play more aggressive. There is nothing unfair about it in the grand scheme of things.

[ACe_1983]

6 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

You did...

I really don't get it. Me having only a T6 ship to play with, while you having a T8 ship to play with, in the same match, has nothing to do with skill. It has to do with a stupid MM system and with the fact that you played this game more than I did or maybe, yes, you;re much better at it (progressed a lot faster) but then why not playing against other T8 ships?

 

Quote

You were also talking about fairness...

Sorry... what? You quote me on complaining that WoWS does NOT assure a level playing field and that obviously there are people who're going to come and "defend" this by providing exceptional (and thus flawed) argument and you're answering with that? So you're telling me that if exceptionally, a very good player in a T5 beats some bad player in a T7, then the system that seems to be centered about exactly that king of matchmaking is fair?

Quote

 

Exactly like WoWs...

... to a degree. +3 or more Tier difference would be too much. Still, back in the day, when it was allowed, we had Tier II ships trolling Tier X ships. Admittedly, the game was different back then. This would be extremly hard today.

The same with a CS player with a handgun and no armor vs a player with a M4, vest and helmet. It can be done, but it is challenging.

You take out the people you can, and leave the sniper to the teamate who sneaks up behind him.

Back in the day, when you joined a CS server, you usually did not start with new teams, you joined a battle with existing teams, who already played for some time and were equpped properly, while you started with a handgun...

 

Wow, you are so stretching this. Either you don't understand what player skill means or you'er making some hard mental gymnastics to defend an obviously flawed position.

 

I can draw it, you know?

 

1. In CS all players started equal. Handgun, one grenade afair, no armor and 600 creds? or 500? Anyway, point is, you started equal. And the "join later" stuff is irrelevant since you can't join an ongoing match in WoWS, can you? But even so, even starting late, in CS you could pick up the gear during the match (win 1 or 2 rounds and it would be enough...).

 

In WoWS you only get 1 round. And your load out is pre-determined. How about you playing the whole match of CS (1 round only) with the pea shooter while I get the M4, while none of us could upgrade our gear during the match. That is precisely what WoWS does. And that seems fair to you how?:)

 

2. In CS, depending on player/team skill, you could improve yourself. But there was no hard limit that would ever prevent a player from obtaining the AK, or the AWS, or the DE or whatever. During the game. In WoWs I can't actually choose a T10 instead of the current T8 ship I own, can I? Because progression. And in CS (or other games for that matter) there is no progression other than player skill / team coordination.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's a nice aspect of the game - the progression. Far from me to complain about it - it's actually fun. But this game applies the static "bracket" MM system (actually... this is barely something sophisticated...) and it applies it poorly. Out of two systems (the bracket on or the one based on player numbers to estimate the "skill") this is the worst possible choice. The fact that it was worse before is not an argument.

 

Quote

If WoWs has no MM, why do Tier I ships not meet Tier X ships? They do not, since WoWs has a MM.

Back in the day. CS teams were often unequal in size.

I don't know why you'er asking those things, I didn't say that WoWS has no MM. I said it has an insane MM that simply pushes most players (read into that average players) into some really frustrating situations that are not habitual, but are the norm.

 

I don't really understand why the hostility (and all that gratuitous patronizing) since really - I complain about this BECAUSE I like the game. I complain because its simply insane not to have the MM system, they way it's implemented right now (based on Tier) not matching only same tier ships. The fact that you don't have enough player at top tiers... well, this sorry excuse for MM is not helping with that.